Open letter to Minister Sophie Wilmès

by Citizen Initiative

Questions to the Belgian government on coronavirus, containment and future vaccines.

To Mrs. Sophie Wilmès, Prime Minister

Copy to : The Ministers of Health in Belgium

Madam Prime Minister, we are trying to understand the contradictory and often restrictive measures that have been taken in recent weeks, particularly by your government. Of course, we are not unaware of the difficulties that leaders around the world are facing. So, in a modest way, we hope that our questions will contribute to finding the best solutions to democratically get out of the crisis in which we are immersed. 

We wish to receive from you clear and concrete answers to our concerns, convinced that they are also shared by a good number of people, whether they are health care personnel subjected to a harsh ordeal or the simple citizen.Formed in 2009, on the occasion of the AH1N1 flu, our citizen collective Initiative Citoyenne, had already asked a series of questions on the adoption of an exceptional law, the contours of the notion of « pandemic », as well as on the implications in terms of freedoms and health information, whether on the disease or treatments and vaccines.The publication, in 2010, of the secret contract for the purchase of H1N1 vaccines between the Belgian State and GSK⁽¹⁾The initial relevance of our questions was demonstrated by the fact that the WHO’s role was questioned by the Council of Europe⁽²⁾ and, unfortunately, by the numerous side effects of the H1N1 vaccine recognized in the medical literature, such as narcolepsy⁽³⁾.

With the coronavirus crisis, we are witnessing an unprecedented panic on a global scale and also unprecedented measures to restrict public freedoms, such as those of movement and assembly, which are guaranteed by our Constitution.

1. Can you define for us all what a « pandemic » is?

Indeed, in 2009, the WHO had already removed from its definition the need for a large number of deaths for the triggering of the maximum alert⁽⁴⁾ and in 2013, the Quotidien du Médecin informed us that the Organization was once again changing its way of proceeding and that it was « simplifying its alert system » (with 4 phases: interpandemic, alert, pandemic, transition, interpandemic,…)⁽⁵⁾ So what is the current situation? 

2. Can you tell us « who is WHO »?

a) What is the share of private sector funding in WHO’s financing?

b) Who precisely decides within the WHO to declare a « pandemic », and who ultimately decides if there is disagreement? And what room for manoeuvre do the States have once this decision is taken? 

c) What do you think is the role of experts? Does WHO take into account potential conflicts of interest in its selection of experts, and how concretely? 

d) What do you think of the recent suggestion by a WHO director that health professionals start going door-to-door to find infected people in their homes and place them in isolation⁽⁶⁾?

e) Despite the « coordinating » role of the WHO, it must be noted that there is no uniformity in the measures taken by the various European States⁽⁷⁾. Therefore, what do these various measures inspire in you for a policy in our country? 

3. Some points of the « Belgian management » of this crisis: 

a) Who decides what, given the different structures and committees in a country like ours where there are 9 ministers responsible for health? (National Security Center ? Sciensano ? Risk Management Group ? GEES ? other ?) Can you make public the activities or occupations of each of the Belgian experts in charge of this file and tell us on what basis you assess their possible conflicts of interest? 

b) Several internationally recognized actors have expressed less alarmist views on the coronavirus crisis. Could you tell us whether you have taken into account the opinion of such experts and field doctors and if not, on what basis have you dismissed them? Such as: The French Society of General Medicine:  » a dramatization that does not need to be « ⁽⁸⁾Prof. François Bricaire, infectious diseases specialist, member of the French Academy of Medicine:  » exaggerated concern « .⁽⁹⁾Prof. Didier Raoult, infectious diseases specialist:  » a worldwide hysteria « ⁽¹⁰⁾Dr. Eric Cua, infectiologist at the Nice University Hospital:  » 99% of patients recover. It is not a virus that will decimate the population, we know this virus « ⁽¹¹⁾; Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, German pulmonologist and epidemiologist, former expert to the Council of Europe:  » We need a commission of inquiry in this coronavirus file « ⁽¹²⁾

c) We are confronted with a real « war » of numbers, with projections and daily counts on which the public authorities base their decisions on containment and the evolution of the measures to be taken. However, these figures are subject to question and evolution, as shown, for example, by the recent « retropedal » of the epidemiologist Neil Ferguson (Imperial College of London) whose model of the evolution of the coronavirus was taken as a reference by most of the States⁽¹³⁾. Could you explain to us how you establish or gauge the reliability of the figures of sickness and mortality in Belgium (?) when: — the whole population is not tested — up to 80% of infections could be asymptomatic according to Chinese data!⁽¹⁴⁾ — 20 to 40% of deaths attributed to Covid-19 in Belgium were not even tested⁽¹⁵⁾ — it is difficult to distinguish precisely those who die with Covid-19 from those who die from Covid-19⁽¹⁶⁾

d) Could you remind us how many people die in Belgium every day (all causes included), and for example in this season? Have we never known, before this coronavirus episode, mortality peaks (for example linked to respiratory infections, or to other causes)? 

e) What measures have you taken to avoid such carelessness, regarding the lack of masks? As a reminder, a stock of 6 million masks (FFP2), was destroyed in February 2019⁽¹⁷⁾, without being replaced.

f) Can you explain to us the reasons for the Royal Decree of March 17, 2020 by which a member of your government explicitly forbids the use of rapid detection tests for the coronavirus for a period of 6 months and this, even though at this date, it was already known that the countries that had most proceeded with the tests had the lowest mortality rates (South Korea, Germany, etc.)⁽¹⁸⁾ ? In the absence of such tests, hospitals such as the AZ VUB (Brussel) systematically use (irradiating) chest scans to test and « triage » patients, thus exposing more than 9 out of 10 patients unnecessarily to radiation⁽¹⁹⁾ ! Can you describe the different tests that are currently available, those to come, and their respective degree of reliability? And also to tell us why the accredited clinical biology laboratories have been pushed aside in favor of industrial firms⁽²⁰⁾?

g) With regard to treatments, prevention methods and risk factors, why does your government not provide patients and doctors with sufficiently plural and independent information when 70% of patients are in favour of a standard reimbursement of complementary medicines⁽²¹⁾? Why not, for example, tell the population (70% of which is deficient in vitamin D) that the risk of hospitalization for Covid-19 is increased in people lacking this vitamin⁽²²⁾? Why not make vitamin C available to hospitals and doctors/patients for intravenous infusions when this remarkably safe treatment has already been shown to be effective and is used in Chinese and American hospitals⁽²³⁾? Why not point out to patients vaccinated against seasonal flu that according to a US Army study, their vulnerability to coronavirus is thus increased by 36%⁽²⁴⁾ and therefore decide to modify future flu vaccine recommendations before next winter? 

4 . Can you tell us what « containment » means to your government?

a) Does it consist in muzzling liberties, preventing access to health care, other than that provided for the coronavirus, preventing justice from functioning, schools from teaching, families from finding each other? 

b) How do you explain that some countries « survive » without containment (Sweden, Belarus, Taiwan, South Korea, etc…)⁽²⁵⁾?

c) How does your government take into account the psychological impact of the confinement on the population (one out of two Belgians would be in psychological difficulty⁽²⁶⁾ !), which constitutes a source of serious morbidity weighing on the general population, but also the abandonment of care towards a whole already weakened part of the population (chronic patients, people suffering from rare diseases and various handicaps) whose consultations are cancelled, and the operations postponed, at the risk of their health and in the name of the only obsession of the coronavirus⁽²⁷⁾ ?

d) How do you explain all the unpopular and worrying measures that are being rushed through in a much more convenient way now that people are confined and less able to protest (installation of 5G, the dangers of which have been denounced by thousands of scientists around the world⁽²⁸⁾and this while a large part of the population is categorically opposed to it⁽²⁹⁾ calls for the end of cash⁽³⁰⁾ or even an outright ban on cash in several essential stores; the prospect of increasingly tight tracking of people in the name of their « security⁽³¹⁾…) ?

5. What policy on « vaccines »?

Most governments are waiting « like a messiah » for the vaccine that will save the WORLD! This is how Finance Minister Alexander De Croo recently justified Belgium’s payment of 5 million euros to CEPI, the Coalition for Innovations in Pandemic Preparedness. Mr. De Croo has indeed declared that CEPI will start clinical trials within 4 months and that « there is no time to lose » because it could save lives⁽³²⁾. In view of the « moderate mortality » (cf. In the words of Dr. Charlotte Martin, CHU St Pierre⁽³³⁾) of Covid-19, how can you be so sure that a vaccine developed in such a short period of time will not create more deaths and illnesses as has already been seen with other vaccines (H1N1, dengue, etc.)⁽³⁴⁾? On what basis did you choose to invest 5 million public money when the virus mutates⁽³⁵⁾, when there are 8 different strains of the virus⁽³⁶⁾, when the question of the possible reinfection of patients is still not resolved⁽³⁷⁾, and when several experts have already pointed out major concerns : 

The fact that essential safety assessment steps (in animals) will be bypassed on the grounds of urgency⁽³⁸⁾, such as checking whether vaccines can cause disease outbreaks, which is sometimes possible.

The fact that the vaccine can create a sensitization of vaccinated patients making them at much higher risk of complications and fatal reactions in case of a subsequent encounter with the virus⁽³⁹⁾ (as seen for example in the Philippines, with the Sanofi vaccine against dengue fever which had also been recommended by the WHO but which created a state scandal⁽⁴⁰⁾).

The fact that previous scientific publications on coronavirus vaccines have reported immunological damage to the lungs⁽⁴¹⁾.

The fact that several vaccine projects (Moderna, CureVac, etc.) use a novel technology, involving the use of RNA or DNA, a method with unknown risks that could give rise to risks of autoimmunity and irreversible genetic mutations, the importance of which can only be gauged after large-scale experimentation on cobaye populations⁽⁴²⁾…Do you support the future vaccine blackmail that is emerging with the recent words of Mrs. Ursula vonder Leyen, according to which we will have to limit contact with our seniors as long as the vaccine is not available⁽⁴³⁾? Can you already guarantee that the law of August 22, 2002, i.e. the right to free and informed consent of patients, will be respected? Art.8. § 1. The patient has the right to freely consent to any intervention by the professional practitioner with prior information. […] § 2. The information provided to the patient, with a view to giving the consent referred to in § 1, concerns the objective, nature, degree of urgency, duration, frequency, contraindications, side effects and risks inherent in the intervention and relevant to the patient, follow-up care, possible alternatives and the financial implications. They also address the possible consequences of refusing or withdrawing consent, and other details deemed desirable by the patient or the professional practitioner, including any legal requirements that must be met with respect to an intervention.

6. How do you understand the notion of health democracy?

Does this important notion of « health democracy » still seem possible to you in a context where we find, for example, the same actor like Bill Gates on so many different levels? Does it seem healthy and admissible to you that a person, even a very rich one, is able to have such an influence on the world’s « health » policies, when he himself has never ceased to announce imminent pandemics? Thus, Bill Gates is not at the same time : 

• a close associate of the current WHO Director General, well before his appointment in 2017⁽⁴⁴⁾
• the second largest donor to WHO in years⁽⁴⁵⁾
• A financial contributor to the aforementioned CEPI (established in 2017).⁽⁴⁶⁾
• a key partner, along with his foundation, in « Event 201, » a global coronavirus pandemic preparedness tabletop exercise held in partnership with the Davos Forum and John Hopkins University on October 18, 2019, just weeks before the pandemic is announced⁽⁴⁷⁾…
• a major investor in companies such as CureVac, Moderna and Innovio that are working on a coronavirus vaccine with different DNA/RNA genetic technologies⁽⁴⁸⁾
• the one that announces that the vaccine against the coronavirus will go first to health professionals⁽⁴⁹⁾
• the one that decrees that there will be no more large gatherings until people are vaccinated⁽⁵⁰⁾ — the Lancet now arguing the same way⁽⁵¹⁾
• the one that evokes the prospect of digital certificates to know who is naturally immunized or vaccinated⁽⁵²⁾ (cf. ID 2020 project sponsored by the UN and supported by its foundation, via the GAVI⁽⁵³⁾) — the one that funds MIT’s invisible, vaccine-injectable « vaccination booklet » device, using nanotechnology and able to differentiate the vaccinated from the others⁽⁵⁴⁾
• the one that supports a billion dollar (sic) plan to cover the earth with video surveillance satellites⁽⁵⁵⁾
• the one who is now announcing that he is going to invest massively to have 7 factories built in a hurry to produce the 2 most promising anti-coronavirus vaccines⁽⁵⁶⁾
• the one who also finances a study on the coronavirus at the KUL⁽⁵⁷⁾ Madam the 1st Minister, your answers to our concerns are essential, in the context of the aforementioned pandemic which allows to put in place and this for everyone, the reduction of our fundamental liberties.

We would like to offer a final thought. In 1945, Georges Bernanos wrote:  » The day is not far off, perhaps, when it will seem as natural to leave our key in the lock, so that the police can enter our home, night and day, as to open our wallet to all requisitions « ⁽⁵⁸⁾. Was he right? Thank you very much for taking this letter into account. We are waiting for relevant answers and clarifications that are justified from a medical and democratic point of view.

For Initiative Citoyenne, Marie-Rose Cavalier, Sophie Meulemans, Muriel Desclée de Maredsous (initiative.citoyenne@live.be) Dr. Eric Beeth, general practitioner, Dr. Pascal Sacré, anesthesiologist-intensivist, Dr. Kris Gaublomme, general practitioner and president of the association Preventie Vaccinatieschade 

For any contact : Me Georges Henri Beauthier, rue Berckmans, 89, 1060 Brussels gh@beauthier.be