With the US authorities announcing that healthy American children will no longer be recommended to receive COVID-19 vaccines, due to a lack of evidence (source), the Australian government does likewise, though with far more damning language: “Healthy infants, children and adolescents aged <18 years are not recommended to receive COVID-19 vaccine… COVID-19 vaccine is not recommended for healthy infants, children or adolescents who do not have medical conditions that increase their risk of severe illness.
Yes, "More legal actions are no doubt on the way.” Such as false advertising of a pharmaceutical, perhaps?
Seems that the TGA did not approve the genetic vaccines even for preventing transmission, and yet many in government and elsewhere have been heard falsely promoting them for protecting Grannie, and for building 'vaccine-induced’ herd immunity.
From what I understand, the Australian Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 is contravened if a person advertises a 'biological' (such as a genetic covid injection) that is 'included in the Register’ (I believe these injections were included), for an indication (such as preventing transmission) that is not accepted ...
I wrote a comment letter to the US FDA advisory committee when they were meeting in November 2021 to decide whether to extend the jab to 5 through 11 year olds. They voted 17 to 0 (with one abstention) to do so despite the fact that we all knew at that point that kids didn’t get sick from covid and that the jab causes myocarditis. They approved it anyway. Here’s a link to an explanation for the decision by esteemed Harvard professor and editor in chief of NEJM, Dr. Eric Rubin.
Thank you Raphael!
You are the tip of the spear!
Yes, "More legal actions are no doubt on the way.” Such as false advertising of a pharmaceutical, perhaps?
Seems that the TGA did not approve the genetic vaccines even for preventing transmission, and yet many in government and elsewhere have been heard falsely promoting them for protecting Grannie, and for building 'vaccine-induced’ herd immunity.
From what I understand, the Australian Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 is contravened if a person advertises a 'biological' (such as a genetic covid injection) that is 'included in the Register’ (I believe these injections were included), for an indication (such as preventing transmission) that is not accepted ...
https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A03952/latest/text
Section 32BL 'Civil penalty for advertising biological for an indication'
A person contravenes this section if:
(a) the person, by any means, advertises a biological for an indication; and
(b) the biological is included in the Register; and
(c) the indication is not an indication accepted in relation to that inclusion.
I shakes me head......
and so they will now share the studies they performed that allowed them to know this fact? Its based on Science right?
See the update. The cited studies have been around for years. Liability...
When did these bastards come to that realisation?
Sure, it’s only safe for the elderly and the immune compromised. They always announce their deadly intentions.
I wrote a comment letter to the US FDA advisory committee when they were meeting in November 2021 to decide whether to extend the jab to 5 through 11 year olds. They voted 17 to 0 (with one abstention) to do so despite the fact that we all knew at that point that kids didn’t get sick from covid and that the jab causes myocarditis. They approved it anyway. Here’s a link to an explanation for the decision by esteemed Harvard professor and editor in chief of NEJM, Dr. Eric Rubin.
https://www.politifact.com/article/2021/nov/01/context-never-going-learn-how-safe-vaccine-unless-/