External contribution

Letter to the Childhood Sector

Madam, Sir,

We hereby wish to draw your attention to a problem that deserves to be tackled with rigor, respecting the rights of the child and fundamental ethical principles.

This is the campaign currently underway to convince children and their parents of the benefit to society and to themselves of vaccination against COVID-19.

The official « communication » on the benefits of this vaccination is, according to our analysis, supported by that of many independent personalities(1), both incorrect, even misleading, and manipulative. It aims to force vaccination for reasons that have nothing to do with the health and well-being of children.

  1. It is unacceptable and even scandalous that this official communication says nothing about the potential so-called side effects of this vaccination, side effects that are nevertheless listed in the framework of pharmacovigilance. Both VAERS in the United States and its European counterpart, Eurovigilance, have documented myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle), thrombosis and embolisms, various neurological disorders, and even autoimmune diseases in vaccinees.
  2. The fact that these side effects occur only rarely does not justify ignoring their possible occurrence. In contrast, the official invitation to be vaccinated admits that the risk of developing severe forms of COVID-19 is low for children. It would be more correct to say that this risk is, in any case, lower than the risk incurred by vaccination. The CDC (Center of Disease Control), the epidemiological watchdog in the United States, has estimated the risk associated with vaccination in young people under 25 years of age to be 50 cases of heart disease per 100,000 and 15 cases of serious COVID-19 per 100,000.
    The vaccine risk is therefore more than three times greater than the risk of COVID-19(2).
    Equally significant and challenging is the situation in terms of hospitalization and mortality. Also according to the CDC, the cumulative data from February 2020 to May 2021 are as follows: for youth aged 0 to 17 years, out of 100 people, the risk of hospitalization is 0.29 and the risk of death is 0.00. Where is the objectivity when one claims that a risk is low when it is close to 0 and when on the other hand one hides a much higher risk linked to vaccination?
  3. The above does not necessarily include long-term effects that may only become apparent after many months or even years. The experience with Sanofi-Pasteur’s dengue vaccine Dengvaxia demonstrates the importance of being cautious. A mechanism, highlighted in 1977(3)called « antibody-facilitated infection, » in which antibodies help the virus instead of inactivating it, has resulted in the deaths of 600 of the 800,000 children vaccinated…(4) This mechanism of facilitating infection by antibodies is known in coronaviruses. This is what prevented the production of SARS-Cov‑1 vaccines from 2002(5). It is inconceivable to ignore this well-documented precedent!
  4. Other potential long-term effects are mentioned by independent scientists. The risk of future impact on fertility and reproduction will be discussed at(6).
  5. Finally, it is necessary to insist on an essential aspect of the particular problem that the use of genetic vaccines (DNA or RNA) generates, as the molecular geneticist Christian Vélot, President of the Scientific Council of CRIIGEN (Committee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering), does. Vaccination of this type runs the risk of increasing the production of variants by recombination (between the genetic material and the genome of an infecting virus).
    In addition, an adverse effect officially considered impossible is the integration of vaccine RNA into the genome of human cells after retro-transcription into DNA. A recent study (Zhang et al, 2021) challenges this certainty(7). Doubt is therefore allowed and requires at least new investigations to invalidate or confirm this disturbing hypothesis.

It is essential to recall here that the currently approved vaccines have conditional marketing authorization, as Phase III clinical trials are still ongoing.

For the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine, the deadline for confirmation of efficacy is December 2023; for the Moderna vaccine, the deadline is December 2022.

We can therefore say at this moment that the people vaccinated by these biotechnological vaccines are pure guinea pigs.

Contrary to the claims of health authorities who advocate the vaccination of children against COVID-19, the responsible thing to do is to forego this vaccination, given the risks, uncertainties and well-founded fears about the long-term consequences. As strongly stated by the scientists who signed the COVIDRATIONNEL group, there is no justification for the systematic vaccination of children and adolescents against COVID-19.

The current communication has instrumentalized children and adolescents for purposes that do not directly concern them, in defiance of the Constitution, which states in Article 22bis that, in any decision that concerns him or her, the interests of the child shall be taken into account in a primary manner.

In conclusion, we urge you to take into consideration the well-documented facts that we have outlined in this letter. Finally, we remind you that, as the old saying goes, « when in doubt, abstain », especially when it is the health and future of our children that are at stake.

Aryan Afzalian (Doctor of Applied Sciences, Civil Engineer)
Fatiha Aïd Saïd (Naturopath)
Denis Brusselmans (Environmental lawyer)
Corine Dehaes (Philologist, teacher)
Geneviève Hilgers (Historian)
Alain Jossart (Social worker)
Paul Lannoye (Doctor of Physical Sciences, Honorary Member of the European Parliament)
Emmanuel Mignolet (Doctor in biochemistry)
Pierre Stein (President Grappe asbl)
Valérie Tilman (Philosopher, teacher)
Thierry Vanderlinden (Lawyer)
Carole Vanoeteghem-d’Ursel (Les Hamsters)

Notes et références
  1. Voir à ce sujet la prise de position solidement argumentée du groupe COVIDRATIONNEL, publiée sur son blog et signée par six universitaires belges, dont l’ancien Recteur de l’Université de Liège, le virologue Bernard Rentier.
  2. Center for disease control and prevention: www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.html
  3. Halstead & O’Rourke, 1977
  4. Carol Isoux : « Autopsie d’un vaccin. La course entre labos au risque du scandale sanitaire », revue XXI, numéro 52, automne 2020
  5. J.L.Bourdineaud, CRIIGEN, www.criigen.org, juillet 2021
  6. Dr Janci Chunn Lindsay, biologiste moléculaire et toxicologique. Audition devant le Comité consultatif Vaccination des CDC à Atlanta, www.jenniemargulis.net
  7. L. Mucchieli : « COVID-19, vaccins expérimentaux, stratégie vaccinale : entretien avec Christian Vélot », www.lames.cnrs.fr
  8. Zhang L. et al: Reverse-transcribed SARS-CoV‑2 RNA can integrate into the genome of cultured human cells and can be expressed in patient-derived tissues. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2021.

Espace membre

Member area