Many countries like Germany, France, UK, Canada, Netherlands etc., are reporting people dying because of heart attack which is induced by the vaccine shot of AstraZeneca. This is happening because vaccine is forming a blood clot mainly in people with low blood platelet count. Most of these countries have suspended the use of this vaccine. Even India has reported some deaths because of the same reason.
Despite these deaths, the UK health regulator is urging people to continue to get these shots,
Britain’s medicines regulator is urging people to continue taking the AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine, despite revealing that seven people in the U.K. have died from rare blood clots after getting the jab.
“The benefits of COVID-19 vaccine AstraZeneca in preventing COVID-19 infection and its complications continue to outweigh any risks and the public should continue to get their vaccine when invited to do so,” said Dr. June Raine, the agency’s chief executive.
How proper is this utilitarian argument of benefits outweighing cost? The father of medicine Mr. Hippocrates has the answer. We all know that after getting license to practice medicine every medical person has to take the Hippocratic oath. We need to repeat that oath once again here to know how proper this utilitarian argument is:
I will use those dietary regimens which will benefit my patients according to my greatest ability and judgment, and I will do no harm or injustice to them.
This principle of Primum non nocere (First do no harm) is important to keep in mind here when we are discussing what is going on around the world during this Covid 19 times in the name of public health. UK public health regulator is in direct violation of Hippocratic oath. The first job of any medical practitioner is not to harm his patient. Not even one. They should stop urging and indirectly forcing people to take vaccine when we know full well that it is killing and seriously injuring people. They have no legal or moral rights to act like how they are acting right now. Utilitarian principle of cost and benefit is a horrid standard to base one’s decisions. Even every religion of the world forbids harming others. The matter here is not of benefits outweighing costs, but of what is right and wrong. This is a Moral issue. Killing someone is wrong. Injuring someone is wrong. Forcing someone directly or indirectly is wrong. In the name of public health, authorities can’t violate basic human right of self ownership. Our bodies are god given and any initiation of aggression (direct or indirect) against it is a violation of this basic human right. Spreading fear in public is also a violation of basic human rights. United Nation’s own Geneva Declaration of Human Rights affirms this.
The way governments and their unelected health officials are behaving world over right now, they are acting like those Nazi doctors who forcefully experimented all kinds of cruelties on their victims. They are acting like this because they know they are not going to face any Nazi Nuremberg trials. If they will feel that they will be brought to justice and face consequences of their actions then they will stop behaving like how they are behaving today.
For justice to prevail we must stop the ongoing Covid experiments on the world population. Totalitarian ideas like the vaccination passport etc., should be condemned and rejected summarily. What are we doing in the 21st Century discussing such immoral idea that outright violates basic human rights? Government lockdowns, mask and social distancing mandates etc., must stop immediately. They all violate our god given basic human rights. Good people of this world must take authorities to the court and challenge and defeat them there. If courts are rigged then civil society should come together and resist this medical tyranny.
The whole idea of public health is hollow and meaningless. There is no one entity called public whose health government should be worried about. The only reality is an individual. And private markets can very well take care of any health emergencies that affect us individuals. In my future articles I will elucidate this matter more. Here it is enough to mention that public health excuse can’t be allowed to let authorities tyrannize people.
2 thoughts on “First Do No Harm”
There are arguments that private companies have it in their rights to only allow people who have been vaccinated and this is made possible with the vaccine passports. What would you say to that?
It violates every right and definitely the right to traverse but what would one say against a company using this method of ID-ing to let people into their premises?
First thing, we do not have any any private companies anywhere in the world right now. whatever companies you see in the name of private are all government licensed monopolies and they do not have any right to stop any one of us. there must be proper privatisation first and then only private companies can demand vaccine passport.
And in a truly private market those companies who will not demand vaccine passports will make more profit compare to those who will demand and companies who were demanding vaccine passports will simply go out of business or they will have to change their policy. So the free-market competition will solve this problem easily.