How can you be informed when nobody knows what the information is?
Personally I have no beef with people risking the vax if they want to PROVIDED the principle of INFORMED CONSENT is in place.
Does the person have enough accurate data to be able to reliably estimate the relative risks involved and come to a reasoned decision?
Currently that is almost impossible because:
Nobody can reliably predict the immediate health impact of being injected. Indeed until the vax roll out had started and reports of reactions came in these reactions were not known about. In other words, the populace replaced the lab rats and was subjected to the usual experimental procedure of "inject them with it and see what happens".This SHOULD have been known and would have been known beforehand - and people this INFORMED - had the proper research been done.
Nobody has been able to confidently predict that the vaccines will work both in terms of getting you protected and in terms of you not infecting others. Again , we are left with a "maybe" because the research has either not been done or the truth of the matter is being fudged. So one cannot even factor into one's INFORMED consent the fact that the vax actually works!
So we don't know for sure the vax works and we don't know for sure that we won't get some horrible reaction that might even kill us. What else don't we know?
Well, we don't even know what the real risks of the actual virus are because the death and infection stats put out by the gov are so unreliable and often downright deliberately false. This has been gone into at great length elsewhere but suffice to say here that it looks very much like the bug is neither as infectious nor as routinely deadly as they are saying it it.
This is not to say that it is not a serious and unpleasant high risk for some (the truly vulnerable) it is just that we do not know with any certainty just how many people fall into that category simply because the stats are such an appalling and misleading mess.
What we do know is that the average age of death of those cases alleged to be from the Covid19 virus is 82 - a year older than the average age of death from all causes.
So the risk for the great majority of us is very low. Which does not help those who ARE at risk very much. Neither does this ambiguity help us assess the risk of taking the vax against the risk of not taking it.
There just is very little here that enables us to make an INFORMED choice: what we have is a whole bundle of "maybe's" intertwined with some unknowns.
But there's more:
The person is not even accurately informed as to what they are being asked to have injected into themselves. As has been explained elsewhere, the Pfizer and Moderna "vaccines" are not actually vaccines. They are experimental biochemical agents mis-labelled as vaccines, a disingenuous marketing trick that mis-sells them to the public as vaccines and we have a serious fraud right there.
And yet more:
The actual virus has not yet after all this time been isolated or had its genetic sequence mapped. The fraudulent pseudo vaxes being foisted on you by Pfizer, Moderna and your government were researched using, not samples of the actual virus but from "a string of computer-generated codes" (SOURCE)
Now we come to the real nitty gritty: we are looking at two things when we consider the impact of the pseudo-vaccines upon human health:
The first is the immediate effect. People have the jab, a percentage get sick and others do not. We are ALREADY at this early stage getting indications that the immediate adverse effect of these vaccines is unusually dire and they may ALREADY be killing the elderly who are less able to withstand the adverse reactions. (see this article)
The second is the long term effect. This we know nothing about at all. NOBODY can tell us with certainty there won't be consequences because the research had not been done before the gov decided to use the entire population as lab rats it could inject, then "see what happens".
The virologist Professor Dolores Cahill (among other professionals in the field) has stuck her neck out and stated a very emphatic warning that within a few months of the vax rollout, as the alterations by these experimental agents of the human organism at cellular level make themselves felt, people will start getting sick and many will die.
The gov of course has chosen to ignore the warnings of prof Cahill and other experts.
As with all such medications the real test of their safety and efficacy is in the long-term. The real problems start showing up over time. Judging by what has happened in the immediate term, the long-term prospects for these pseudo vaxes do not look good.
Of course I cannot say with confidence that Prof Cahil is absolutely right. Only time will tell how accurate he predictions and how justified her concerns are.
To be honest I am praying this courageous lady with more integrity in her little finger than the entire government has in its collective body turns out to be wrong.
But right now, surveying the scene and taking on board how much the government has already repeatedly lied to our faces and the alarming number of immediate-term adverse events that have already shown up, I don't think she is.
But with millions of people being injected with extraordinary recklessness, God help us if her predictions are even remotely on target.