May the Force Be With Them: Scientists Fight Back

May 31, 2022

BY JOE WANG AND JENNIFER MARGULIS

SARS-CoV-2 started in Wuhan in late 2019. After several waves swept through the world and left millions of people dead, the world is now entering the endemic phase. The scars that COVID-19 have left behind, however, are very fresh and very deep. Leaders in government, science, and medicine, along with the general public, must work together to heal, and to make sure that these scars do not turn into a cancer that eventually kills humanity.

The Dark Forces

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) governs China by controlling every aspect of people’s lives. When SARS-CoV-2 emerged in Wuhan in December 2019, the CCP was in a celebratory mood. It planned to showcase its economic achievements and celebrate the Chinese New Year with huge banquets. No virus should have dared to come to spoil the party. Therefore, the CCP silenced those people sounding the alarm.

Then, when they found out that the virus was spreading and killing many, in order to show the world that they were powerful and capable of controlling viral spread, they implemented a draconian lockdown in Wuhan.

The CCP then intentionally allowed the spread of the virus to the rest of the world by continuing international flights out of Wuhan while cancelling domestic flights. In this way, the CCP protected itself while infecting other countries.

As a result, the rest of the world suffered huge losses while China enjoyed zero-COVID for most of 2020 and 2021. The CCP then took every opportunity to “educate” the world that their system is better than the inefficient western democracy and should be implemented across the whole world for the sake of “the shared destiny of humankind”. After all, it was in the CCP’s Constitution (as revised in October 2017) that it is CCP’s duty to advance “the shared destiny of humankind” with the CCP’s superior governing system.

Xi Jinping even suggested honoring the CCP with a gold medal in COVID control at the party celebrating the conclusion of the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympic Games.

Unfortunately, many in the West admired the CCP and followed the CCP’s playbook.

The Lancet, Nature, and many other scientific journals praised the Chinese response. For example, the Lancet published an article on April 18, 2020 claiming, “The quick containment of COVID-19 in China is impressive and sets an encouraging example for other countries.”

Government-imposed lockdowns, vaccine mandates, keeping people in fear, and silencing scientific debate have all garnered approval from the global scientific community.

But for those of us who noticed that the public health information being disseminated often contradicted itself, it seemed that Dark Forces had been in control.

Silence and Censorship Make Bad Science

Some of us have known all along that the public health agenda of advancing pharmaceutical talking points, disseminating fear, and insisting that only a for-profit, rushed to market vaccine would not stop COVID.

Others of us are just waking up to the inconvenient truth that the entire pandemic response may have been wrong and that our blind obedience and trust in authority were misguided.

No matter what your beliefs are about COVID, vaccines, lockdowns, social distancing, masking, and school closures, however, it’s important to understand that the only way out of the collective mess humanity is in right now is to be willing to disagree, talk honestly, and encourage the process of scientific inquiry.

Yet since the beginning of the COVID crisis, when honest scientists, professors, and medical doctors began to speak up, they were, and continue to be, silenced, canceled, de-platformed, and defamed.

Even now, “science” has become so politicized that doctors willing to speak truth to power have lost their jobs, their social standing, and their licenses to practice medicine.

Questioning COVID Protocols

Just a few months into the pandemic, scientists start to question the COVID measures being implemented.

Health care professionals noticed that when their patients were put on ventilators, instead of recovering, they were dying.

Others saw that COVID was treatable, and that they could use a combination of off-label drugs like ivermectin and anti-inflammatory steroids to calm the immune system’s cytokine storm that the virus seemed to provoke in order to help their patients recover.

These observations led to the Great Barrington Declaration, which was a project spearheaded by three visionaries: Dr. Martin Kulldorff, a professor of medicine at Harvard University, Dr. Sunetra Gupta, an epidemiologist at Oxford University, and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine at Stanford.

They described themselves as infectious disease specialists and public health scientists who have “grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies.”

Published in October of 2020, the Great Barrington Declaration currently has more than 930,500 signatories.

“Current lockdown policies,” the Great Barrington Declaration insisted, “are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health.” These include, “lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health—leading to excess mortality in the years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden.”

The Declaration pointed out that school children and the underprivileged were “disproportionately harmed.”

As hopeful as the Declaration made many feel, it was relentlessly criticized and largely ignored. It seemed that throughout 2021, many people preferred to blindly put their trust in the government and in what a growing number call the government’s lies.

For whatever reasons (political, emotional, Dark Forces), people throughout the free world were willing, and even eager, to allow newly minted pharmaceutical billionaires to forward a narrative that lined their corporate pockets. It was as if the world were gripped by a dark force.

But 2022 has not turned out to be “2020 too.” Instead, starting in January of 2022, major scientific journals are rebelling against the one-sized-fits-all no-debate-allowed agenda. It was then that the British Medical Journal, one of the most prestigious health journals in the world, published an editorial insisting that the raw data that has been used to justify such an aggressive worldwide push to get the COVID vaccine be made fully and immediately available for public scrutiny.

Three months later, an editorial was published in the April edition of Surgical Neurology International: “COVID UPDATE: What is the truth?” by retired neurosurgeon Dr. Russell L. Blaylock. Blaylock was frank and direct in his condemnation of the public health policies implemented to contain COVID-19.

Indeed, he unapologetically calls the pandemic “one of the most manipulated infectious disease events in history, characterized by official lies in an unending stream lead by government bureaucracies, medical associations, medical boards, the media, and international agencies.”

Real Science is Not Dogmatic

Fake science is dogma that cannot be debated, nuanced, challenged or changed. Real science is not dogmatic. It can be debated and considered. But scientific freedom can only be defended when each one of us stands up and defends it.

Now for the good news. There are indications that the pro-science pro-freedom movement is becoming more mainstream every day.

In March, Joe Wang attended a conference in Washington, D.C. to inaugurate the Academy for Science and Freedom at Hillsdale College. This new academy’s mission is to educate people about “the free exchange of scientific ideas and the proper relationship between freedom and science in the pursuit of truth.”

Everyone who attended the conference was already aware, to some degree, of the American government’s war on science. But there we were, in America’s capital, able to hold a conference criticizing the rich and powerful, without having the police knocking at our door. Just ask yourself, what happened to Dr. Li Wenliang, the Wuhan whistleblower in 2020, who purportedly died of the virus in a Chinese hospital? And what happened to the top COVID expert in Shanghai, Dr. Wenhong Zhang, who had to give up his belief of co-existing with the virus and “full-heartedly” endorse the Xi Jinping’s zero COVID policy?

We must use of what limited freedom we still have now in the United States to avoid the fates of Dr. Zhang and Dr. Li.

In April, Jennifer Margulis attended a medical freedom conference for doctors and other healthcare workers in Conroe, Texas. It was hosted by pediatrician Angelina Farella, a conventionally trained doctor who has testified against the COVID vaccines. Dr. Farella’s testimony has led biased media outlets, including The Independent, to give her the moniker of being an “anti-vaccine” doctor despite the fact that she gives vaccines in her office every day. Over eighty medical doctors attended the conference, sharing their clinical data and successful treatment protocols.

“People are sick and dying and doctors won’t treat patients,” Ben Marble, M.D., an emergency room doctor, said. “Is this a 2-year long Twilight Zone episode or what?”

He called the way patients were being treated in the emergency rooms an “epic failure” and explained that he quit his job as an emergency room doctor in order to be able to treat patients. Marble, who founded a website that treats people for free called MyFreeDoctor.com, said, “[We’ve] treated over 200,000 people for COVID and lost six.”

May the Force Be with Scientists and Doctors that Fight Back

The fight for scientific freedom is important to our lives, and the lives of generations to come. To be honest, scientists and doctors are not particularly good at these kinds of fights, which involve not only science, which they are good at, but also interacting with politicians, the mainstream legacy media, and social media.

Luckily, the scientists and doctors are stepping up anyway and it’s time for us to join them. It’s time to say enough is enough, just as Blaylock has.

Silencing free speech and co-opting science can have deadly consequences. “The first thing that the Nazis did was fear, propaganda, and censorship,” says Vera Sharav, a child survivor of the Holocaust.

She said, “The free press was ended the minute Hitler took over. Information is freedom. People who are informed do not march in unison. It’s only those who are being fed lies that frighten them and that keep them in a state of total anxiety who will follow orders without a second thought. They’ve become conditioned not to trust their own instincts.”

As founder and president of the Alliance for Human Research Protection, Sharav has been speaking openly about the disturbing parallels between the German state’s control of information in the 1930s and today’s trend to silence dissent. For instance, the Germans justified eugenics, which was widely accepted among scientists even in the United States, by insisting that they were “following the science,” Sharav said.

We all need to rally behind the scientists, researchers, and doctors who are striking back. It is only with our support that the side of what is true will prevail and vibrant and long-lasting good health be realized.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

NY TIMES: Bioterror Researchers Build A More Lethal Mousepox (Published 2003)


October 31, 2003 by https://www.nytimes.com/by/william-j-broad

Scientists have created a highly lethal virus in an effort to develop stronger protections against supervirulent forms of smallpox that terrorists might turn on humans, researchers said yesterday.
The genetic engineering involved a virus known as mousepox, which infects mice but is not known to hurt people. Into that virus the scientists spliced a single gene that made it superlethal, then tested it on mice treated with different combinations of a smallpox vaccine and drugs.
The scientists said the results showed that the best defenses proved quite effective in preventing deadly disease not only in mice, but probably in humans exposed to customized smallpox of similar design.
This type of research has been debated for years, with critics arguing again yesterday that superviruses created in laboratories could inspire terrorists to create their own deadly diseases. The mousepox scientists countered that the research could help deter terrorism by demonstrating the emergence of more potent medical defenses.
The mousepox research was done at St. Louis University as a project financed by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases meant to find new protections against smallpox, which kills one in three victims.
The leaders of the research said that the lethal mouse virus would have no effect on humans even if it somehow escaped from the laboratory, which they said was safeguarded at biosafety level three, the second-highest degree of security.
”To my knowledge, there’s no scientific evidence to suggest that this kind of research poses any sort of human health risk,” said Mark Buller, a professor of molecular microbiology at St. Louis University who directed the mousepox research. Many experiments have shown that mousepox does not cause disease in humans, he said.
It goes beyond similar research on mousepox that Australian scientists reported in early 2001. They warned that their genetic technique, which they said they stumbled onto, could overpower existing vaccinations and produce deadlier kinds of biological weapons. The news prompted heated scientific debate internationally.
Yesterday, Dr. Buller said the St. Louis researchers had also made a designer form of cowpox, another cousin of smallpox, to better understand how easy or difficult it would be to apply the same kind of genetic engineering to the human smallpox virus and make it more lethal.
Experts said both the threat of such developments and the federal response seemed part of a theoretical debate, not something to worry about for now. They split over whether the research was prudent. Some argued that, given the accelerating pace of advances in genetic engineering, it was wise to investigate worst cases and responses.
”If we do not act across a wide range of areas we will be failing in our responsibilities as global citizens,” said Ken Alibek, a former leader of the Soviet Union’s germ weapons program.
Other experts called such research a slippery slope that could aid terrorists, and argued that the research should have had the kind of rigorous peer review that a National Academy of Sciences panel called for last month in new recommendations.
”This is bigger than the original Australian work,” said Elisa D. Harris, a Clinton administration arms control official now at the University of Maryland. ”They knew the mousepox results and deliberately set out to build upon that work in a way to create a more deadly virus.”
”There was a need here,” she added, ”for consequential research to be reviewed to weigh the potential risks and benefits before the work proceeded, and that apparently didn’t happen here.”
Dr. Lawrence D. Kerr, a senior official at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, agreed, noting that the research began before the recommendations were issued and would have undergone such scrutiny if begun now.
”This is the exactly the kind of scenario” that federal officials worry about, he said in an interview.
Eradicated two decades ago, smallpox no longer exists in nature or human populations. Officially, only the United States and Russia have stocks of the virus, under tight security. But federal experts suspect that clandestine supplies of the virus exist or could be fabricated.
The mousepox research was first reported in the current issue of New Scientist, a British magazine.
It involved inserting into the mousepox virus a mouse gene that controls interleukin-4, a primary chemical in the immune system’s response to invaders. In the Australian case, the designer virus so crippled mice’s immune system with extra production of interleukin-4 that the microbe reproduced wildly, killing mice that had been vaccinated and leaving others permanently disabled.
Yesterday, Dr. Buller said the St. Louis research made the killer germ more lethal by inserting the interleukin-4 gene into an unimportant region of the virus’s DNA, unlike the central part of the genome that the Australians chose. That allowed the virus to multiply even faster, he said.
”It can’t affect humans,” he emphasized repeatedly.
The human smallpox vaccine offered no protection to mice exposed to the superlethal virus. ”They all died,” Dr. Buller said.
The antiviral drug cidofovir similarly failed to give protection. But a combination of the drug and vaccine, he added, saved some mice. The researchers found that the best protection was a combination of cidofovir with a monoclonial antibody drug that fought the effects of interleukin-4. ”We protected all the mice from a very high dose” of the virus, he said.
He added that he planned to submit the research for publication and had no qualms about disclosing the exact location of the gene transfer. ”It’s irrelevant” to the design of a human weapon, he said.
Dr. Buller said that colleagues at the Army’s biodefense institute at Fort Detrick, Md., were planning to test the superlethal cowpox virus on mice. Yesterday, neither the White House nor Fort Detrick would comment on whether those plans had been approved.
The cowpox virus can infect humans, though the resulting disease is usually mild. Still, critics worry about the ramifications of such research, for safety and for precedent. ”The issue here,” Dr. Harris said, ”is the potential of this research being misapplied for destructive purposes.”

Day 50 of Year 8 Low-SOS Vegan Plan

EXERCISE:
* Jog 5k outdoors
* Lift legs, shoulders, abs

WATER:  (3) × (25) = 75 oz

EATS:
* cherries & nuts
* small gfo (greens-fruit-oats) smoothie w/ arugula, banana, pineapple, beet-pomegranate-vitamin C powders, ground flaxseed, uncooked rolled oats & water
* VERY veggie spaghetti w/ greens, lima beans, tofu & served w/ gorilla salad & plain sparkling water w/ shot of soft XL-drink
* few stalks of celery dipped in peanut XL-butter

SUN HAS SET

Cmmt: XL indicates uncommon extravagantly luscious food

Savory Breakfast Oats

Serves 1

Ingredients

  • ½ cup steel-cut oats (or farro if you want to repeat my “experiment”)
  • 1¾ cups water
  • 2 tablespoons nutritional yeast
  • 2 cups chopped stemmed kale or greens of choice
  • ½ cup sliced mushrooms (we love using shiitake, but any kind is delicious)
  • 3 to 4 sun-dried tomatoes, thinly sliced
  • ¼ teaspoon turmeric
  • 1 teaspoon Sriracha sauce or hot sauce of choice, or to taste
  • 1 tablespoon chia seeds or flaxseed meal

Method

  1. In a saucepan, combine the oats, water, nutritional yeast, kale, mushrooms, tomatoes (reserving some for garnish if you like), turmeric, and hot sauce. Bring just to a boil, watching carefully and stirring to prevent burning. Reduce the heat to maintain a simmer and cook, stirring occasionally, for 8 to 10 minutes; not all water will be absorbed when it is removed from the stove, but it thickens as it cools.
  2. Sprinkle with sun-dried tomatoes, chia seeds, or flaxseed meal and feel the goodness.

Based on excerpts from The Engine 2 Cookbook by Rip Esselstyn and Jane Esselstyn.

Sunlight: Optimize Health and Immunity (Light Therapy and Melatonin)

Jan 2022

HIGHLIGHTS / TIMESTAMPS:

0:00 Intro

6:50 The solar spectrum

13:00 Circadian rhythm highlights and chart

15:15 What is regulated by circadian rhythm

16:30 Circadian dysregulation

22:30 Circadian master clock

26:41 Blue blockers

29:15 Light & mood regulation & seasonal affective disorder

31:14 Dawn simulation light and light therapy box demo

35:45 Light & cortisol

38:15 Melatonin from the pineal gland

42:00 Morning dos and don’ts

44:00 Evening dos and don’ts

48:30 Mitochondria & melatonin

49:45 Melatonin night AND day

51:00 Details of melatonin production

59:00 Melatonin summary

1:02:30 Infrared radiation

1:20:45 Sun exposure & melanoma risk

1:26:00 Sunlight penetrates bone & brain

1:29:00 Sun exposure and Covid-19

1:40:00 Infrared inhibited by glass

1:43:00 Infrared summary

1:53:00 Summary & tips

LINKS / REFERENCES:

The Relationship Between Lux, Lumen and Watt (Tachyon) | https://tachyonlight.com/the-relation…

Infrared and skin: Friend or foe (Science) | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science…

Melatonin as a potential anticarcinogen for non-small-cell lung cancer (Oncotarget) | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27102…

The efficacy of light therapy in the treatment of mood disorders (AJP) | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15800…

Adj. Bright Light Therapy for Bipolar Depression (AJP) | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28969…

Effects of artificial dawn on subjective ratings of sleep inertia and dim light melatonin onset (Chronobiology Int) | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20653…

Effects of Artificial Dawn and Morning Blue Light… (Chronobiology Int) | https://www.researchgate.net/publicat…

Circadian rhythms in the hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis (MCE) | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21782…

Reduced cancer incidence among the blind (Epidem) | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9730026/

Evening use of light-emitting eReaders negatively affects sleep (PNAS) | https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/112…

Ocular input for human melatonin regulation (NEL) | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12163…

Melatonin and the Optics of the Human Body (Melatonin) | https://www.melatonin-research.net/in…

Melatonin in Mitochondria (APS) | https://journals.physiology.org/doi/f…

Opportunities.. of Fluorescent Carbon Dots (CPD) | https://www.researchgate.net/publicat…

The health benefits of the great outdoors (Environ) | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti…

Interplay between up-regulation of cytochrome-c-oxidase (Nature) | https://www.nature.com/articles/srep3…

Red/Near Infrared Light Stimulates Release of an Endothelium Dependent Vasodilator (FRBM) | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti…

Effect of daylighting on student health (CMSE) | http://www.wseas.us/e-library/confere…

Shining the Light on Sunshine (Clinical Endo) | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/f…

Associations of Outdoor Temperature (JCEM) | https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article…

Relationship between sun exposure and melanoma risk (EJC) | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti…

We cannot post all links and references here (due to video description length limitations) but will post them at the MedCram Blog: https://blog.medcram.com/

EARLY COVID CARE AVAILABLE (Hope Is Real)

(PINNED TO TOP)

MYFREEDOCTOR.COM or try *TEXTING* 850-750-1322

EARLY TREATMENT MEDS / TELEHEALTH: https://www.earlytreatmentmeds.com/

IVERMECTIN SOURCE: https://www.ivermectin.com/

For most recent recommendations, click on this link & scroll down to attached documents: https://palexander.substack.com/p/covid-early-treatment-protocol-as?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

EARLY COVID CARE ANALYSIS/RESEARCH

FOR DETAILED INFORMATION TRY THIS:

NASAL/THROAT WASH FOR EVERY HOUSEHOLD (do NOT swallow)

Mouthwash rinses containing cetylpyridinium-chloride or ethanol/ethyl lauroyl arginate eliminated live virus in vitro

ALSO CONSIDER XLEAR NASAL IRRIGATION

IVERMECTIN RESOURCE

IVERMECTIN STUDIES

PLANT FOOD SOURCES TO RESIST VIRUSES

CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILED INFO

Requesting Exemption Accommodations

I was reluctant to post this exemption resource page, but with all my fellow Earthlings (not just from the USA) being harassed by employers/gov’ts I am compelled to share some hope. Choosing what goes into your body is your God-given responsibility and liberty. You’re not asking anyone to approve this right, you are only requesting specific accommodations for the right already provided by Him. Be bold, honest, honorable & respectful when submitting your request. Use these resources as educational  guidelines. Customize them in accordance with your own personal beliefs. Make it genuine.

This list will be updated as information becomes available.

1. Detailed advice from an attorney https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/s/resources

2. https://news.gab.com/2021/07/29/important-download-covid-vaccine-religious-exemption-documents-here/

3. https://healthfreedomdefense.org/resources/

4. https://www.truthforhealth.org/legal-resources/

5. https://defendingtherepublic.org/covid/
On #5 click on vaccine “exemption” links to edit their request forms.

6. Quote some of this for support:
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a6.htm

7.
https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/legal_features/know_your_rights_how_to_request_a_religious_accommodation_for_covid_19_vaccine_mandates_in_the_workplace

8. Sample letter available for use:
https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3A3b23c102-87c1-40ca-8064-9f20c2b8fdc2#pageNum=1

9. Advice from lawyer (click, scroll down & click on: RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION AND COVID
https://renz-law.com/

10. Advice from HR corporate attorney – if there is a refusal to give termination letter:

Make a call to the EEOC (see item #15 below)

Every employee involved should call and open a claim. That will be the biggest pain in the ass for HR.

11. Legal Resources at Truth For Health Foundation

12. List of Lawyers by State Who Fight COVID-19 Mandates https://cleverjourneys.com/2021/09/19/list-of-lawyers-by-state-who-fight-covid-19-mandates/

13. Replies for Exemption Cross-Examinationshttps://www.bitchute.com/video/lLKH5gyAf7Ih/

14. New evidence for infanticide https://truthcomestolight.com/new-evidence-for-infanticide-in-the-creation-of-the-fetal-cell-line-used-for-covid-vaccine-testing14.

15. US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (eeoc)

16. https://www.thehealthyamerican.org/

Religious VS health exemption:
https://youtu.be/CSCRl5Gw_WE

17. Compilation Info http://www.kathydopp.info/COVIDinfo/Vaccines/InformedConsent/SampleLetters

18. Online video course (behind paywall) on how to sue employers: https://www.thehealthyamerican.org/classes/p/lawsuits?utm_medium=email&utm_source=getresponse&utm_content=HOW%20TO%20SUE%20FOR%20WRONGFUL%20TERMINATION&utm_campaign=

19. Liberty Counsel Sample Exemption Letters & More https://lc.org/exempt

20.

Michael Kowalik, Melbourne-based philosopher and ethicist, is a leading voice in the academic debate about the ethical permissibility of vaccine mandates.

Below is a summary of what he believes are “the three strongest arguments against the ethical permissibility of vaccine mandates and why any medical procedure imposed by coercion must be refused.”

The following ethical reasons may explain why some people refused Covid-19 vaccination despite the severe social and economic consequences of remaining unvaccinated.

A. Vaccine mandates imply that all humans are born in a defective, inherently harmful state that must be biotechnologically augmented to allow their unrestricted participation in society, and this constitutes discrimination on the basis of healthy, innate characteristics of the human race. By refusing to acquiesce to vaccine mandates we take an ethical stance against discrimination on the basis of innate characteristics of the human race. (This point derives from my paper published here: https://jme.bmj.com/content/48/4/240).

B. Medical consent must be free – not coerced – in order to be valid. Any discrimination against the unvaccinated is economic or social opportunity coercion, precluding the possibility of valid medical consent. The right to free, uncoerced medical consent is not negotiable, under any circumstances, because without it we have no rights at all; every other right can be subverted by medical coercion. Crucially, by accepting any mandated medical treatment we would be acquiescing to the taking away of the right to free medical consent not just from ourselves but from our children and from future generations, and we do not have the right to do this. Acquiescence to medical coercion is always unethical, even if the mandated intervention were a placebo.

C. Vaccines are known to occasionally cause deaths of healthy people. When an employee is required to receive vaccination as a condition of employment, that employee is economically coerced to participate in an activity where some percentage of employees are expected to die ‘in the course of employment’ as a direct result of the mandated activity. This goes against the fundamental principles of medical ethics and workplace safety. It may be objected that infectious pathogens also kill people, but these two categories of deaths are not ethically equivalent. Infection with a pathogen for which there exists a vaccine is not mandated, whereas deaths resulting from mandatory vaccination are mandated deaths, a legalised killing of some people for the prospective benefit of the majority. Critically, any discrimination against the unvaccinated (or a privileged treatment of the vaccinated) amounts to a violation of the right to life, because a small percentage of the targeted population are expected to die as a result of this coercive treatment. By refusing to accept mandated vaccines we take an ethical stance in defence of the right to life.