Admission: Jab did Not Prevent Transmission, By Richard Miller (London)
Dan Hannan asked the UK Minister, Lord Markham, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, what the UK Government's latest assessment is of the efficacy of the Covid vaccines is. His reply was that the jab reduced the intensity of the disease but "not particularly reduce[d] the transmission." That is hard to deny even in our post-truth society, when vaccinated people still got the Covid infection, again, and again. Yet the whole system of mandates, lockdowns, vaccine passports and all the other oppressive measures were based upon the idea that the vax prevented transmission. The World Health Organization know that the vax did not prevent transmission, but pushed it anyway to keep up the profits of its Big Pharma masters. Likewise, I think, did governments.
"Dan Hannan has posted on his YouTube under the heading 'The vaccination scandal' a clip of him asking the Minister, Lord Markham, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, what the Government's latest assessment is of the efficacy of the Covid vaccines. In response, the Minister admits that the vaccines did not significantly prevent transmission, leading Lord Hannan to comment beneath the clip: "So why the hell did we force them on to young people? Why did we insist on vaccine passports?"
Here's the question and reply in full:
My Lords, may I ask my noble friend the Minister about the efficacy of the vaccine in preventing transmission. It does seem to have been very good at keeping people out of hospital and keeping people alive. But we built the most immense edifice of restrictions around the idea that it was preventing the transmission of Covid. We had vaccine passports and travel bass and it now seems that both the WHO and FISA knew at the time that its efficacy when it came to preventing transmission was negligible. Can my noble friend the Minister tell the House what is his Department's latest assessment of the vaccine as a way of preventing giving other people Covid.
Lord Markham's reply:
I think the main thing that the vaccine did was prevent, if you did get Covid, you having any bad effects from it all. So whilst it might not particularly reduce the transmission, it absolutely reduced the effects if you had it and the impact in terms of hospitalisations and deaths. That was the main benefit of the vaccine. And because we made it basically a less serious disease, that then enabled us to open up the country in the way that we were one of the first to get going again because we knew there was no longer the high risk from the disease that there was before.
The vaccine "enabled us to open up the country" again. Yet Sweden and South Dakota never shut down, and Florida reopened before the vaccines were available. I guess they're magical places that don't need vaccines to live as free people.
Let's not forget, of course, that Boris Johnson admitted that two doses of the vaccines didn't protect against "catching the disease" or "passing it on" back in October 2021. He also said the Government wanted "young people" and "kids at school" to be "getting their jabs with complete confidence."
Comments