TRUMP Defends The Unvaccinated After Doctor Behind Covid Vaccines Said Refusing The Vaccine is a “Fundamental Right”

With the news about the health risks involved with the covid vaccine, President Trump spoke out to Newsmax about the freedom from getting the vaccine. Americans have a right NOT to get a vaccine if they choose not to, but the push has been on from the Biden administration to get 70% of Americans vaccinated by July 4th. Members of the administration have even been traveling around the US, giving speeches promoting vaccinations.

Even though there are risks, there are other reasons why people may not want to get a covid vaccine. If someone has had covid and has antibodies, they do not need the vaccine. If a person is young and has no comorbidities, there is a very small chance they will get very sick from covid. The big question to ask is, does the risk outweigh the cost?

“I don’t think that children should get it, and I think people should have the freedom not to get it. They can’t be forced because they do have rights.”

In fact, Tucker Carlson recently spoke to Dr. Robert Malone, who helped create the mRNA technology behind the COVID vaccines. Dr. Malone discussed whether people should get a covid vaccine if they aren’t at great risk:



BECAUSE THIS INFORMATION IS SO IMPORTANT, THE TRANSCRIPT OF WHAT DR. MALONE SAYS IS BELOW:

CARLSON: I hope you’ll tell us, do you have concerns about these vaccines for people who aren’t at great risk?

MALONE: Yes, I think that one of my concerns are that we are — the government is not being transparent with us about what those risks are, and so I’m of the opinion that people have the right to decide whether to accept vaccine or not especially since these are experimental vaccines. This is a fundamental right having to do with clinical research ethics.

And so my concern is that, I know that there are risks, but we don’t have access to the data and the data haven’t been captured rigorously enough so that we can accurately assess those risks and therefore for folks like your audience, you and me, we don’t really have the information that we need to make a reasonable decision.

CARLSON: Here’s a simple formula that most people use when they’re trying to think about, you know, should I take this or that pharmaceutical? Do the benefits likely outweigh the risks?

So, for this specific population — the largest population in America being forced to take the vaccines right now are college students, kids between 18 and 22, a huge number of whom have already had and recovered from COVID, very few of whom stats show will die from COVID. For that population, particularly those who have already had the virus, do the benefits outweigh the risks in your view?

MALONE: So, I have a bias that the benefits probably don’t outweigh the risks in that cohort, but unfortunately, the risk benefit analysis is not being done, so that’s one of my other objections is that we toss around these words risk benefit analysis casually.

CARLSON: Yes.

MALONE: As if it’s a very deep science, it’s not. Normally, at this stage, the C.D.C. A.C.I.P. would have performed those risk benefit analyses, they would be data-based and science-based. They’re not right now.

It is kind of a little bit at the seat of the pants and that I really object to. So, you ask me, do I think the risks — the risk benefit ratio is appropriate for this age cohort? The truth is, I can’t really say, but certainly I can say that the risk benefit ratio for those 18 and below doesn’t justify vaccines, and there’s a pretty good chance that it doesn’t justify vaccination in these very young adults.

CARLSON: It’s hard to believe that anybody would push universal vaccination on a country of 340 million people without getting the data you say don’t exist. How did no one think to do that?

MALONE: I think that what we have is a structural problem in how the databases were built and how they are being analyzed. My understanding from colleagues inside the F.D.A. is that the C.D.C. is overwhelmed. They aren’t even processing the data they have, and by the C.D.C.’s own admission in their recent M.M.W.R. report on safety and pregnancy, the V-safe database, which is the one that they hold internal, is so poor that they can’t draw any definitive conclusions about whether or not these vaccines are safe in pregnancy. They believe they are generally safe, but the databases aren’t sufficient to really demonstrate that.

We’re left in a position where we’re waiting for data from places like Norway, Finland, Scandinavia, and hopefully from Israel to back up our decisions in public health. Unfortunately, the Israelis that we’ve been relying on did not pick up these cardiotoxicity risks that we now are learning about. They were first picked up by F.D.A. people looking at the VAERS database.

CARLSON: Shocking. In an environment like this, where we know so little, voices like yours are essential, and the thought that you’re being censored by the tech platforms is a scandal.


https://100percentfedup.com/trump-defends-the-unvaccinated-after-doctor-behind-covid-vaccines-said-refusing-the-vaccine-is-a-fundamental-right/

Well I'm glad there's a transcript 'cuz I can't get any sound.  

How insane is it that that very inventor of a vaccine can't get the proper information on its efficacy?  
Dr. Malone did a pretty good job of rounding up the situation:

MALONE: As if it’s a very deep science, it’s not. Normally, at this stage, the C.D.C. A.C.I.P. would have performed those risk benefit analyses, they would be data-based and science-based. They’re not right now.

It is kind of a little bit at the seat of the pants and that I really object to. So, you ask me, do I think the risks — the risk benefit ratio is appropriate for this age cohort? The truth is, I can’t really say, but certainly I can say that the risk benefit ratio for those 18 and below doesn’t justify vaccines, and there’s a pretty good chance that it doesn’t justify vaccination in these very young adults.

And he can't really say because the CDC, etc., etc., are making sure they have plausible deniability.  


Good, though, that the doctor who invented the vaccine is speaking up.  

We are gonna be seeing people, vaccinated people dying out from infection or other things caused by this 'vaxxine' possibly even THIS winter flu season. I wonder if that will drive down the price of housing.

"National emergency" or not, they can't shoot a bunch of vaccines into people like skeet on a shotgun range, then sign a slip of paper that says they aren't responsible for anything they're doing, and expect that to have any legal weight. It's a crackerjack box waver as fake as anything else chi-com operatives are doing, IMHO.

Can they?

well it doesn't sound like much of a legal contract to me.

Calypso Jones wrote:well it doesn't sound like much of a legal contract to me.

It's probably near standard boilerplate wording that would be found in whatever you have to sign to get the vaccine. The waiver agreement or consent is  probably to be found also on the internet.

Bump.