A brilliant report from James Corbett delving into the persuasion and behvavioural insight techniques being deployed to “persuade” a doubting public that Covid-19 vaccines, developed at warp speed, are safe and effective. 

 My post today: 

Covid-19 vaccines. Astra Zeneca version.

(Operation warp speed)

1. “Acceptable safety profile”. Are you prepared to be injected with potential toxins, bearing in mind history of Vaccine mismanagement and risks?

2. Requires two doses, will not *prevent* severe disease, you will probably suffer symptoms and they have no idea how long “protection” will last. So, you are basically accepting an injection, twice, that could have dangerous side effects, will make you feel sick, has not been correctly tested (10-15 years is standard approval time), will not prevent the disease and possibly will only protect you for limited time, no mention of what to do if virus mutates which it inevitably will.

3. Vaccine is unlikely to be any use for over 55s. The highest risk sector.

Remind me again why vaccines should be mandatory, why you will only be allowed to travel, get loans, go back to work etc etc IF you agree to being poisoned with no fringe benefits?

Can’t wait for the pro-vaxxers to argue their way out of this debacle.

BBC report on life in 2022.

http://www.bbc.com/…/…/20200621-will-travel-be-safer-by-2022

Telegraph article that I took “scorecard from”.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/…/england-germany-neck-neck-ra…/

Astra Zeneca:

“Seroquel, AstraZeneca’s second best-selling pharmaceutical, was promoted by the company to physicians and psychiatrists between 2001 and 2006 for mental disorders not covered by US Food and Drug Administration approval. (The approval range spanned the treatment of schizophrenia, short term treatment for certain manic episodes linked to bipolar disorder, and then, in 2006, bipolar depression.)

A whistleblower lawsuit subsequently alleged that the company had marked Seroquel to cover everything from dementia to anger management, post-traumatic stress disorder and sleeplessness. Doctors were also paid to give advice to the company on how best to market the drug for unapproved uses. Resorting to a technique it has come to master over the years, AstraZeneca refused to admit liability for such a marketing strategy while still paying $520 million in the civil suit.

Such short and sharp practice has extended to manipulating the clinical record, something that should make any investors into a COVID-19 vaccine vary. The company has been known to fudge the results of clinical trials, stressing supposedly positive findings while diligently hiding nastier ones. The notorious CAFE (Comparison of Atypicals in First Episode) study on comparing the effectiveness of three “atypical” antipsychotic drugs – Seroquel, Zyprexa and Risperdal – was accused by Cardiff University’s David Healy, a senior psychiatrist, of being “a non-study of the worst kind”, designed as “an entirely marketing-driven exercise” rather than having any scientific value. The criteria of effectiveness – for instance, whether the drugs were taken to the end of the study – suggested that the designers from the AstraZeneca were only interested in one thing: that candidates using them stuck with the programme. This said nothing about effectiveness as such, a point made even more glaring by the study’s omission of older antipsychotics.”

Dr Binoy Kampmark

https://www.globalresearch.ca/astrazeneca-public-in…/5715891

SAGE UK also working on debating those who challenge the warp-speed-vaccine process for Covid19 – James Corbett Report James Corbett report:

The WHO has made a handy-dandy guide on how to debate vaccine deniers. Today on #PropagandaWatch, James delves into the document and examines its ideas.