20 good scientific and ethical reasons to refuse compulsory vaccination

Mandatory covid-19 vaccination, whether perversely sought via a covid safe ticket, shameless guilt-inducing propaganda, or, perhaps soon, through a bill, is legally, scientifically, and philosophically illegitimate for a variety of reasons including:

1. These injections are experimental⁽¹⁾.
2. The content of these products is of questionable quality⁽²⁾.
3. What right do we have to be injected with an experimental product under duress?
4. The health risks of covid in healthy youth are extremely low. Young people have a proven natural immunity to covid-19. The health benefit-risk ratio for healthy youth is almost zero, or even negative⁽³⁾.
5. The health risks of covid for most healthy people are very low⁽⁴⁾.
6. These risks are further reduced with appropriate prevention and early management⁽⁵⁾.
7. These injections are not without risks⁽⁶⁾.
8. The promoters of compulsory vaccination seem to consider the victims of post-vaccination accidents (deaths, handicaps, even rare ones) as necessary sacrifices. Personal sacrifice is an individual choice; imposed by society, it becomes criminal.
9. The actual efficacy of these vaccines is still under investigation⁽⁷⁾.
10. Regarding the short and medium term safety of these products, there is an under-reporting of post-vaccination accidents for various reasons (patients and physicians not reporting post-vaccination effects)⁽⁸⁾. Despite this under-reporting, the reported post-vaccination effects are already far greater than those following any previous vaccine⁽⁹⁾.
11. The medium and long-term safety of these products is by definition still unknown⁽¹⁰⁾.
12. The central argument to convince young and not so young people to be vaccinated is « altruism »: it is a question of preventing the contamination of the entourage; however, certain studies tend to show that the vaccinated remain just as contaminated (viral load at least identical): the anti-covid vaccination does not prevent the viral transmission, this argument of altruism falls flat: what are the bases of an obligation of vaccination then⁽¹¹⁾ ?
13. The vaccination obligation is unjustifiable in a context where, in addition to questionable statistics, not everything has been done to treat, with the consequence of many deaths directly linked to these culpable negligences: we have indeed observed obstacles to access to care during the first confinement; the rejection of a preventive approach; a brake on the use of antibiotics⁽¹²⁾ while many covid-related deaths occur through bacterial superinfection⁽¹³⁾the excessive use of the precautionary principle for ivermectin and other early treatments with encouraging results, while the same precautionary principle has been abandoned in the case of injections; the lack of positive refinancing of the hospital sector, etc.
14. The questionable practices of the pharmaceutical sector are well known (numerous past convictions). How can we trust them blindly with this heavy past⁽¹⁴⁾?
15. Individual informed consent without coercion is a legal principle derived from fundamental rights and freedoms⁽¹⁵⁾. My right to my own body is an inalienable right that is part of the dignity of the human being, a principle from which all human rights flow: what argument justifies sweeping aside these fundamental principles, without even examining the broader implications of this abandonment of the individual’s right to his or her own body and of individual consent?
16. For those who refuse these experimental injections, it is not ethically justifiable to envisage, in the case of a universal vaccination obligation, depriving them of the possibility of working or studying, thus infringing on other fundamental rights: right to work (art. 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) and thus the impossibility of providing for vital needs (right to life), the right to education (art. 26), the right to freedom of opinion (art. 19), the right to liberty (art. 3), …
17. The political and moral project seems to be clearly to suppress fundamental rights and freedoms in the name of the collective good… Who would be responsible for defining this public good? Public goods experts »? What about liberal democracy (not to be confused with the dictatorship of the majority)? Fundamental rights and freedoms are the result of social struggles that have made it possible to erect these rights as bulwarks against the law of the strongest.
18. We have clearly entered into a strategy of periodic vaccination over an indefinite period of time for the benefit of the American pharmaceutical sector (July forecasts of 33.5 billion dollars for Pfizer in 2021) and to the detriment of public budgets: this raises questions on the one hand about the real issues at the heart of this crisis, about the state of our democracy, but also — and above all — about the foreseeable future inability of the States to manage basic policies and future challenges
19. The effectiveness of natural immunity is scientifically proven and mortality data, including RFI rates, are a vivid testimony to this⁽¹⁶⁾. The role of prevention in strengthening this natural immunity is also scientifically proven⁽¹⁷⁾.
20. The lack of universal vaccination coverage is blamed by some for leaving the field open to virus mutations, but others warn that a high vaccination rate during a pandemic is likely to cause selective pressure on the virus, allowing the emergence of resistant variants⁽¹⁸⁾. Moreover, it is completely illusory to pretend to control a zoonosis by human vaccination coverage since domestic animals and livestock contribute to the variations and mutations of the virus⁽¹⁹⁾.

The sources cited in this document are only a small part of the sources referring to scientific references that demonstrate the lack of sanitary, legal and moral relevance of mandatory vaccination.

This text is written by a group of citizens and scientists who urge their fellow citizens from all walks of life, caregivers, jurists, etc., to to come out of silence and join their collective to enrich it with their skills.