“I have no issue with the principle of (vaccinating children as young as five)…..But I would be bound by public-health guidance in respect of it, because public health will have to weigh up the benefits for the child in respect of receiving the vaccine as opposed to the risks to the child.”

Taoiseach Micheal Martin (above) on Saturday


‘…Younger children have had a difficult pandemic to date. In the beginning they were incorrectly labelled as “vectors”, which led to avoidance and for many to feel stigmatised, according to recent expert evidence before an Oireachtas committee. Children’s education has also suffered. The long-term psychological effect of Covid is unknown.

Children in the Pfizer trial were given 10 microgram doses, rather than the 30 micrograms recommended for over-12s. The antibody responses and side effects were comparable. In other words, the safety profile and immunogenicity data in children aged five to 11 vaccinated at a lower dose are consistent with those in other older populations at a higher dose. The researchers plan to submit the results to regulators to seek approval for vaccinating children younger than 12, the current age limit. However, there remain differing opinions as to whether young children will need to be vaccinated.

…Taoiseach Micheál Martin has signalled the State will move to vaccinate children aged between five and 11 if advised to do so. The approval of the European Medicines Agency and then consideration by the National Immunisation Advisory Council and the chief medical officer, Dr Tony Holohan, will be required. These authorities have provided sound advice so far. There will be no reason to doubt whatever recommendation is made.’

Editorial, Sunday Independent.

Should we vaccinate young children against Covid? (Sunday Independent)



Sponsored Link

20 thoughts on “Can He Get Lower?

      1. M

        All based on the word of Pfizer – a criminal with an extensive felony record.

        Imagine telling the government that you’re not going to get your car NCT’d – your going to test it yourself and you’ll let them know if it passes..

    1. John

      You ask “why should you do this” ?

      I would suggest that you ask that question of a medical professional that has spent years training and learning to cure and care for people. Try asking your doctor.

      I wouldn’t ask the question on Broadsheet, an anti-vaccination conspiracy website that pushes an agenda that can result in serious harm to people and allows un-moderated execrable medical misinformation and lies to be promoted by delusional posters

  1. Darren

    This might even be too far a line for the taoiseach.. maybe?.. it is so obviously not about anything but the price pharmaceutical sector will be paid for their product before they are forced to sell it to lower income countries where there is greater need but less profit to be made. When children here look like an easy market it will take a responsible state to ensure that parents do not find themselves to some extent pressured into going along with the expected positions of schools on behalf of their insurance providers. To create a situation where a childs vaccine equals one adult dose is surely a last ditch attempt to push this greed based narrative over that of common sense and health which it is claimed motivates all those involved.

  2. Micko

    The European Medical Agency (EMA) receives 86% of its funding from fees and charges.

    “The Agency charges a fee for processing applications from companies that want to bring a medicine to the market.”

    Link: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/about-us/how-we-work/governance-documents/funding

    So the pharmaceutical companies fund the EMA in fees and charges when they want to bring a new medicine to market. Only 14% of their funding comes from the EU themselves.

    The FDA in the US is the same. (Not as high percentage)

    Now, conspiracy theories etc aside, does this not definitely seem like something that would be a conflict of interest?

    The companies releasing drugs providing the vast majority of your funding? Surely it makes more sense to fund this through tax payer money, and therefore (hopefully) ensuring impartiality.

    I’m not saying there’s anything dodgy definitely going on, but you’d have to be a special kind of myopic muppet not to think that this relationship could be abused.

    1. Chris

      Yes, we live in a paradigm where corporate interests have escewed the rights and health of citizens (clients).

      I don’t even see a political answer to it, politicians are either unaware or just on the grift. One things for certain, we were all sold out a while ago.

      1. Micko

        If the cigarette companies were doing similar, people would be up in arms ( and rightly so)

        When it’s the pharma industry?

        “Nah…it’ll be fine, let’s rock this out to 90% of adults and mess with their rights if they don’t”

        “ on the grift”

        Totally on the grift.

  3. K. Cavan

    The solution that has been concocted to combat the uselessness of these injections is “boosters”, basically more of the stuff that didn’t work before. There’s no reason to believe these gene therapies will be more effective in children, so injecting them into a five-year-old would be committing that child to 150 or so bi-annual boosters, throughout their life.
    I doubt if our politicians or health authorities have even considered that. In reality, of course, 150 boosters won’t happen because nobody could possibly survive that with a functioning immune system, even if they were normal inoculations.
    There is no exit strategy & the headless chickens in our government are about to make the biggest in a series of disastrous blunders, guiding us ever deeper into the mire.
    These are the darkest days I’ve ever lived through but it seems there is worse to come.

    1. SOQ

      The real question is if people can actually survive without them or, is it as Robert Malone is suggesting, that ADE kicks in when the efficacy wanes?

      If that scenario pans out then it may be the case that people will have to take them for the rest of their lives.

  4. Nigel

    We seem to be attributing Pizzagate-levels of child-murdering adrenochrone-harvesting evil intent to the people who have created life-saving vaccines now, apparently just for the hell of it.

    1. Zaccone

      Its completely possible (and relatively common) to think the vaccines have done absolutely fantastic things for the over 65s and the immunocompromised, who were always at severe risk from covid, while at the same time being completely unnecessary for healthy children at no risk from covid.

      The statistics for risk of hospitalization/serious illness are easily accessible and very clear. You don’t have to believe in some pizzagate style nonsense to question this when the evidence is extremely clear.


Leave a Reply

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

Sponsored Link