The question of side effects neglected in the debate on compulsory vaccination, despite scientific and citizen syntheses made available to the public!

Among the scientific and ethical reasons that oppose mandatory vaccination against covid-19, the question of side effects is an issue that is of equal interest to non-vaccinees who refuse the current vaccines as it is to vaccinees who have trusted the authorities or those who had no choice but to be vaccinated because of professional, family or social constraints or pressures.

This question of side effects has been the subject of numerous scientific publications focusing on this or that effect: More than 1000 scientific studies on the dangerousness of Covid-19 vaccines | Covid-19 research (cv19.fr) but very few synthetic publications are currently available to the general public. For this reason, the work of synthesis carried out by the French doctor of philosophy Mariane Borie cannot be ignored. This synthesis work based on a large number of scientific articles and articles for the general public will undoubtedly have to be updated, clarified and completed by new scientific references (which is normal, since science evolves every day), but it is necessary to underline the extent and the social utility of this work which, at least, highlights the lack of scientific certainty about the safety of vaccines, the numerous clues pointing to their dangerousness, and above all the culpable omissions of the media, politicians and official health experts and institutions who claim that the risk-benefit of vaccines is indisputable.

The arguments developed by Mariane Borie on the basis of the studies she has referenced are the following: in view of the data and studies that suggest the importance of health risks on an individual but also societal scale associated with these vaccines, in view of the absence of epidemiological justification for compulsory vaccination, the collective failure of vaccination and the scandal of the ban on early treatment, itcan be argued that mandatory vaccination is unethical, unwise and malicious. The publication of this synthesis work, accessible to all, puts politicians, parliamentarians, as well as experts and institutions under influence in front of their responsibilities: even if this document is bound to evolve, to be clarified, amended, updated and completed by new scientific references, which will certainly be done (the document attached to this text has already undergone some amendments since it was put online last week and further amendments will be brought to the attention of Kairos readers), it is an extremely valuable attempt to synthesize, as it is accessible to all, the disproportionate risks to which the anti-covid vaccine policy exposes the population, and it exposes all political and scientific actors (including at the level of European and international institutions) who contribute to the implementation of compulsory vaccination or a vaccine pass to legal proceedings, in Belgium, as elsewhere: Warning from lawyers and toxicologists to French Senators: you could be held responsible! — CovidHub.ch.

Mariane Borie’s synthesis is not the only one available to the general public. On the same theme, the following documents written by scientists are useful to read:

In Covid-19, the role of government is no longer to impose but to propose new strategies. Vaccination can only be considered on the basis of free and informed consent. — Independent Scientific Institute (isis21.org) (also published as a carte blanche in Le Vif on 18/01/21) and its annex Cov19_vax_adverse_highlights_severe_VAERS.pdf — Google Drive that concludes that the benefit-risk balance is doubtful, at least for the population under 50 to 65 years of age without risk factors, even with the delta variant, and even more so with the omicron variant. You may also find it useful to consult this note Ethical and scientific note on mandatory vaccination of caregivers and the general population — The #covidrationnel blog which devotes pages 3 to 6 to the side effects of vaccines, and this very recent document Omicron, a game changer — The blog of the #covidational who demonstrates, after analysis of the new epidemic context related to omicron, the unjustifiability of mandatory vaccination and of a series of other measures (see conclusion) due to the minimal impact of this variant on intensive care. We will finally listen to Dr. Martin Zizi ⁽¹⁾ on Bam! ⁽²⁾ and Kairos remind that the omicron variant is 100 times less dangerous than H1N1 (the delta variant being 4 times less dangerous than H1N1)The legitimacy of a debate on a vaccination obligation and of sanitary measures similar to those taken for almost two years has never been questioned!

The antiviral vaccine is neither « altruistic » nor « supportive » since it does not prevent contamination and transmission, and even seems, according to some scientists, to have fuelled the epidemic, and above all, it puts healthy people (including the young) in potentially serious danger from a disease that is globally not very lethal (and even less lethal with the now dominant omicron variant) that would not seriously affect them. The issue of hospital overcrowding is primarily a political one: it is a question of the resources allocated to the sector that does not have to be resolved by infringing on fundamental rights. Finally, the obligation to vaccinate with an experimental product under the pretext of common interest (a fallacious pretext, since other policies are possible) creates a legal precedent and initiates a moral shift that will not remain without consequences on other questions that require individual consent: the general interest (i.e. the interest of all) would therefore like individual consent to remain a fundamental principle. Vaccination against covid-19 must be a voluntary choice.

Access to the PDF of Mariane Borie: