How can a Government and its Ministers claim an untested vaccine is safe if tested vaccines carry a legal classification of "unavoidably unsafe?"


Vaccines are legally classified as “UNSAFE”
Vaccines are legally classified as “unavoidably unsafe” under controlling U.S. law.  Unsafe is the antithesis of safe. The use of the word “safe” to market this particular class of product, by any objectively-rational view, can only be described as fraud. Codifying this particular species of fraud as a protected activity within the USA does not alter the fact it is fraud to use the word “safe” to market a product that is absolutely known to be “unsafe”. (SEE NOTE BELOW)

Arguments that the marketing slogan “safe” is justified on pretense that vaccines are relatively-safe because they “save lives”, are equally devoid of justification because this class of product is known to destroy and end lives, and the number of lives thusly-affected by vaccines have not been accounted for by any of our public health agencies. Again, the accounting system relied upon for vaccine-risk numbers, the VAERS, fails to produce correct data relevant to the risks over 99% of the time. Without an accounting, it’s impossible to know whether this class of product has saved more lives than it has destroyed and/or taken, let alone justify slogans like “rare”. The word “safe”, in any context related to vaccination, is false and only intended to defraud the public out of their right to be informed where there is risk, to know the extent of that risk, and to voluntarily consent.

NOTE: Vaccines are legally classified as “unavoidably safe”, and there is no data to support any claims that vaccine reactions and injuries are “rare”, which would be the only method of supporting a claim vaccines are “worth the risks” or “relatively safe”. Therefore, the relevant ‘null hypothesis’ is not whether or not vaccines are safe. Vaccines are already known to be unavoidably unsafe. See: RESTATEMENT (2nd) OF TORTS § 402A comment k (1965). This study was conducted for the purpose of enumerating the risks associated with complete vaccine avoidance, by producing numerical values to then compare against health outcomes observed in the 99.74% vaccine-exposed population. Providing these numerical risk values facilitated an evaluation of the risk/benefit ratio of vaccination, at any level of exposure.