EU plays politics with people’s lives

The EU sees the Oxford-AZ vaccine as dangerous – to the EU.

Like all political contrivances brought to life by fiat and therefore lacking historical legitimacy, the EU regards life solely through the prism of politics. Or, more specifically, of its own survival.

Since Britain’s apostasy sets a bad example for others, the EU has to see her as an existential threat. An enemy, in other words. Once that assumption is made, an elaborate scorecard comes into existence.

Britain’s successes are chalked up as the EU’s failures and vice versa. And on that card, Britain’s record of Covid vaccination pulls her way ahead of the EU.

The warped logic of European federalism hence demands that Britain’s success be made less striking, and the EU will try to achieve that goal at any cost – including the cost to the lives of its own citizens.

It’s only in this context that the EU’s total or partial rejection of the Oxford-AZ vaccine can be understood. Outside the political realm, the vaccine is perfectly usable, meaning it saves thousands of lives.

It’s perfectly usable, but is it perfectly safe? No, it isn’t – for the simple reason that we in this world aren’t blessed with medicines that are 100 per cent safe. Even everyday analgesics, such as aspirin, ibuprofen and paracetamol can kill some people under some circumstances.

In fact, as few as eight tablets of paracetamol have been known to produce a lethal outcome, and over 150 people die every year of a paracetamol overdose. (A note to aspiring suicides: don’t use the drug for that purpose. You’ll die of liver failure, which is a ghastly way to go.)

Nevertheless every year medical authorities all over the world approve many drugs for prescription or OTC use. To get its drug approved, the manufacturer has to present heaps of evidence proving that the benefits of the drugs far outweigh the risks.

Even so, the law requires that every possible side effect, no matter how unlikely, be listed in the in-pack leaflets. These documents can be long and scary, with death often mentioned as a possibility. It’s easy to get frightened and shun the medicine, especially for people who played truant when arithmetic was taught.  

For the issue of drug approval is decided on the basis of statistical data correlating clinical success with the incidence of side effects. This may be higher or lower, but it’s never nonexistent. If a drug has no side effects, it has no effects, which is why homeopathic medicines enjoy their sterling reputation for safety.

So far the Oxford-AZ jab has been administered to 20.2 million people, of whom 79 (51 of them young women) have developed a rare type of blood clot and 19 died. This is tragic, but it’s no reason for the hysterical scaremongering campaign whipped up by the EU’s functionaries, such as Manny Macron and Angie Merkel.

As far as they are concerned the evidence against the vaccine is overwhelming, but it’s political, not medical. The trouble with the Oxford-AZ vaccine isn’t that it’s too unsafe, but that it’s too British.

Hence Manny, Angie et al. are prepared to deny their own people a potentially life-saving treatment to prevent Britain’s success from becoming even more spectacular. And they have an attentive audience.

Most people respond to data with their emotions, not reason. That’s why so many, for example, refuse to fly. Yet those same people will happily drive across the continent, even though the risk of doing so is exponentially higher than with flying.

Crossing the street, even in a quiet part of town, presents a much higher risk than an Oxford-AZ jab, but such arguments are futile in the face of a massive propaganda offensive. Manny’s and Angie’s scaremongering is louder than the quiet whisper of statistical evidence.

Europeans aren’t even deterred by the weathervane turnarounds performed by their peerless leaders. First Manny declared that the Oxford-AZ was lethal to the over-65s. Then suddenly it was fine for the wrinklies, but a real killer for the under-55s. Then Manny stated publicly that, though he himself was in the threatened age group, he’d gladly be vaccinated with the British poison.

Nevertheless the vaccine has been banned for the under-55s in France and the under-60s in Germany. And Holland, Norway and Denmark have banned it altogether.

Our own regulatory agency, MHRA, understandably undeterred by the British provenance of the vaccine, has taken a sensible position, and I thought I’d never say this about a government medical institution.

While stressing that Oxford-AZ vaccine has saved thousands of lives and is continuing to do so, MHRA advises that “careful consideration be given to people who are at higher risk of specific types of blood clots because of their medical condition”. And even the European regulator recommends the same approach.

But this is medical advice informed by evidence and reason, not political propaganda animated by hatred of Britain. The EU mandarins and other fruits are prepared to sacrifice lives at the altar of a corrupt political idea – and we’ve seen that sort of thing on the continent before.

4 thoughts on “EU plays politics with people’s lives”

  1. Conventional vaccines differ greatly from these new mRNA vaccines; we must be wary of them! The mRNA approach reprograms the cell to create that viral protein inside of itself. The Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, similar to Moderna, is based on the virus’s genetic instructions for building the spike protein.
    Dr. Tal Zaks, chief medical officer of Moderna, refers to the company’s mRNA shots as “information therapy,” which is just another way of saying gene therapy because mRNA is a carrier of genetic code. Zaks and other mRNA vaccine marketers view the body as your hardware, your genetic code as software and these mRNA injections as software updates. These ‘vaccines’ actually store instructions in the strands of our DNA.
    So far all of these (quickly) developed COVID-19 “vaccines” are only designed to lessen symptoms of COVID-19, none of them yet prevent infection or spread. Therefore, since the vaccinated individual is the only one receiving a potential benefit, “the greater good” argument falls apart. Yet, most countries are forcing this untested mix of genetic coding into our systems.
    However, none of all this hype and scaremongering is really about a pandemic, it’s about obedience. Rarly do we hear abut deaths, instead they warn of ‘COVID cases’; this is because the peak has well passed and besides, deaths from COVID equals the reduced number of deaths from all other causes.
    This world event is really about the ‘great reset’. We are all being geared-up for the big social control plan to hit civilisation. As Klaus Schwab (from the World Economic Forum) states so clearly, “you will own nothing, and you will be happy”. Part one, world shutdowns; part two is next!

  2. Human beings have expectations for the good life far exceeding anything that ever was in the past. Everyone must lead a life of health, wealth and wise. And don’t tax me too much either. Health care is a right under the welfare state and less than 100 % success rate with any sort of treatment is not permissible. And civil law suits [in the USA at least] a remedy if absolute guarantee not maintained.

Leave a Reply to Ben Idestrom Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.