Pandemic 2?

After the unprecedented situation that was "COVID-19", and all the attendant harms, difficulties, and losses caused by the Government's catastrophic response to this alleged virus, it seemed, finally, that lessons had been learned and life was returning to pre-pandemic normality.

The aftermath of "Covid", and real-world data (rather than computer modelling, on which the pandemic response was initially based) showed irrefutably that measures such as lockdowns, face masks, and mass testing did nothing to improve the nation's health, and a lot to severely undermine it.

Meanwhile, vaccine injuries in those who received the rushed, experimental "Covid vaccine" are widespread, with excess deaths linked to various pandemic measures continuing to increase.

As a result of all this catastrophe and loss, surely, if there was one good thing to come out of "Covid", it was this: the realisation that such extraordinary measures as national "lockdowns", and other draconian restrictions, could never again be repeated in an alleged bid to contain or prevent illness.

This being the case, we must ask the urgent question.

Why is the UK Government and its advisors now warning us that there "will" be another pandemic, which they will respond to with more lockdowns and restrictions - with which the British public "will" comply?

How are they so confidently able to predict the future in this way?

How could they seem to know what is going to happen well in advance?

Could it be because there are currently plans underway to manufacture such a pandemic?

To some, this may sound like a "conspiracy theory", but there are clear, evidence-based reasons to believe that Governments can have a hand in orchestrating mass illness in populations, for reasons of increasing their own political power and control. It has long since been known the best way to control a population (as all Governments are invested in doing) is through fear.

And the one thing that frightens most people most of all is something that threatens children.

Please note that, this September (2023), for the first time ever, the UK Government is offering the flu vaccine nasal spray to all secondary school pupils in England, a cohort of more than three million children. The flu vaccine has never been mass administered to this group before, as they are at such a miniscule risk from the flu.

Informed Consent Matters approached a veteran GP for his comments on this situation, a medical professional who is not anti-vaccine. The doctor, who has more than 40 years’ experience, said:

"This is ridiculous, a complete waste of money, this group does not need it at all."

So, we must question: why would the UK Government spend such a colossal amount of money vaccinating a huge group of people that are essentially at no risk from the condition the vaccine claims to prevent?

The "official" explanation is that schoolchildren are being vaccinated in order to protect more vulnerable groups, and in turn, the NHS.

Yet if the vaccine works, surely it is enough to vaccinate the vulnerable themselves, rather than expecting healthy children to take risky invasive medical products in a theoretical bid to act as "human shields".

If, however, the vaccine doesn't work to protect vulnerable groups, then clearly, there is no point in giving it to anyone.

In either case, administering this risky drug to millions of healthy children for the theoretical benefit it might provide to others is not acceptable from an ethical perspective and something no legitimate medical professional would ever recommend. Medicines should only ever be administered when they have a clear benefit to the person receiving them, and the benefit has been shown to outweigh the risk. To give a risky drug to a healthy individual in the hope it might offer some protection to another, does not meet medicine's own guidelines of informed consent, as per the Montgomery ruling.

So why is this unnecessary, unethical initiative being carried out - to repeat, at huge cost?

The Government never spends large amounts of money on something unless there is an obvious benefit to them.

The Government wishes to increase their power and control (as all governments do) and they learned throughout "Covid" just how much power they could have through creating fear of a "virus".

So, it appears they are going to try this again - but increasing the fear factor (and therefore their own potential power and control) by this time targeting the threat at children.

The flu nasal spray, which is only given to under-18s, contains many known toxins (including neurotoxic monosodium glutamate, genetically modified organisms, and monkey kidney cells) - and could well contain unknown ones, too, since it is well documented that vaccines can contain undisclosed ingredients. Obviously, spraying toxic ingredients - known and unknown - into children's noses has the capacity to make them ill.

Additionally, as an aerosol spray rather than an injection, the flu nasal spray has the potential to disseminate its toxic particles to others who have not directly received it. This may account for why the flu nasal spray is known to "shed", e.g., create illness even in those who have not received it.

The ability of the flu nasal spray to shed also means that the principle of informed consent is rendered obsolete in schools, because - even for families who have opted out of the vaccination - their children may still be adversely affected by it through inhaling it from "shedding" classmates.

Therefore, Informed Consent Matters vigorously opposes the mass administering of the flu nasal spray in schools.

We do not believe that any child needs this spray, but for families who wish their child to receive it, the correct environment is a secure clinical setting where the risk of "shedding" to others can be minimised: not a school, which is not a medical environment and should therefore not be mass applying risky medical products - including and especially when these products are completely unnecessary for the group they are being administered to.

We at Informed Consent Matters believe there is a deeply nefarious purpose behind this new campaign, and we are willing to risk being labelled "conspiracy theorists" for saying so.

If the Covid chapter taught us anything, it's that a lot of so-called "conspiracy theories" turn out to be true.

We believe that a new pandemic is being created and spread through the mass application of the flu nasal spray in schools, and that the illness this spray creates will be blamed by government ministers on a "novel virus". Governments will then respond by attempting to reintroduce such ruinous measures as lockdowns, as well as mask and test mandates.

However, as they confirmed in the recent 'Covid inquiry', this time the measures will be much harsher than in the Covid chapter.

Former health secretary, Matt Hancock, said at the Covid inquiry that the UK must be prepared to impose lockdowns which are “wider, earlier” and “more stringent than feels comfortable” to combat a future "pandemic".

What Can We Do?

We strongly believe the most powerful action is real-world action in your local community, so please consider getting active by:

*Finding out what meetings and events are going on in your local area, and arranging real-life meet-ups

*Sending our template letter regarding the flu vaccine to your local schools

*Handing out our specially designed leaflets to raise awareness that a new "plandemic" is on the way

Remember, we are the many and they are the few, and together, we have the power to expose what they are doing, resist, and fight back.

Please join us today by signing up to our mailing list at the bottom of the home page to keep updated on our campaigning.

All of our online resources here at Informed Consent Matters are made available for free, but running and maintaining this resource is not free, so please consider supporting our work via donation or through a purchase from our awareness-raising shop.

Thank you for joining us in this crucial fight.

Letter template for secondary schools regarding flu vaccine campaign

Dear [name of headteacher],

I am a supporter of the campaigning group, Informed Consent Matters, an initiative that promotes the vital legal and ethical importance of informed consent in medicine.

I understand that you, along with every other secondary school in the country, will be offering the nasal flu spray to all of your pupils this coming September.

I harbour grave concerns about this initiative, given the relative risk to healthy children from acquiring the flu is very low, whereas the flu nasal spray can potentially cause a wide array of negative health effects, some of them serious.

I would therefore like to request a copy of the school's risk assessment regarding the mass administering of a risky medical product in a non-clinical environment, with particular emphasis on the controls put in place should a child have an adverse reaction.

Studies have shown the nasal flu spray can cause a child to develop severe, life-threatening respiratory issues that require immediate ICU admission, amongst other potentially serious adverse effects.

As you are aware, schools are not clinical environments, nor are they able to maintain the professional standards of such environments, and that one would expect when administering invasive, risky medical products to children. In the first instance, if a child needs urgent, professional assistance in the face of a medical emergency (such as a severe adverse reaction to the vaccine), schools are not equipped to provide this. Healthcare settings are, which is why, traditionally, children have always received their vaccinations in healthcare settings, rather than school gyms.

In addition, children are also highly liable to become distressed at the prospect of vaccination, and the insertion of a foreign object into their nasal cavity, which is a particularly invasive procedure that could even prove painful if administered without sufficient care (unfortunately it is well documented that such care is often not taken when things are being inserted into the nose)..

Therefore, children as young as 11 who are to be subject to such potentially distressing processes should be supported by trusted family members, not strangers who are "batch processing" hundreds of other children. This is a potentially highly traumatic experience for a child, especially one who may be dealing with ASD or a similar condition, as many children are.

All these factors - both the physical and emotional risk to children of applying the flu nasal spray in school - should be taken into account in your risk assessment.

A further risk which has been well and extensively documented by studies is the phenomenon of vaccine "shedding", where the flu nasal spray disseminates its particles from the vaccinated child, to others around them who have not been vaccinated.

This phenomenon means parents cannot genuinely give "informed consent" to vaccination in school, because their child may inhale some of the vaccine from shedding classmates, even if that child themselves has not received the vaccination.

This is another reason why vaccines should not be given in schools, but (for families who want them) in controlled clinical settings, where the risk of shedding can be minimised. Giving a shedding vaccine in schools, environments which are known to be "superspreader" environments for communicable infections like headlice, inevitably creates a high-risk situation where communicable aspects of the vaccination could be spread to many others, causing illness in those people.

The flu vaccine is known to cause a wide range of infections and health conditions, including strep A (which swept through schools last year) and the flu itself, with a 2021 study showing 81% of flu cases in children were caused by the flu nasal spray.

As such, I am concerned that administering this vaccine to an additional 3 million children, as the secondary school flu vaccination programme aims to do, has the potential to drive a wave of illness in children that could be declared as another "pandemic", and lead to more of the ruinous "lockdown" policies that so disrupted children's education and lives in 2020 and 2021.

I am sure that you are as keen as I am to avoid that fate, so please consider very carefully whether you wish to administer the flu vaccine in your school (rather than letting families arrange for their children to receive this vaccine in the appropriate medical setting should they wish), and please also, as I have requested, furnish me with a copy of your full risk assessment should you decide to proceed with administering the flu vaccine in your school.

As a member of the community, I am concerned for both the children at your school who may receive this vaccine, and the wider public (including vulnerable groups), who may be adversely affected by this vaccine and its ability to "shed" and cause illness - an illness that may potentially be declared by government officials as another "pandemic" (please note that the then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson declared in 2022 that if a wave of illness that specifically affected children ever emerged, another lockdown would likely be introduced).

It is incumbent on you, as a headteacher with safeguarding and pastoral responsibilities to the children in your care, to ensure their optimal safety whilst they are at your school, and not to expose them to avoidable and unnecessary risks.

It is the contention of myself and the Informed Consent Matters campaigning group that the flu nasal spray being administered in schools is an avoidable and unnecessary risk. If you cannot prove otherwise with a comprehensive risk assessment that takes into account all the evidence (not merely "cherry-picked" evidence that may confirm existing bias), then we will conclude that you are derelict in your obligations to optimally safeguard children, and we will therefore respond to this situation accordingly.

Thank you for your time.

Yours sincerely,

[Name]

Shocking new change in childhood vaccination policy - coming this September

The flu vaccine is an intervention that claims to reduce the spread and severity of influenza ("the flu") in the general population, especially in vulnerable groups.

For some years, an annual flu vaccine has been made available for free on the NHS to groups considered to be more at risk from the complications of the flu (which doesn't generally cause serious complications for otherwise healthy people), including children aged 2-11. The form the children's flu vaccine typically takes is a nasal spray, rather than an injection, and for most children who receive it, this spray is administered at school.

Various campaigning groups have raised concerns with this approach, observing that there are several safety issues and adverse events associated with the flu spray itself, and that schools are not a suitable environment for applying risky medical procedures to children - especially as the flu nasal spray is known to "shed", thereby can cause the illness it claims to prevent. In Hong Kong in 2021, fully 81% of the cases of flu in children were caused by the flu spray.

At Informed Consent Matters, we support these groups' concerns regarding safety, and we also do not believe that schools, as non-clinical environments, are appropriate venues for children to receive potentially dangerous medical treatments. We believe that medical treatments should only be applied in medical environments that are able to observe the highest standards of clinical excellence, and that this is especially important where children are concerned, who may suffer serious adverse reactions to vaccination that schools are not equipped to handle..

As such, Informed Consent Matters strongly opposes the new initiative announced this month (July 2023) to extend the flu vaccine in schools programme to include secondary school pupils as well. The Department of Health has announced it plans to offer the flu nasal spray to every secondary school pupil in the UK (more than 3 million additional recipients), starting September the 1st when the autumn school term commences.

This initiative has been imposed on secondary schools without consultation with parents or caregivers, and without adequate risk assessments being carried out, regarding both the risks to children who receive this product, and the risks to others around them via shedding.

Hence, parents have not been able to give their informed consent for these products being administered at schools, as even if they opt out of their own child receiving the flu vaccine, they cannot be sure their child will not be adversely affected by others receiving it.

It is also highly unlikely schools will observe their ethical duties as per the Montgomery ruling to inform parents of all "material risks" (which includes risks considered rare) of the vaccine before seeking their consent.

This is why Informed Consent Matters believes that it is imperative that, if a family chooses to administer a vaccine to a child, this is done in a secure clinical environment, where all risks have been fully disclosed in advance, and that the family is also advised of the risks of "shedding", and that it may be best to keep their newly vaccinated child away from others - especially those with health vulnerabilities - until the shedding phase has passed.

Informed Consent Matters is gravely concerned that the impending extended administration of this risky drug to 3 million more children, in poorly controlled settings highly vulnerable to shedding and spreading, could prove catastrophic. We are aware of the distinct possibility that such an endeavour could prompt another wave of illness in the general population, and that government officials could respond to this situation by recklessly reintroducing such failed "infection control" measures as mask-wearing and lockdown (both of which all the real-world evidence have determined don't work to reduce disease spread, but do dramatically degrade public physical, economic, and mental health).

Please join us in our campaign to raise awareness of the risks of the flu nasal spray in schools, both to children and to other vulnerable groups they may "shed" it to, and help us to reinforce the message that medical treatments belong in medical settings, not in schools - and that, for most children, the risks of a flu nasal spray far outweigh any risks involved should they contract the flu, which - in the overwhelming majority of cases - fully resolves itself without medical treatment and with no lasting consequences.

In addition, Informed Consent Matters does not support the idea that children should be vaccinated to "protect others". If an adult is worried about their health and believes vaccination will protect them, they should seek vaccination for themselves, rather than asking the next generation to shoulder the burden on their behalf. Medical products (which always carry risk) should only be administered for the direct and demonstrable benefit of the person receiving them, not for the theoretical benefit to someone else.

The nation's children are not human shields, schools are not hospitals, and, as such, Informed Consent Matters says no to flu vaccines in schools, and will be campaigning vigorously on this issue throughout the summer months and beyond. Please consider supporting our work via donation or through a purchase from our shop.

Thank you for your support in protecting the future and wellbeing of the country's most precious resource: the children.