UK ITU Doctor Confronts UK Health Secretary about Mandatory Vaccinations
Discover more from Steve Kirsch's newsletter
UK ITU Doctor Confronts UK Health Secretary about Mandatory Vaccinations
All the workers don't want the vaccine. They say nothing when asked. Finally an ITU doctor speaks the truth. The UK Health Secretary ignores him saying they "take advice from vaccine experts."
The UK Health Secretary Sajid Javid is confronted with facts from an Intensive Therapy Unit (ITU) doctor Steve James.
Dr. James told the Health Secretary that his 'natural immunity' after contracting coronavirus was far superior to any booster. That is what the science says. It’s unambiguous. Dr. James is absolutely right.
However, Javid, who has no medical training and whose career was formerly as a banker, disagrees.
Watch the actual exchange. It’s really stunning.
You can see first hand the dismissive attitude that Javid has. Javid can’t argue with James based on the actual underlying science and studies, so he uses a hand-waving argument about “we take the very best advice we can—from the people who are vaccine experts.”
Let’s be clear. The more you vaccinate, the sicker you get. That’s what the science says.
The Denmark study (which shows Dr. James was right; you have to boost every 30 days to maintain protection.
German government data (this is from The Expose)
Javid’s vaccine experts seem to not know about any of these studies. It’s doubtful that Javid could read the studies himself and understand them.
And there doesn’t seem to be any evidence for asymptomatic spread
Study Of Ten Million Finds No Evidence Of Asymptomatic COVID Spread
For more on this story
Read this article from the Naked Emperor entitled “UK ITU Doctor Confronts Health Secretary about Mandatory Vaccination.”
UK ITU Doctor Confronts UK Health Secretary about Mandatory Vaccinations
Wow.... estimated he took a 98% pay cut to go into politics. This Pakistani man must really, sincerely care about conservative values a lot.
Firstly, I don’t believe in compulsory vaccination. However, just because someone is a medical consultant (anaesthetist), and has the confidence to share their view to the Secretary of State for Health & Social Care, does not mean they are well-informed about the relative merits of vaccination and acquired immunity. Nor does it mean they are correct.
The anaesthetist politely expressed a view. ‘His’ view. He didn’t cite any data to support any part of his view. Some aspects ARE supported by data, others are not.
There is now accumulating evidence that people with acquired immunity may have differing levels of protection to emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. More importantly, the data indicate that those who’ve had and recovered from a COVID-19 infection still stand to benefit from getting vaccinated.
Greaney et al., Sci. Transl. Med. 13, eabi9915 (2021)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8369496/pdf/scitranslmed.abi9915.pdf
Vaccine-elicited antibodies have been shown to bind more broadly across the recepror-binding domain (RBD), including to the more conserved “core” regions. This broader binding makes neutralization by vaccine sera more resistant to mutations within the RBD. This helps explain the relative ineffectiveness of convalescent sera, which many people initially thought would be a successful treatment for patients with severe COVID. In fact, ‘RBD-directed neutralization by convalescent sera was greatly reduced or even eliminated by a combination of key mutations at the three major epitopes in the RBD’s receptor-binding motif, but all vaccine sera tested retained substantial neutralization against this triple mutant.’
Amanat et al. also reported that several single RBD mutations reduce binding of serum from individuals vaccinated with the Pfizer mRNA vaccine less than for serum from previously infected individuals.
medRxiv 2021.03.07.21253098 (2021).