The universities...where critical thought is suppressed.
Consider for example the university and research sector-funded The Conversation in Australia.
In 2016 Misha Ketchell, the editor of The Conversation, personally banned me from commenting on The Conversation, because I dared to question the blessed Church of Vaccination.
Oct 31, 2023·edited Oct 31, 2023Liked by Ursula Edgington, PhD
The CON is so aptly named; CON is as Con does (a 'Gumpism').
A scan across the multiple regional and national sites of The CON will surely alert anyone with a scintilla of critical appraisal to the obvious agenda(s) in play.
As a mandated clinician, "taking a shot for the team" was never on the cards, a position echoed by 11,006 "exempted" clinicians who independently shared the same critical and ethical analysis.
Thanks Ursula, I'm very interested in the exemptions angle!
FYI, please see below my email to Mark Butler, the Australian Health Minister, on this subject:
Wed, May 17, 2023 at 3:24 PM
Mark Butler, I’ve been advised by the Department of Health and Aged Care that: "Informed consent should be obtained for every COVID-19 vaccination, as per usual consent procedures for other vaccinations."
As health practitioners are legally and ethically obligated to obtain voluntary informed consent before every COVID19 vaccination, why should anyone have to obtain a COVID-19 exemption to not have a COVID-19 vaccination?
Who are the individual medical practitioners behind this Department of Health COVID-19 Vaccine exemptions information, which completely flouts the legal and ethical obligation for voluntary informed consent?
The Australian Immunisation Handbook states: "Valid consent is the voluntary agreement by an individual to a proposed procedure, which is given after sufficient, appropriate and reliable information about the procedure, including the potential risks and benefits, has been conveyed to that individual." (My emphasis.)
As stated by the Australian Law Reform Commission, under common law: "As part of their duty of care, health professionals must obtain 'informed consent' by providing such information as is necessary for the patient to give consent to treatment, including information on all material risks of the proposed treatment..." (My emphasis.)
The Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Healthcare Fact Sheet for Clinicians on Informed consent in health care acknowledges key principles for informed consent, including: "...adults have the right to determine what will be done to their bodies and what healthcare treatments they will undergo."
and
"For there to be valid informed consent, the person consenting must... Have enough information about their condition, treatment options, the benefits and risks relevant to them, and alternative options for them to make an informed decision to consent. This includes the opportunity to ask questions and discuss
concerns."
Again quoting the Australian Law Reform Commission: "At common law, all competent adults can consent to and refuse medical treatment. If consent is not established, there may be legal consequences for health professionals".
Mark Butler, why should anyone have to obtain an exemption to not have a vaccination, given that they are supposed to be voluntarily giving their informed consent to this medical intervention, which may also include their choice to not have the intervention.
I look forward to your response on this matter, including disclosure of the identity of the individual medical practitioners behind the Department of Health COVID-19 Vaccine exemptions information.
Sincerely
Elizabeth Hart
Independent researcher investigating vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy
Urusla, re the big picture on the Covid vaccination scandal from an Australian perspective, please also consider my recent substack post: Why did former Australian PM Scott Morrison overrule advice against compulsory vaccination? https://elizabethhart.substack.com/p/why-did-former-australian-pm-scott
Are you following the UK covid19 inquiry? It’s being live-streamed on youtube. Some unsurprising content but useful for the normies to see it in black and white.
Thank you. You excellently highlight an evil paradox! Furthermore, as you doubtless know and as the literature already points out, informed consent is not possible for several reasons: 'Informed consent disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of risk of COVID-19 vaccines worsening clinical disease', Cardozo & Veazey (2021) Int J Clin Pract, in addition to an absence of statement regarding associated ARR and OR, and the dismantling of 'controls', and the post hoc modelling of 'effectiveness' (what was later shown to be negative risk benefit ~ (Fraiman et al. 2022).
This always was and remains a brutal, indiscriminate, and evidently planned assault by the State. Your own Prof Jane Halton is the well and long ensconced Board Chair of CEPI (!)
For interest, the weekly excess death rate above the 2015 - 2019 mean in Australia and New Zealand march in nigh on perfect concordance. Oceania is starkly different to Sweden.
The corruption in New Zealand universities was evident from my studies of Fluoride Industrial Waste Disposal via the public drinking Water. The Phosphate Fertilizer business shareholdings, political donations and endowments would make a wonderful FOI study. They even experimented giving Fluoride "supplements" to pregnant women.
actually I just realised that was a censored version of the facts, here's a more realistic write-up: https://unfortunateexperiment.wordpress.com/ I wonder how many Kiwi medical students even know about this?
Oct 31, 2023·edited Oct 31, 2023Liked by Ursula Edgington, PhD
Kiwis are aware of it, but it is old news and one supposes they conveniently chose to ignore it in this demented age of unethical and twisted DIE ideology?
NZ tertiary edukatshon had already succumbed to, 'The Diversity Delusion' (Health MacDonald (2020). The subsequent "COVID" delusion (https://pandauncut.substack.com/p/worldwide-covid-mortality-patterns?) nailed down the institutional authoritarians, erased ethics, and removed science, replacing it instead with policy-based State driven/bureaucrat imposed/corporate gain "The Science™ ." (The Rightful Place of Science: Science on the Verge. Benessia, Funtowicz, Giampietro et al. (2016).
It is hard to imagine a viable, ethical, rigorous, robust academic future when it is heavily composed of obsequious, unethical, well paid, conned and compliant invertebrates?
Just google 'Bill & Melinda Gates' and a NZ University and see how bought and paid for they are. Come to think of it, in my less awake uni days one thing I clearly recall was a mention in a sociology lecture 'that one day corporations would control governments' (mid '80s).
The universities...where critical thought is suppressed.
Consider for example the university and research sector-funded The Conversation in Australia.
In 2016 Misha Ketchell, the editor of The Conversation, personally banned me from commenting on The Conversation, because I dared to question the blessed Church of Vaccination.
The CON is so aptly named; CON is as Con does (a 'Gumpism').
A scan across the multiple regional and national sites of The CON will surely alert anyone with a scintilla of critical appraisal to the obvious agenda(s) in play.
As a mandated clinician, "taking a shot for the team" was never on the cards, a position echoed by 11,006 "exempted" clinicians who independently shared the same critical and ethical analysis.
DrLatusDextro, can you please expand upon "11,006 "exempted" clinicians who independently shared the same critical and ethical analysis".
What does this mean?
Read my previous posts on this topic please!
Thanks Ursula, I'm very interested in the exemptions angle!
FYI, please see below my email to Mark Butler, the Australian Health Minister, on this subject:
Wed, May 17, 2023 at 3:24 PM
Mark Butler, I’ve been advised by the Department of Health and Aged Care that: "Informed consent should be obtained for every COVID-19 vaccination, as per usual consent procedures for other vaccinations."
As health practitioners are legally and ethically obligated to obtain voluntary informed consent before every COVID19 vaccination, why should anyone have to obtain a COVID-19 exemption to not have a COVID-19 vaccination?
Who are the individual medical practitioners behind this Department of Health COVID-19 Vaccine exemptions information, which completely flouts the legal and ethical obligation for voluntary informed consent?
The Australian Immunisation Handbook states: "Valid consent is the voluntary agreement by an individual to a proposed procedure, which is given after sufficient, appropriate and reliable information about the procedure, including the potential risks and benefits, has been conveyed to that individual." (My emphasis.)
As stated by the Australian Law Reform Commission, under common law: "As part of their duty of care, health professionals must obtain 'informed consent' by providing such information as is necessary for the patient to give consent to treatment, including information on all material risks of the proposed treatment..." (My emphasis.)
The Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Healthcare Fact Sheet for Clinicians on Informed consent in health care acknowledges key principles for informed consent, including: "...adults have the right to determine what will be done to their bodies and what healthcare treatments they will undergo."
and
"For there to be valid informed consent, the person consenting must... Have enough information about their condition, treatment options, the benefits and risks relevant to them, and alternative options for them to make an informed decision to consent. This includes the opportunity to ask questions and discuss
concerns."
Again quoting the Australian Law Reform Commission: "At common law, all competent adults can consent to and refuse medical treatment. If consent is not established, there may be legal consequences for health professionals".
Mark Butler, why should anyone have to obtain an exemption to not have a vaccination, given that they are supposed to be voluntarily giving their informed consent to this medical intervention, which may also include their choice to not have the intervention.
I look forward to your response on this matter, including disclosure of the identity of the individual medical practitioners behind the Department of Health COVID-19 Vaccine exemptions information.
Sincerely
Elizabeth Hart
Independent researcher investigating vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy
vaccinationispolitical.net
Original email accessible via this link: https://vaccinationispolitical.files.wordpress.com/2023/05/exemptions-for-covid-19-vaccinations-directly-contradicts-voluntary-informed-consent.pdf
Urusla, re the big picture on the Covid vaccination scandal from an Australian perspective, please also consider my recent substack post: Why did former Australian PM Scott Morrison overrule advice against compulsory vaccination? https://elizabethhart.substack.com/p/why-did-former-australian-pm-scott
Are you following the UK covid19 inquiry? It’s being live-streamed on youtube. Some unsurprising content but useful for the normies to see it in black and white.
With pleasure, Elizabeth.
Dr Emanuel E. Garcia, NZDSOS.com member and psychiatrist.
https://newzealanddoc.substack.com/p/secret-jab-exemptions-for-healthcare?
Thanks for the link...wow...
Please see my response to Ursula above.
Thank you. You excellently highlight an evil paradox! Furthermore, as you doubtless know and as the literature already points out, informed consent is not possible for several reasons: 'Informed consent disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of risk of COVID-19 vaccines worsening clinical disease', Cardozo & Veazey (2021) Int J Clin Pract, in addition to an absence of statement regarding associated ARR and OR, and the dismantling of 'controls', and the post hoc modelling of 'effectiveness' (what was later shown to be negative risk benefit ~ (Fraiman et al. 2022).
This always was and remains a brutal, indiscriminate, and evidently planned assault by the State. Your own Prof Jane Halton is the well and long ensconced Board Chair of CEPI (!)
For interest, the weekly excess death rate above the 2015 - 2019 mean in Australia and New Zealand march in nigh on perfect concordance. Oceania is starkly different to Sweden.
https://drlatusdextro.substack.com/p/excess-deaths-nzzzz-ozzzz-and-sweden
A lot knew that it was toxic and many in NZ knew that it was toxic in 2019.
The corruption in New Zealand universities was evident from my studies of Fluoride Industrial Waste Disposal via the public drinking Water. The Phosphate Fertilizer business shareholdings, political donations and endowments would make a wonderful FOI study. They even experimented giving Fluoride "supplements" to pregnant women.
NZ doesn't have a great history when it comes to medical ethics: eg https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(20)30162-1/fulltext
actually I just realised that was a censored version of the facts, here's a more realistic write-up: https://unfortunateexperiment.wordpress.com/ I wonder how many Kiwi medical students even know about this?
Kiwis are aware of it, but it is old news and one supposes they conveniently chose to ignore it in this demented age of unethical and twisted DIE ideology?
https://nzdsos.com/2022/02/08/is-new-zealand-ready-for-cartwright-2-0/
(Feb 2022)
NZ tertiary edukatshon had already succumbed to, 'The Diversity Delusion' (Health MacDonald (2020). The subsequent "COVID" delusion (https://pandauncut.substack.com/p/worldwide-covid-mortality-patterns?) nailed down the institutional authoritarians, erased ethics, and removed science, replacing it instead with policy-based State driven/bureaucrat imposed/corporate gain "The Science™ ." (The Rightful Place of Science: Science on the Verge. Benessia, Funtowicz, Giampietro et al. (2016).
It is hard to imagine a viable, ethical, rigorous, robust academic future when it is heavily composed of obsequious, unethical, well paid, conned and compliant invertebrates?
Just google 'Bill & Melinda Gates' and a NZ University and see how bought and paid for they are. Come to think of it, in my less awake uni days one thing I clearly recall was a mention in a sociology lecture 'that one day corporations would control governments' (mid '80s).
Studying social policy in the '80s at Massey, I clearly recall being told that in the future corporations would control governments.
Keep going. You're on the right track.