What Exactly Is ‘The Emergency’ Which Has Kept Australia and South Australia Under Restrictions for the Past 19 Months?
By Elizabeth Hart
For the attention of:
Grant Stevens
Commissioner of Police South Australia
State Coordinator COVID-19 Emergency Response
Grant, can you please clarify for me what exactly is ‘the emergency’ that has kept South Australia and Australia under emergency laws, and restrictions and lockdowns, for the past 19 months…because this is not adding up for me…
Despite all the fear-mongering in the mainstream media, the reported deaths for COVID-19 globally do not support the hysterical response. Over the past 19 months 4.8 million deaths have been attributed to COVID-19 globally. This is in a global population of 7.9 billion, where around 60 million deaths would be expected annually, so around 95 million deaths would be expected over 19 months. Seen in this context, 4.8 million deaths, most likely in elderly people with comorbidities, is not a great number, and even this figure is highly questionable in regards to deaths ‘of’ covid, or ‘with’ covid. Also see the PANDA article: COVID-19 deaths: Underreported or overestimated? 28 July 2021.
Retrospective critical analysis is now required to investigate deaths attributed to COVID-19, and the basis of this so-called ‘pandemic’, which has been used as the excuse to disrupt global societies and economies, and to steal the free movement and association, and bodily autonomy, of billions of people. Decades of pandemic planning have been disregarded in the response to COVID-19, including the Australian Health Management Plan for Pandemic Influenza that was abandoned by the Morrison Government in 2020, as discussed by Emma McArthur in her letter to Scott Morrison, 16 July 2021. These plans recognise that it’s not appropriate to shut down society for a respiratory virus like SARS-CoV-2, and that fundamental rights must be upheld. It’s past time to return to long-established principles of public health, and we must ‘learn to live with the virus’.
It was known from the beginning that COVID-19 wasn’t a serious threat to most people. For instance, the World Health Organisation acknowledges “Most people infected with the virus will experience mild to moderate respiratory illness and recover without requiring special treatment”. John Ioannidis et al report that “People <65 years old have very small risks of COVID-19 death even in pandemic epicenters and deaths for people <65 years without underlying conditions are remarkably uncommon. Strategies focusing on protecting high-risk individuals should be considered in managing the pandemic”. (My emphasis.)
Operation COVID Shield currently reports that 57.4% of people over the age of 16 are fully vaccinated in Australia, and that 51.7% have had the double dose in South Australia. (Data as at 4 October 2021.) Presumably people in the vulnerable groups have taken the opportunity to have the covid injections if they choose. The fast-tracked experimental covid injections apparently don’t prevent infection nor transmission, and the duration of ‘immunity’ is unknown – consequently there appears to be little justification for vaccinating anyone outside of the vulnerable groups.
Personally, I remain unconvinced that a global vaccine response should have been implemented, and we are now in unknown territory with these ‘leaky vaccines’ which are being pressed upon the global population. I’m still pursuing transparency and accountability for the processes that instigated the vaccine response globally and in Australia. In my opinion natural immunity should have been pursued, as raised in my BMJ rapid response in March 2020: Is it ethical to impede access to natural immunity? The case of SARS-CoV-2.
It’s very concerning that natural immunity is not being acknowledged as it’s likely many people may be protected by cross-immunity from infection with other coronaviruses, and that children are protected by their strong innate immunity. See for example this article: Pre-existing immunity to Covid-19 – Marc Girardot of PANDA unpacks its evolution.
In regards to natural immunity, it was recently reported an unvaccinated truck driver in South Australia was diagnosed as ‘positive’. According to the report in The Advertiser, Nicola Spurrier “said she was “disappointed” the driver was not vaccinated and urged him to get vaccinated when he is over his illness”. On what medical basis is Nicola Spurrier urging a person diagnosed as COVID-19 positive to ‘get vaccinated’? If this truck driver has already had a natural immune response to SARS-CoV-2, what is the benefit to him of COVID-19 injections?
Fast-tracked experimental COVID-19 injections have been implemented, wrongly in my opinion. We have no idea what lies ahead with potentially multiple shots with these injections, to purportedly protect against a disease it was known from the beginning wasn’t a serious risk for most people, see for example: Protection, immune response fall after Pfizer COVID vaccine, data show. CIDRAP News, 7 October 2021.
Again, we have to live with the virus, we should have been doing this all along…
I again ask what exactly is ‘the emergency’ that has kept South Australia and Australia under emergency laws, and restrictions and lockdowns, for the past 19 months, and why are restrictions still in place in South Australia?
I look forward to your response on this matter.
Elizabeth Hart
Independent person investigating the over-use of vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy
