Writer-Counselor-Wellbeing Coach

Mandating what exactly?

Victoria and New South Wales have mandated booster shots to certain sectors of the workforce both citing recommendations from ATAGI (Australian Technical advisory Group on Immunisation). This panicked reaction to growing concerns about Omicron, which ATAGI identifies as being significantly less severe than previous variants seems risky to say the least.

With all the 'we don't really know' language in the ATAGI statement, I cannot fathom how this became a recommendation at all. On reading it, I would have thought the best course of action would be to remove ALL mandates, not add more. Read some of what they had to say:

ATAGI expects that booster vaccination alone will not be sufficient to avert a surge due to Omicron. However, maximising booster coverage by expanding eligibility and encouraging high uptake, in combination with enhanced public health and social measures, may prevent a large surge in case numbers, hospitalisations and deaths.

Note, may prevent (bolding mine). Translation: We don't really know. Yet they go on to say,

Despite key uncertainties, it is reasonable to assume that protection against severe disease is likely to be enhanced by a booster dose, particularly in those with risk factors for severe COVID-19. However, it is not yet known to what degree boosters may provide additional protection against severe disease, hospitalisation or intensive care admissions.  

'key uncertainties, 'reasonable to assume', likely to be enhanced', 'not yet known', 'may provide'

These qualifying phrases are interspersed with direct information about the total lack of data of some serious adverse effects.

There are currently no data on the risk of myocarditis after a booster dose of the Moderna vaccine, but this is expected to be available in coming weeks.

The impact of reducing the interval between the primary course and booster dose to 3 months on the risk of myocarditis is not yet known.

There is still little evidence on the incremental benefit of booster doses in protecting against severe disease or reducing onward transmission of Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2, and on the duration of protection provided by COVID-19 booster doses.     

Keep in mind most people in the workforces where boosters are now mandated are going to be in the age groups of least risk of Covid itself, but now forced to take risks with their short and long term health based on complete unknowns.

How, in their right minds could any health practitioner or politician make any such recommendation? I guess that the real question is becoming is anyone in charge in their right mind anymore?

We are forcing boosters on an unsuspecting public with no known benefit, forcing more young people to risk their health in order to earn a living AND causing unknown harm to children as young as 5 years old FOR NO BENEFIT to them, or it seems to anyone else.

These are extraordinary events that must be questioned, and quickly.

1 Comment

  1. Claire McManus

    Yes, the “we don’t really know” language, but “we” are willing to gamble with danger to health and lives by mandating more jabs for unsuspecting people. Is there a particular homicide charge that applies to such conduct, I wonder?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© 2024 Debbie Garratt

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑