The purpose of putting together this commentary is to provide an overview of what we know regarding Covid-19 as it relates to children and youth. I have tried to present a risk/benefit analysis based on the real world data that we now have at our fingertips.

Putting aside the issues of the pandemic inspired, mind-numbing promotion of fear and division, ongoing scientific censorship, as well as political / economic agendas, one must ask the simple question: Are proposed mandates to administer the experimental injection to our children and youth, evidence-based? Equally important, are they ethical?

The media drumbeat of “safe and effective” has been impossible to ignore. When the pandemic began over a year ago, we had no data upon which to make informed public health decisions. We now know that the risk of severe illness and death is highly dependent on age and associated health problems.

COVID-19 risk by age: The data are now available.

The survival rate for unvaccinated 0-19 year olds who may catch Covid-19 is 99.9973% (death rate 0.0027%). For 19-29 yr olds, the survival rate is 99.986% (death rate 0.014%).

Institutionalized persons older than 70, particularly those with comorbidities, have been at highest risk of death from Covid-19, with survival estimated to be 94.5% (death rate 5.5%). About 70% of all Covid-19 deaths have occurred in this age cohort. If one is older than 70 but not in an institution, your survival rate is 97.6% (death rate 2.4%).

The American children in the USA (400 children in a population of 350 million) who have tragically died with a positive Covid-19 test have been very immune compromised (cancer, organ transplant, etc.).

Every death of child is a tragedy. A sickened child with immune compromise is a tragedy. Yet vaccination will confer no benefit to children, whatsoever.

Here’s why:

SAFETY DATA NOW AVAILABLE ON THESE EXPERIMENTAL SHOTS

These Covid-19 shots are not vaccines, as they fail to fulfill the goals of vaccination: They do not prevent a vaccinated individual from becoming infected, nor do they prevent the transmission and spread of the virus in one who is vaccinated. Indeed, a vaccinated person may show few or no symptoms and is still quite capable of infecting others – and as such there will be no achievement of “herd immunity” by giving these shots, even with 100% vaccine coverage. Any mention of that goal, touted by our public health “experts” at the outset of the pandemic, has quietly disappeared from news releases, here in Vermont and elsewhere.

Meanwhile, the government has vaccinated much of Vermont and the data are in on the results of this program, too.

The Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System (VAERS), co-managed by the CDC and FDA, is the official system the US government uses for vaccine surveillance. By reviewing the weekly updated VAERS reports (available at vaers.hhs.gov, medalerts.org, openvaers.com), it is quite clear, even with the system’s acknowledged shortcomings, that there has never in history been a drug or “vaccine” that has caused anywhere near this level of harm.

Through Oct. 8th, 2021 reports have tallied 16,766 deaths, 18,000 life threatening reactions, 24,805 permanently disabled, 9470 cases of myocarditis/pericarditis (HEART INFLAMMATION) as well as other serious events, including neurological damage, anaphylaxis, heart attacks, blood clots/strokes, paralysis, miscarriage…. the list goes on.

Vermont VAERS data shows there have been 1621 reports of adverse events thus far. Of this total, 87 are categorized as serious (i.e., life threatening, hospitalized, disabled, and/or died). Close to 23% of these serious reactions occurred in the 17-44 age group. I recently saw a mother in my office whose healthy 24 year old son, two days after receiving his 2nd Moderna jab, developed severe myocarditis and was rapidly placed on a heart transplant waiting list.

The CDC now openly acknowledges about 5000 cases of myocarditis, mostly in adolescents and young men. The four Scandinavian countries have either stopped giving or no longer recommend the Moderna shot to their youth for this reason. The FDA has delayed approving Moderna’s shot in this age group as well. The UK no longer recommends Covid-19 jabs in 12-15 year olds.

Just considering the risk of heart injury alone in young men, or the risk of blood clots in young women (never mind other adverse reactions), makes the known harms of these shots greater than the risk of contracting and recovering from Covid-19. Additionally, there is zero long-term safety data for these mRNA shots, which employ an experimental genetic technology that has never been used in humans on this scale, let alone proven safe.

Many of our youth have already contracted and recovered from Covid-19, and thus now have robust and durable immunity that is far superior to what the shots provide. Immunity from natural infection has in every instance been far superior to that provided by vaccines. There are no exceptions. There is now abundant scientific evidence that this is true of Covid-19 as well. Any person, particularly a child, being injected must first be screened for already existing immunity.

ETHICS

It is abundantly clear that children have everything to lose and nothing to gain by getting the Covid-19 jab; the risks exceed the benefits, and some will certainly be harmed if the mandates are imposed. Medical personnel, the state, and drug companies cannot be held accountable and bear no liability at all in the event their jab kills or permanently disables. The injured person and family are left entirely on their own. The medical, financial, and emotional costs of a severe vaccine injury for families are devastating.

Children and students have already paid a high price in terms of education, social isolation, mental health, and masking, not to mention being trained to avoid and fear others. Our societal norm has always been to protect the most vulnerable, especially children and pregnant women. Is it ethical to use them as a means to protect the old and frail, particularly when that strategy has never been proven? Haven’t they sacrificed and suffered enough? This utilitarian tactic, euphemistically termed “the greater good”, employed by all authoritarian regimes, is in the final analysis quite cruel, regardless of the risk/benefit equation. Mandating Covid-19 jabs in our young can, and should, be understood to be medical abuse.

This is exactly the kind of medical experimentation that the Nuremberg Code (1947), The Declaration of Helsinki (2013), the Geneva Declaration (2017), the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (1998), and the AMA Code of Ethics were all written to prevent.

Alarmingly, the fundamental right of each person to bodily autonomy and true informed consent, without coercion, no longer seems to be valued by many doctors, politicians, and public health “authorities”.

Like so many of our human rights in this pandemic, informed consent of individuals, or parents on behalf of their minor children, has become a privilege to be granted, or suspended, at the whim of the state and the stroke of a pen. It is time to wake up.

Parents, school staff, teachers: Please print this commentary and share it widely. In particular, please send it to those serving on your local school boards, and to those Representatives Senators in Montpelier who are elected to represent YOU. Our children and youth have too much at stake for us to remain silent. DOWNLOAD A PDF VERSION, HERE.

I trust that the school boards everywhere will keep the wellbeing and health of their students as their first and only priority.

Dr. Sandy Reider, of Lyndonville, graduated from Harvard Medical School in 1971, and completed his medical internship at the Medical Center Hospital of Vermont. He practiced family medicine and emergency medicine in Vermont from 1972-1985, and for the past 30 years has maintained a private medical practice in northern Vermont. He serves on the board of Health Choice Vermont (HealthChoiceVT.com), and is a founding member of Physicians for Informed Consent (PhysiciansforInformedConsent.org).

2
0
0
0
1

(5) comments

Michael Rousse

As a physician in this community that goes to work every day to help care for the victims of COVID-19, and the extremes of delayed health care that the COVID-19 pandemic has caused I am extremely disappointed that a person that has attained the title of MD, (albeit in 1971, 50 years ago), is allowed to do so much harm to the public's health by disparaging one of the greatest medical breakthroughs in any of our lifetimes. As we are about to reach 5,000,000 deaths worldwide from COVID-19 I am severely dismayed that the CR has allowed this to be published. I doubt this would have been allowed on Facebook, but it was fine for the readership of the CR. I implore the readership to be very careful where they get information on COVID-19 and carefully consider the source of the "evidence". I am a big fan of peer-reviewed journals and well controlled, double-blinded studies that can be duplicated. I can tell you that Dr. Reider has not cited any. Please do not rely on one-sided websites to help you in decision making. We have a well-established medical system here in the US, some say it's the best in the world. I can only ask that you consider both sides of the story when you make decisions about whether to vaccinate your children. We have no alterative motive here other than protecting and/or enhancing your children's lives. To say otherwise is an extreme disservice to the public's health.

Michael Rousse, MD, MPH (UVM College of Medicine, '88)

Alison Despathy

Dr. Rousse, I believe we all want the same goals- healthy individuals and a safe community. That being said, please be sure you are independently researching and checking your facts and not just taking the CDC and FDA’s “word for it” so to speak. Government science is not the end all be all and is actually quite compromised when you check the historical record. I have watched the FDA and CDC very closely over the past several decades because of my work in the field of nutrition. Many of their decisions and practices including noted, questionable revolving door policies and conflict of interest with the industry they are supposed to regulate need to be surfaced and also legitimately bring into question who these agencies are serving, the people or the industry? They have been brought to the Congressional GAO multiple times due to these unethical practices. Also the FDA approval process is highly controversial and questionable from a safety standpoint. Government science is typically about 25 years behind/delayed when you account for research and evidence to translate into clinical practice. Dr. John Ionnides of Stanford University researches heavily in this field. The other piece and this is not fear mongering as you have stated before, is that these covid vaccines are indeed experimental injections. This is the first time we have ever used this vaccine technology which is actually gene therapy involving synthetic biology and recombinant or gene modified biotechnology on such a massive scale. Offering and pressuring the community to take experimental injections that are absolutely not safe and effective and never were safe and effective is not the answer. The fact that these experimental vaccines were presented and marketed this way is actually criminal and fraudulent. We never had the research or evidence to determine this false claim and now the data that is accumulating both in this country and others offers actual proof that these bring risk actually high risks according to VAERS reports and mounting evidence. We need to start talking honestly about the risk versus reward analysis of these experimental injections especially as the country ramps up to literally experiment on our children, who have a close to 100% recovery rate from CoViD. They have seen in the accumulated data and research that children who are immune compromised are the ones who struggle with Covid and these children would unfortunately struggle with any infection. The sooner people realize this the better, especially if we are actually working towards these goals of healthy and safe Individuals and communities. I will again repeat to you the same things that I have mentioned in our conversations

1. The PCR test is 100% NOT a gold standard, specific Covid 19 test, despite what you have repeatedly tried to tell me. It never was and it never could be. It is always by definition a surrogate test and must be calibrated to specific markers for covid 19 in order to be a useful and meaningful surrogate test. It never was calibrated in this regard. The implications of this are massive. This means that the data collected using this test which equates to cases of Covid is potentially highly inaccurate. Please see the Corman-Drosten Review report linked here for further insight into this problem.

https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/

2. The state of Vermont according to the DOH had been using a PCR cycle threshold of between 37-40. This is unacceptable. These tests look at fragments of genetic material. They cannot access infectious disease. At these high levels it has been found that between 80-97% of positive cases do not culture out and are not positive or infectious. Think about this as it relates to cases, asymptomatic cases, quarantines, loss of school, and work and creation of policy based on faulty data. This has to be addressed and acknowledged. This is a gross misuse of this test especially at these cycle thresholds. What are we doing?

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/72/11/e921/5912603

3. If you were to actually swab someone’s nasal cavity and culture out any and all microbes. You would find an abundance- strep, staph, E. coli, lactobacillus, and bifidus species etc, common cold viruses (rhinovirus, adenovirus, and coronavirus) and many other microbes. This is normal, this is natural- these are your mucous membranes, they are covered with microbes. They provide a barrier of protection for the inside of our bodies from the outside world and all of these microbes found naturally in our environments. This is a beautiful design- really incredibly brilliant. But does this mean that I have an infection of these microbes because they are found there? Absolutely not. Especially in an asymptomatic case. What are we doing with this testing.

4. There are so many more aspects to this conversation, I would love to actually talk about this more- it is truly the only way for us to reach real solutions and the truth.

5. The last piece that deserves mention is the research regarding early outpatient care and treatment, there is so much research and clinical evidence justifying certain protocols, please look at this. This will directly impact outcomes for the best

https://rcm.imrpress.com/article/2020/2153-8174/RCM2020264.shtml

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7410805/

6. And please don’t underestimate natural immunity- the all time best form of protection historically and currently. The evidence for this right now is astounding. This needs to be acknowledged and become part of the conversation.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2782673

7. Thank you for your time, we share goals of health and a thriving community for all. There is more than one path there and we need to step back and look and see and work with everything we can to improve the current situation.

Alison Despathy

802-748-1487

Karen Bufka

Thank you so much, Dr. Reider, for providing a thoughtful, informed and informative resource to help us weigh the risks against the benefits as we consider Covid vaccines for children. Children have indeed already paid an incredibly high price during the pandemic. Let's refrain from causing them any more harm than they have already suffered during this time.

Alison Despathy

I am so very grateful for Dr. Reider’s honest professional opinion which reflects an incredible depth of research and an ability to really assess the science, the data and the risk versus reward analysis of these experimental injections for our children. At this point it is incredibly clear that the risks and unknown short and long term side effects of these completely experimental injections based on new vaccine technology are real and due to this, these injections are not justified and bring tremendous risk to the children, much greater risk than Covid itself. Thank you so much Dr. Reider for taking the time to compile the existing evidence and share this information with our community to help parents really gain an understanding of the risks associated with these vaccines. It is so important that parents are offered all possible information so that they have full informed consent regarding these experimental injections as they make this monumental decision for their children and their specific situations.

Allison Cassavechia

Thank you Dr. Reider for making such important points. I hope all readers will carefully consider this for their children. We need to have all information in front of us in order to make a fully informed decision for ourselves and our children.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.