URGENT Please respond to: Consultation on proposed authorization of unlicensed cov19 vaccines, removal of civil liability from manufacturers, suppliers, medical operatives for injury/death from unlicensed vaccines; promotion of unlicensed vaccines; expansion of individuals authorized to administer vaccines & removal of any civil liability from resulting injury/death. Proposed legislation will alter the current Human Medicine Regulations; ENDS Friday 18th Sept:
Online Consultation Response at:
https://consultations.dhsc.gov.uk/5f43b8aca0980b6fc0198f9f
Text of Consultation:
Grateful thanks to The Conservative Woman and Vlod Barchuk's article at:
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/we-could-be-guinea-pigs-for-untested-vaccines/
Text of Consultation:
Although I beat you to post this by 8 minutes ( 😀 ), I am replying to yours because you added a link to the consultation. I replied as follows - not perfect, but people may care to adapt, adopt and improve.
Temporary authorisation of the supply of unlicensed products
Licences provide proper scrutiny, or test, of the testing procedures and results. As such, they are effectively acting as a test themselves. Consequently, removing licensing is tantamount to an abbreviation of testing and it cannot responsibly be considered.
Civil liability and immunity
Given that a removal of licensing allows for a deliberate abrogation of responsibility regarding the testing procedure, it is unthinkable that it should exonerate those implementing it from civil liability and immunity.
Expansion to the workforce eligible to administer vaccinations
This provides for a wider implementation of something for which the licensing process has not been completed to a recognised level. There would be doubts about this expansion on quality grounds alone, even with a licensed vaccine. To implement this would double up on irresponsibility from two perspectives.
Vaccine promotion
The wider promotion of a vaccine that has not even been fully promoted to the promoters themselves through the necessary testing and licensing process is furthering at least an unknown and at worse a falsehood. It could easily fall into the category of peddling snake oil.
6. What could we do better?
Provide more time for consultation - particularly for something that itself is promoting less consultation in the form of removing licensing requirements.
I would like to 'bump' this one up. Are people submitting their concerns? It is your last chance to do so today and tomorrow (17/18 September).
Thanks for your comments on this shocking proposal. I have responded but they do say on the website that even if you miss the deadline you can still contact them so if people have not commented by midnight tonight, you can still do so
