T. Belman. I do not trust the impartiality of fact checkers. I think more clarity is needed.
1`. The Nuremberg Code is not the law in Israel or even the US. It is a list of principles. A lawsuit against the Israel has been filed in the ICC.. The ICC has not acted on the matter.
2. Given the fact that
” the vaccine has been found to be 97% effective against severe cases of the virus and 94% effective against asymptomatic infections, according to data recently released by Pfizer and the Health Ministry. Those who did not receive the vaccine were found to be 44 times more likely to develop a symptomatic case of COVID-19 and 29 times more likely to succumb to the virus when compared to individuals who had received their second dose two weeks prior.” ,
IF IT IS TRUE, is it still “experimental”.
3. I agree that it can’t be voluntary if it is coerced just like a confession isn’t admitted into evidence if it is coerced.
Candace Owen made this claim which the fact checker said was inaccurate.
CLAIM
“Nuremberg codes stipulate that consent must be voluntary […] Threatening someone’s livelihood unless they take an experimental vaccine is NOT voluntary consent.”
VERDICT
DETAILS
Inaccurate: Created in 1947 during a trial of Nazi doctors that conducted experiments on concentration camp prisoners, the Nuremberg Code specifically addresses experimentation on human subjects. As such, they don’t address COVID-19 vaccines that—having been authorized by health agencies like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration—are not experimental.
Misleading: COVID-19 vaccination isn’t mandatory in the U.S. Employers or schools may require specific vaccines, but this is not a new phenomenon. All 50 U.S. states require specific vaccines from students enrolling in public school and, in the U.S., employers can also require specific vaccines. In both cases, exemptions and accommodations are made for those who cannot receive the vaccine for medical reasons. In some states, vaccine exemptions are also allowed for religious reasons.
The Nuremberg Code is a list of ten principles guiding research ethics for experiments involving human subjects. As such, the Nuremberg Code specifically addresses experimentation on human subjects. It doesn’t apply to the use of authorized vaccines, such as the COVID-19 vaccines which aren’t experimental. Additionally, COVID-19 vaccination isn’t mandatory in the U.S., but employers and schools can require specific vaccines from employees and students. In both cases, exceptions are made for individuals who cannot receive the vaccines for medical reasons.
FULL CLAIM: “Nuremberg codes [sic] stipulate that consent must be voluntary. Telling a child they cannot go to school, firing people from work, or preventing their travel is NOT voluntary consent. Threatening someone’s livelihood unless they take an experimental vaccine is NOT voluntary consent.”
REVIEW
In June 2021, U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes dismissed a lawsuit brought by 117 employees of the Houston Methodist Hospital system who claimed the hospital’s COVID-19 vaccine requirement violated the Nuremberg Code. The employees also compared the threat of termination unless they take the COVID-19 vaccines to forced medical experimentation conducted by the Nazi doctors; a comparison Judge Hughes called “reprehensible”.
Though one of the more high-profile examples of individuals calling vaccine requirements a Nuremberg Code violation, the 117 employees aren’t the only ones to incorrectly make this claim. Similar claims involving the Nuremberg Code and COVID-19 vaccines have circulated and been fact-checked before, as shown here, here and here. These claims have also been fact-checked in other languages, including Spanish and French.
On 7 July 2021, talk show host Candace Owens posted a tweet, which she then shared on Facebook, saying that the “Nuremberg codes [sic] stipulate that consent must be voluntary”, and due to COVID-19 vaccine requirements to attend school, work and travel, “voluntary consent is not given”. As such, Owens claimed that the Nuremberg Code was being violated in such cases. She also called the COVID-19 vaccines experimental. As we’ll show below, the COVID-19 vaccines don’t violate the Nuremberg Code, which is related to medical experimentation on human subjects, not the use of authorized vaccines.
The Nuremberg Code
The Nuremberg Code is a list of 10 principles guiding research ethics for experiments involving human subjects. The Code was created in 1947 in Nuremberg, Germany, during the Doctors’ Trial, at which Nazi doctors, accused of conducting horrifying human experiments on concentration camp prisoners, were judged[1]. Of the 23 physicians and scientists in the trial, 16 were found guilty.
The first of the 10 principles states that “the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential”[2]. The other nine principles concern other aspects of the research experiments, such as how they must “yield fruitful results for the good of society”, and must be “conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering” and “only by scientifically qualified persons”. You can read the complete Nuremberg Code here[2].
One example of a research study that violated the Nuremberg Code was the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, conducted by the U.S. Public Health Service between 1932 and 1972. In order to “observe the natural history of untreated syphilis” in black men, researchers recruited 600 African American men in Alabama, two-thirds of which had syphilis. Despite penicillin-based treatment becoming available by the mid-1940s, the researchers didn’t provide such treatment to the participants; instead, they provided ineffective medicines, like ointments, so that the recruited subjects would believe that they were receiving treatment. By the time the study ended, after a front-page report in the New York Times, 128 participants had died of syphilis.
COVID-19 vaccines and the Nuremberg Code
There are two arguments put forth by individuals who claim the COVID-19 vaccines violate the Nuremberg Code.
The first is that the vaccines are experimental, and therefore individuals receiving them are human subjects in an experiment. This isn’t true because the COVID-19 vaccines aren’t experimental. As we’ve shown in a previous Health Feedback claim review, the COVID-19 vaccines went through clinical trials and were “authorized for emergency use following a careful review of their benefits and potential risks”.
Speaking to Full Fact, a U.K. fact-checking organization, Aston University medical sociology and medical ethics researcher Alexis Paton said the Nuremberg Code is “very specifically about experimentation”. Participants in the COVID-19 vaccine phase III randomized clinical trials, for instance, read informed consent documents that provided information about the trials to ensure their voluntary participation[3]. As such, while the 10 principles outlined in the Nuremberg Code apply to vaccine clinical trials, once a vaccine is authorized or approved, the Code is no longer relevant.
The second argument is that vaccine requirements, such as to enroll a child in public school (which is already in place, with all 50 U.S. states requiring specific vaccines from students) or to work at a hospital, violate the Nuremberg code because they are a form of coercion. This was one of the arguments put forth by the 117 employees of the Houston Methodist Hospital system who refused the COVID-19 vaccine. However, as Judge Hughes explained in his ruling:
“This is not coercion. Methodist is trying to do their business of saving lives without giving them the COVID-19 virus. It is a choice made to keep staff, patients, and their families safer. Bridges can freely choose to accept or refuse a COVID-19 vaccine; however, if she refuses, she will simply need to work somewhere else”.
Private businesses like the Houston Methodist Hospital system can require a vaccine, and vaccine requirements are not new for hospitals. For instance, in 2017, 61.4% of surveyed U.S. hospitals had influenza vaccination mandates for healthcare personnel[4]. Furthermore, U.S. federal Equal Employment Opportunity laws “do not prevent an employer from requiring all employees physically entering the workplace to be vaccinated for COVID-19,” with reasonable accommodations made for employees who cannot receive the vaccine. Such medical exemptions are part of vaccine requirements: all 50 U.S. states allow medical exemptions to students enrolling in public schools, and another 44 allow religious exemptions.
In terms of a federal mandate, though U.S. states have the legal authority to institute mandatory vaccinations, there are currently no plans to do so; on 5 December 2020, then-president-elect Joe Biden said COVID-19 vaccines wouldn’t be mandatory. Additionally, on 28 May 2021, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security said that “there will be no federal vaccinations database and no federal mandate requiring everyone to obtain a single vaccination credential”.
In short, both arguments put forth by Owens and others as to why COVID-19 vaccines violate the Nuremberg Code are inaccurate. The first because the Nuremberg Code is concerned about experimental research and COVID-19 vaccines aren’t experimental. The second because COVID-19 vaccination in the U.S. isn’t mandatory, and specific vaccine requirements by schools and employers are legal.
REFERENCES
- 1 – Shuster (1997) Fifty Years Later: The Significance of the Nuremberg Code. The Lancet.
- 2 – British Medical Journal (1996) The Nuremberg Code (1947). British Medical Journal.
- 3 – Emmanuel et al. (2021) Assessment of Length and Readability of Informed Consent Documents for COVID-19 Vaccine Trials. JAMA Network Open.
- 4 – Greene et al. (2018) Changes in Influenza Vaccination Requirements for Health Care Personnel in US Hospitals. JAMA Network Open.
*****
Israeli anti-vaxxers submit ethics complaint to ICC – report
Despite the suit’s claims of severe side effects and deaths allegedly related to the vaccine, only about 0.25% of Israelis who received the vaccine experienced any side effects.
By TZVI JOFFRE, JPOST MARCH 14, 2021
Anshei Emet (People of Truth), a group against coronavirus vaccination, filed a suit against the Israeli government with the International Criminal Court (ICC) earlier this month, arguing that Israel’s administration of the coronavirus vaccine and policies to encourage vaccination are considered “crimes against humanity” according to the Nuremberg Code.
“It is our intention to present to you and detail how in the State of Israel this year, the Government of Israel with its ministers and its Knesset members, heads of cities, and additional senior factors, violate the Nuremberg Code in an unlawful manner, blatant and extreme. And to our regret, not only in a single aspect but many – too many!” the group wrote in the suit filed by Tel Aviv-based A. Suchovolsky & Co. Law Offices.
Israelis were unlawfully not informed that they were taking part in a “medical experiment,” and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had signed an agreement with Pfizer to receive a large amount of vaccinations if Israelis were used as “experimenters,” Anshei Emet argued. The state did not present “alternatives for treating the Corona disease” and concealed information regarding the vaccines, the suit said.
In an interview last month, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla called Israel the “world’s lab” due to the country’s high vaccination rate, which provides real-world data on the vaccination campaign’s effect on health and the economy.
Members of the Helsinki Committee did raise concerns that the agreement with Pfizer could violate privacy rights, as information about the vaccination’s effectiveness is shared with the company.
“Many” were killed, injured and severely damaged by the vaccine, Anshei Emet said in the suit, adding that the Health Ministry “openly admitted that 41% of police persons, military, education and medical personnel who were vaccinated suffered severe side effects.” The Jerusalem Post was unable to verify whether the ministry did this.
There were “no full reports of the numbers of dead or injured,” despite the data from the clinical trials being released and the Health Ministry releasing reports on side effects experienced by those who received the vaccine, the suit said.
Despite the suit’s claims of severe side effects, death and injuries allegedly related to the vaccine, Health Ministry data released amid the vaccination campaign showed that only about 0.25% of Israelis who received the vaccination experienced any side effects, and that the vast majority of these reported side effects were light and temporary, including general weakness and headaches, dizziness, feeling faint, muscle pain, fever, joint pain, nausea, stomach pain, chills, throat pain, coughs and runny noses.
During clinical trials of the Pfizer vaccine, two participants died after receiving the vaccination, but the deaths were deemed to be unrelated to the vaccine by the US Food and Drug Administration.
Meanwhile, the vaccine has been found to be 97% effective against severe cases of the virus and 94% effective against asymptomatic infections, according to data recently released by Pfizer and the Health Ministry. Those who did not receive the vaccine were found to be 44 times more likely to develop a symptomatic case of COVID-19 and 29 times more likely to succumb to the virus when compared to individuals who had received their second dose two weeks prior.
Companies and associations that threatened to prevent unvaccinated employees from arriving at work were acting against the Nuremberg Code, the suit said, and policies preventing unvaccinated people from receiving certain services and entering certain locations were against the code. The vaccination policies go against Israeli state law as well, it said.
Anshei Emet called on the ICC to halt Israel’s administration of coronavirus vaccinations and to stop its policies incentivizing vaccinations.
Mark P. Dillon, head of the ICC Office of the Prosecutor’s Information and Evidence Unit, reportedly acknowledged receipt of the suit. The suit would be considered, but this “does not mean an investigation has been opened, nor that an investigation will be opened by the Office of the Prosecutor,” he wrote in a letter to Anshei Emet.
The Nuremberg Code, published originally in the judgment of an American military tribunal in 1947 against Nazi doctors, laid out guidelines for medical experimentation, including the requirement for consent and the need to avoid suffering and unnecessary risk. While the exact code was never adopted in any official policy, it has served as the basis for medical-ethics policy in a number of countries.
<
>
The healthcare industrial complex cannot be trusted for their claims.
“Do no harm” is the past!
It is a jungle out there.
The idiot Bourla of Pfizer has just described how Israel was used to TEST Pfizer’s “vaccine”:
https://www.jpost.com/health-and-wellness/pfizers-bourla-defends-testing-covid-19-vaccine-in-israel-at-post-conference-681760
How soon we’ll see him on the bench of the Nuremberg II?
Posting the 4th time (it keeps disappearing).
Reader
October 12, 2021 at 6:44 am
If anyone needs a proof. Also read the comments:
“Confirmed:
Israel agreed to be ‘giant testing trial lab for COVID-19 vaccines’
Globes: ‘Concept of Israel as a giant testing trial lab for COVID-19 vaccinations came from several sources.’
Tags: Vaccine Benjamin Netanyahu Coronavirus Biotechnology Test Globes
Mordechai Sones , Jan 10 , 2021 8:51 AM
Last week former Prime Minister Ehud Barak suggested that Pfizer and other drug manufacturers are using the Israeli population as a COVID-19 vaccine test subject, and that Israel has willingly made itself available for this purpose.
Globes Friday confirmed the details, writing that “Israel will act as a large world testing laboratory, with the results from this huge research serving to set vaccination strategies in the rest of the world.”
Barak had stated: “This data is a treasure trove for Pfizer. With this data, Pfizer can show that it vaccinated an entire high-risk population in a country with no deaths wholly attributable to the vaccine.”
According to Globes, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu revealed the main reason why Israel has received so many vaccine doses so quickly, mainly from Pfizer but also from Moderna: Israel has committed to send Pfizer “data and details especially gathered for them, including the consequences of the inoculations, side effects, efficacy, amount of time it takes to develop antibodies. according to different types of population, age, gender, preexisting conditions etc. The agreement extensively details the various parameters that will be sent to Pfizer.”
“The concept of Israel as a giant testing trial lab for COVID-19 vaccinations came from several sources,” says Globes, listing a researcher at the Israel Institute of Biological Research in Nes Ziona, a senior Health Ministry doctor, and a World Health Organization official.
“After the idea was broached,” the paper continues, “Pfizer consulted with the WHO and the leaders of other countries. Pfizer representatives closely scrutinized Israel’s health system.
“In addition to sending all the data to Pfizer, it was also agreed that the WHO would receive all the information. A WHO delegation is expected in Israel in February to closely examine Israel’s vaccine distribution network.””
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/294594
In state corporations like Israel and Canada, there is no common law to validate a claim and the prevailing statutes are in “contract law”, nothing else and while the State seeks to make it sound different, they are wrong and slide to intimidation to make their point.
However, in a contract state, and Israel and
Canada are the only two in the world that are so, compliance is signified by consent and consent must be given for a person to be held to anything.
It is a contract basis, pure and simple.
In state corporations like Israel and Canada, there is no common law to validate a claim and the prevailing statutes are in “contract law”, nothing else and while the State seeks to make it sound different, they are wrong and slide to intimidation to make their point. However, in a contract state, and Israel and
Canada are the only two in the world that are so, compliance is signified by consent and consent must be given for a person to be held to anything. It is a contract basis, pure and simple.
Dissemblers and those who make their sorry livings by twisting words and facts will always find ways to deny the (obvious) truth.
1. The vaccine IS experimental, and 2. “Take the vaccine or lose your job” IS coercion.
Don’t waste your breath, time, or computer ink, arguing those facts. Do something else to make better use of your resources.
As of June 27, 2021 the number of people in Israel who received at least 1 dose was 5,557,192 (I think it’s OK to round it to 5,600,000).
The number of side effects according to the Ministry of Health (which claims that most of them were light) would be (if the % remained the same since March):
5,600,000 x 0.0025 = 14,000 people
The above are only the ones which were both reported AND attributed to the vaccine.
The fact checkers arguments are BS for the following reasons:
1) they claim that vaccine approval takes the vaccine out of the “experimental” category;
2) anything which is approved by the government is “kosher” by definition, i.e., government is the highest legal, moral, and ethical authority – nothing can be further from the truth.
Reason #1 is plainly not true because it is common knowledge that there are certain standards of research and experimentation which have to be followed before such an approval may be granted.
If these standards were not followed and, moreover, there was deceit or carelessness involved in the risk/benefit analysis which resulted in an unnecessary emergency approval, this substance most certainly fits into the “experimental” category.
Not only was this the case with this vaccine but the quick, cheap, safe, and widely available treatments were withheld from the patients in order to continue administering the vaccine as the sole “cure” for COVID.
The existence of such treatments means that the emergency approval was not necessary
Reason #2 is simply false because law is not the same as morals, ethics, democracy, freedom, etc.
History knows lots of very cruel, stupid, tyrannical laws enforced by governments which had to be abandoned by them, often as a result of revolutions and uprisings.
What if the Reichstag approved all those concentration camps’ experiments – would that make them immune to the Nuremberg Code?
This whole affair screams for the Nuremberg code.
HOWEVER, in the court of law, if you want to use the Nuremberg code argument, you better prove to the judge that:
1) this vaccine has never lost its experimental status;
2) the approval was not justified (give the reasons and the proofs);
3) there were safer and better alternatives to treat the disease that made the emergency approval unnecessary;
4) these treatments were withheld to benefit the vaccine distribution;
5) that the vaccine kept being administered despite being shown to be unusually dangerous, etc.
BTW, I think one of the best ways to show that these vaccines are still experimental is to point out that for all of them the experimental stage 2 and 3 trials are still ongoing – then what is the emergency approval but a worldwide stage 2 and 3 trial?
@Adam
One last point that should be mentioned. Dr. Rose is a data analyst and has been watching the VAERS as it rolled out. She states that the adverse events, without accounting for under-reporting in VAERS, shows that 1,500 immunological events per million people receiving full injections are taking place. Restated, she notes that this comes to 1 immunological adverse event for every 660 fully vaccinated person in the US. As she notes, “that is a lot”.
She also notes that
She has a 3min video that starts at 4hrs 10min here:
https://granitegrok.com/blog/2021/09/fda-panelist-steve-kirsch-the-vaccines-kill-more-people-than-they-save
She has asked the FDA and anyone to correct her findings as she hopes she is wrong, but two statisticians have supported her findings without anyone responding to correct her.
@Adam
This is based on data that Phiser collected from their destroyed Stage II/III trial from last Fall. They announced this prase above during a press release and they held the data til July before releasing it. Here was a more complete phrasing of their statement:
This data is badly managed. They list it as including data “upto 6months”. I warned about Mulnipulvar(sorry spelling was never my super power) when they used the phrase “hospitalizations or death”. The tip off was this previous situation where the data was claimed to be upto 6months, but was in reality only 4-5months at the most per the data that they withheld til July, nearly one year after the study began. They have massive questions about inconsistencies in the data between the vaccinated group and the unvaccinated group where they actually swapped 93% of the unvaccinated group into the vaccinated group after they vaccinated them while still collecting data for the mandatory 6month trial which they never completed. That’s right, the FDA required a minimum of 6months safety data with a possible extension that never went beyond 4-5montns. You can read about it here
https://anti-empire.com/wait-what-how-does-this-abysmal-shambolic-data-justify-the-approval-of-the-pfizer-vaccine/
Peter Doshi is an editor of the BMJ which is a very well recognized medical journal in England, for what it’s worth. He also was among the first to sound an alarm over the data in the trials and the safety failures in the vaccine rollout.
@Adam
Lets first tackle the questions of
It is not such a tall order as an impossible request. I can tell you that the human immune system has the ability to prevent death from Covid 99.97% of cases without vaccines and without early treatment and only receiving the toxic Remdisivir. The vaccines claim, at the best of times, to have an efficacy of 95%. What the efficacy references, ie deaths, cases, hospitalization or the latest, severe cases, seems to depend on how well or how poorly the vaccines are working when we discuss 95% efficacy. All of this is based on a testing regimen that is poorly supportive of reality, with the unvaccinated being over-tested and the vaccinated being under-tested while the deaths are artificially over-stated as being unvaccinated while they are under-stated as being vaccinated. To tease all of this apart is an impossibility except for one reality. The obfuscation of these facts were not undertaken lightly or without an expressed intent. The testing was always designed to have massive numbers of false positives. Also the reallocation of testing sensitivity to find massively higher numbers of false positives among the unvaccinated compared to vaccinated at the end of April was managed to hide the breakthrough cases. In fact this was only done because they had found 10,000 breakthroughs and immediately announced they would no longer track the breakthroughs and changed the sensitivity of the vaccinated from 40 down to 28. Regarding the deaths, they have deaths counted as unvaccinated for two weeks after every shot. This means that all deaths are counted as unvaccinated for one month after the first shot in a two shot vaccination regimen. This is all bent towards prejudicing the positive cases and the deaths as being unvaccinated with no reason. This is the height of skullduggery, but that was the point. So, with this all in mind, I can not believe that they would have so badly maligned the data unless they felt there was a need to do so. As difficult as this was to write and read, this is the best answer that can be offered to your question. Who says what is irrelevant to anyone really interested in an honest answer. There is just no way better to answer your question short of actually making a leap of faith, and faith should have no place in this discussion. We should have facts, cold hard, reliable data. We just don’t.
Everyone must watch the 6min video!! iMOH setup a VAERS like system according to Avi Barak. He claims that the system was never publicized. Following a statement on FaceBook, the iMOH received 25K responses detailing the usual problems, ie myocarditis, blood clots, neurologic symptoms, reactivated or increased pre-conditions, etc. People saw the reports being reduced in real time from 25K to 20K reports.
Please watch:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1447262367004385283
https://twitter.com/i/status/1447262832517599234
https://twitter.com/i/status/1447263220415275008
Ted, I have now realized that the source of your quotation was Mr. Joffre’s article. At the time, I was focused on the “fact-checkers” article and had only skimmed Mr. Joffre’s. My apologies.
@Tanna
Well stated Tanna.
One big glaring problem with the “fact checker” argument. This is NOT a vaccine. It failed to qualify for any of the five criteria for being a vaccine. Therefore, it is an experimental drug concoction and NOT approved as a vaccine regardless of what the FDA says. The drug makers and those who make huge amounts of money from this, ie Fauci,, knew that if they didn’t call it a vaccine, they would be held liable for the damage it has done and could be sued.
@peloni1986. Peloni, what do you believe is the true figure regarding the number of vaccinated people who have died of Covid in Israel? And the percentage of vaccinated people among those who have died? Also, the same two questions concerning the United States. I don’t believe the Pfitzer claim, even though it apparently was supported by Israel’s ministry of health.
Also, do you believe this statement to be accurate?
This quotation comes from Mr. Joffre’s article, and is also quoted by Ted as the introduction to the unidentified “fact-checker’s” article. But is a true? If it is not true, what are the accurate figures?
I know that these questions are a tall order. But please do your best to give me answers I can understand and clear up my confusion as best you can.Many thanks, Adam.
Bottom line…….. you can argue your position all day long and the government will destroy you if that is what they want to do. While your drawing your last breath and asking God why he forsook you? remember, always have a choice. Stand on your feet and act like a man, or die on your knees.
@Adam
Here is the Pfizer release in which that quote originated dated March 11, 2021:
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/real-world-evidence-confirms-high-effectiveness-pfizer
@Adam
McCullough talks about the 39% in every one of his talks. Here is a recent one that I believe he discusses it, but I can’t tell you the time marker:
https://rumble.com/vnbv86-winning-the-war-against-therapeutic-nihilism-and-trusted-treatments-vs-unte.html
Here is a TOI article on the same topic
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/health-ministry-says-covid-vaccine-is-only-40-effective-at-halting-transmission/
I seem to recall seeing a report from Israel that was published in Israpundit and elsewhere that in terms of absolute numbers, more vaccinated people in Israel had died than unvaccinated ones. And this was using a very strict defination of what “vaccinated” meant (two jabs plus 15 days after the second jab). This article claimed only that the percentage of deaths for the unvaccinated was greater than for the vaccinated.
Another article or talk by Dr. Macculough said that the Israeli Ministry of Health said that the Pfitzer vaccine was only 39% effective for those who werer fully vaccinated seven months ago.
Peloni, Reader, or anyone, can you find the articles that contain these statements, and provide us with quotations from and links to these sources? Thanks.
Given the fact that
What is the source of this quotation, Ted? ,
Who is the “fact-checker?” Where did you find this “fact-check” article? Link?
I don’t believe what either the anonymous fact-checker or Mr. Joffre of the Jerusalem Post are reliable sources. Ditto the Israel ministry of health. Does Israel have the equivalent of a VAERS system? And if not, how could the ministry of Health know how many bad reactions to the vaccines, including deaths and serious illnesses, have occurred?