Children | Informed Consent | Can a Child Answer These Questions?

Interdependencies

Parents continue to remain concerned about the increasing pressure to pass laws allowing children to make their own medical decisions when it comes to the topic of vaccination.  To put the ‘bottom line upfront’  – specifically as it relates to the mRNA ‘vaccines’ – any decision that entails injecting a therapeutic, designed by the manufactures to force one’s body to create the synthetic S1 Spike protein, is complex and the technology used to do so is even more complex.  The results, both known and unknown, in terms of a risk/benefit calculus, are not readily understood by a child.

In a newsletter from Physicians for Informed Consent  an educational nonprofit organization focused on science and statistics, you can find an opposition letter to California Senate Bill 866 (SB 866). Their newsletter and call to action along with the following list of questions in this article should be considered as the interdependencies between the issues – can a child answer these questions – and the impact of these bills if passed — are important factors. Lets look at some of the issues.

A look at some of the terms – Vaccine or Information Therapy

Does a child understand that the medical intervention they are being told is just a ‘vaccine’ – understand how the term is being used?  Would they know that the manufactures use the term ‘vaccines’ and other terms such as ‘information therapy’ and ‘gene therapy technologies’ – as if they are synonymous with the mRNA COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ countermeasures or injections?  They are not.

Children would likely not understand the nuanced differences. In short, calling an mRNA COVID-19 injection a vaccine omits a critical detail – namely – that these information therapies are coding our cells to produce – specifically, to use a technology, designed in a lab, that codes our cells to produce a synthetic S1 Spike Protein.

Of note, for the current COVID mRNA injections in question, the manufactures documented that they are designed to ‘cause disease’ in the body, first – as in these products act like code [information therapy] telling the body to develop the S1 spike protein which is – again – by the manufacture’s definition – the ‘pathogen’.  For additional reference, per European standards, it is clear that – the mRNA ‘vaccine’ is a genetic set of instructions that forces the body to produce S1 Spike, which ‘…causes disease…’ (reference below):

[…]

Of grave concern, would a child be following the rapid changes and opinions about the safety of repeated injections to include the boosters?  Would a child be able to follow – and understand – the most recent data dump from Pfizer and determine risk without a parent’s input? Just one example of the latest here: Pfizer dump .

Would a child know that as recently as January 11, 2022 the European Medicines Agency reversed course and acknowledged that ‘…repeated boosters could weaken the immune system…?” (See  Repeat Booster Shots Risk Overloading Immune System) Would a child understand any of this data and understand that they could be making a permanent decision that they cannot undo?

[…]

What Can Children Understand | Some Questions

[…]

(1)       Do young children (an eleven-year-old) have the critical thinking skills needed to understand the concepts of informed consent or pharmaceutical developer’s indemnification protections when making a decision on their own, without a parent or guardian, about taking a vaccine?

(2)       Do they know about, and are they privy to the safety claims as they are reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), or the federally mandated use of the early warning system VAERS, or other health agency?

(3)       Are children able to understand that a vaccine may not have been tested for its mutagenicity, carcinogenicity or reactogenic properties?  Would they even understand what these three words mean?

(4)       Does an eleven-year-old understand or comprehend the risks to themselves from the disease that a vaccine purports to confer ‘immunity’? How does an eleven-year-old define ‘immunity’?

(5)       Does an eleven-year-old understand any stated risks of possible adverse events from a vaccine that would be listed on a vaccine insert, both known and unknown.  Are their statistical analysis skills able to discern the difference between the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) and the Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) used in the mRNA clinical trials and would they know how to use these metrics to determine personal risk?

(6)       In the case of a clinical trial, where no safety studies have yet to be completed, does a child know the meaning of, or have an understanding of the term post marketing surveillance?

(7)       Will there be situations whereby many children would not understand any of the terms already cited in combination with concepts of a manufactures ‘indemnification’ protections?

(8)        Is it reasonable to assume that a child would be able to research and understand, on their own, that the CDC reported that with regard to the Sars-CoV-2 virus – “most children have mild symptoms or have no symptoms at all?” https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/daily-life-coping/children/symptoms.html

(9)       Would a child as young as eleven understand that such decisions would violate their parent’s substantive due process rights to make medical decisions for their children?

(10)  In the case of the Washington, D.C Bill B23-0171, https://lims.dccouncil.us/Legislation/B23-0171 physicians across the United States are raising serious concerns.  Would a child understand their concerns and/or the details of Bill B23-0171 that would require insurance companies, vaccine providers and schools to conceal, from the parent, the fact that the child has been vaccinated. Recall, this bill stipulates those doctors would need to provide an insurance bill directly to the child’s school, without the parent’s knowledge if the child’s parent has a religious exemption on file.  Of significant concern, if the child develops potential side effects, has a severe adverse reaction and parents seek medical care for their child; the evaluating physician may not get the necessary information needed to recognize a reaction.  This puts physicians at risk of not being able to practice, using all the available medical history they need.  This bill adversely impacts the duties and responsibilities of physicians and presents grave ethical questions for physicians, parents and legislators alike.

Via https://interdependencies.substack.com/p/children-informed-consent-can-a-child