Tackling “Vaccine Hesitancy”…

19 June 2022

That term, “vaccine hesitancy” is the recently popularised description of a state affecting people who are (in the minds of those using the phrase) not taking up the Government’s sales pitch for pharmaceutical interests, but could potentially be “encouraged” to take them, via “behaviour change models” and their application to said hesitant people. This is in contrast to the other popular term, “anti-vaxxer” which is applied to people who have made the perfectly reasonable decision to forego an invasive medical treatment because they have evaluated the benefit/risk trade-off, AKA “informed consent”. We looked at the weaponisation of that term a while ago.

Governments, Public Health organisations, pharma mouthpieces and spokespeople from various interested Foundations have all decreed that “vaccine hesitancy” is a real problem, and they are super-keen to address it. We looked previously at a document produced by the WHO on the topic related to the COVID-19 injectable products. Obviously the actual problem isn’t quite the same as the problem they describe. There is no actual concern for the health of the world’s population or they would direct the majority of their attention towards the things that actually impact people’s health, such as malnutrition, contaminated water, lack of sanitation etc. which are the main things that improved health in the so-called developed nations, at least until profits and control-freakism took over and subsequently decimated people’s health.

The problem is that because it’s not obvious, people aren’t dying of dysentery after drinking out of a puddle, or are not emaciated, it is less easy to spot unless you’re paying attention. Our water IS contaminated, with things like fluoride, hormones, metals and other harmful substances. Our food IS often full of nutrition-lacking calories, highly processed, artificial and even genetically modified. Crops are sprayed with pesticides that change the way they grow. Animals bred for meat are fed a diet of garbage and drugs. Of course it is possible to avoid all this, but it isn’t easy, especially if you’re on a budget, under time pressure or just unaware.

All of this however has been pushed on the public, escalating over the course of decades, and has made lots of money for a small group of companies and people, and Public Health organisations have largely sat there and watched in silence. Silence on those matters, but not on the topic of vaccines. Oh no, all of a sudden these people care so much about our health they want you injected with a DNA altering substance with no long term safety data and efficacy data that is largely fictional, created by the companies who’s products they are desperate to sell to a captive audience, and rubber-stamped by regulatory bodies that have been completely corrupted by the dollars/pounds/yuan being stuffed in their mouths by the same companies.

But, they DO want to tackle “vaccine hesitancy”. Of course they do, there’s lots of money at stake, along with all the other plans that can only be realised if the fake contagion-driven bio-security grid controlled by digital health passports is fuelled by a constant stream of new scary things and “vaccines” to save humanity from them.

Here in the UK the Government is spending lots more of our money on this stuff. Just a couple of examples include a “Covid vaccine festival”. The BBC reported on this in April this year with the headline “Covid vaccine festival cost £535 per person jabbed”.

Over a quarter of a million quid to bribe the public into taking these worse than worthless injections. While that figure seems like chump-change compared to the billions that have been completely wasted over the last 2+ years, out of a local Council budget that is a significant amount, especially when you consider all the things they won’t be doing for tax-paying residents because they’ll claim they can’t afford to. But, they’re tackling “vaccine hesitancy”, right?

Brighton & Hove City Council has been running Zoom training sessions where you can get your shiny “RSPH Level 2 Award in Encouraging Vaccination Uptake” certificate. You’d want that up on your mantlepiece wouldn’t you?

While all this is going on, despite the public being told by the Government that “vaccine passports” or whatever derivative name they referred to them as, are being scrapped and that they are undemocratic and unneeded, the Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC), currently run by Sajid Javid was advertising a job titled “Deputy Director, Delivery Lead Covid Pass”, a full-time permanent job on an annual salary of £71,000 right up until he was questioned about it in Parliament. All of a sudden, before the closing date for applications had passed, the job seems to have “closed or been withdrawn”. Here is an archived version, and a screenshot of the entire page. Javid made some kind of waffling excuse about his department being prepared, which if that was the case the job would not have suddenly vanished.

Never mind the 2+ years of relentless lies, the fact that the person currently running the DHSC (much like his predecessor, Hancock) cannot even be honest about a job application advertised by his department, perhaps if the Government really wanted to tackle “vaccine hesitancy” they could try NOT LYING ALL THE TIME. Or maybe they could try NOT CENSORING AND DEMONISING ANYONE WHO ASKS QUESTIONS. Or they could even try AN OPEN DEBATE WHERE PEOPLE FROM EACH SIDE DISCUSS THE ACTUAL DATA. Seriously, as outlandish as that all sounds, I think it could work. Obviously the idea the Government and its partners in business would entertain those things requires that the actual science, facts, data and so on support them. In case you’re still wondering, the fact that those three things have not and will not happen should answer any questions as to whether their position is supported by science etc.

There have been no shortage of offers by doctors, scientists, data analysts and concerned, educated people to hold open debates which would settle the argument once and for all. Debates are and have been part of academia and truth seeking for centuries. They don’t always result in a “win”, as the topics can sometimes be subjective, or theoretical. But we are told relentlessly to “Trust The Science”, that “vaccines are safe and effective”, and there is no question that the Government and its partners are right, and anything else is mis/dis-information.

Except they will not take anyone up on the one thing that would settle the matter, and tackle “vaccine hesitancy”, which would be if they held a debate and obliterated the arguments of the “anti-vaxxers” with their majestic science, and demonstrated to the “vaccine hesitant” there was no need to worry. Instead of spending millions on dishonest advertising, festivals, bribes and coercive, destructive policies, this could be settled quickly and easily. People could then make an actual informed choice, based on real risk/benefit data and the truth about the lack of sufficient testing, the fraudulent trial data that Emergency Use Authorisation was based on, and so on.

They know full well that it is likely no-one would ever voluntarily accept these COVID-19 injectables if they actually understood what they are, how they are supposed to work, and knew anything about the corruption in the trial and approval process, and that would severely affect two major things…

1. The insane amount of money that is being stolen from the taxpayers and given to allies of Governments.
2. The implementation of the bio-security grid, the dream of technocrat psychopaths.

Nothing is permitted to threaten those two main objectives. For absolute, incontrovertible proof of this, take a look at this Freedom of Information (FOI) request and response. The question submitted was…

Dear Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, we understand you will not release the terms of the agreement; which granted indemnity to Astrazeneca from litigation.
Can you give details of what would make that indemnity null and void? For example, faulty or incomplete trial data?

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/863442/response/2051299/attach/html/2/FOI2022%2012181%20Response.pdf.html

The response from the Government Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy was…

The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy can confirm that we do hold some information relating to vaccine indemnities, as per your question. However, we are withholding this information under section 43(2)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act. Under Section 43(2) of the Act, which states that “information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person (including the public authority holding it)”. The requested information contains commercially sensitive information with regards to contracts with vaccine suppliers, and we consider that the disclosure of that information would prejudice the commercial interests of the companies involved.

This is subject to a public interest test, and we have carefully considered the balance in this case. We recognise that there is a general public interest in the disclosure of information relating to the vaccination programme, as greater transparency makes Government and its decision making more open and accountable. However, against this, there is a strong public interest in ensuring that the commercial interests of Government and vaccine suppliers are not damaged or undermined by disclosure of information which is not common knowledge, and which could adversely impact current or future business.

It is important that vaccine suppliers and Government are able to have discussions which include commercially sensitive information to fully understand the issues. For such information to be shared, companies must be confident that, whilst the information remains commercially sensitive, the Government will treat the information with the appropriate care and seek to ensure that companies do not suffer unnecessary damage to their wider commercial interests and opportunities. In this case we consider that the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

Emphasis added

There is no question now as to where the Government’s priorities lie. The notions of “transparency”, and being “open and accountable” are outweighed by the “commercial interests and opportunities” of companies and Government departments. This was always blatantly obvious by the actions, policies and focus of these Public Health obsessed loons, but now it is there in black and white, in their own words.

They are only bothered about tackling “vaccine hesitancy” with manipulative, dishonest and coercive techniques that are the tools of those who do not have the truth, data or science on their side.