AAPS poll says majority of doctors dismiss COVID Jab, citing ‘significant backlash’

by Matt Agrest

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons – AAPS – is a nonpartisan professional association for physicians in all kinds of practices and specialties across the country, and has been around since 1943. They are rarely cited by the institution, however, because their mission is to maintain medical freedom, no rob it.

Unlike organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics, Funded by Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, GlaxoSmithKline, and others Especially the corrupt pharmaceutical companies, and AAPS is fully funded Via subscriptions and membership fees. Therefore, according to the AAPS, they “respond to and advocate for our physician members and not major corporate donors or government funding sources.”

Last month, the AAPS conducted a survey among physicians that brought back some somewhat controversial findings. According to an internet survey, Nearly 60 percent of doctors said they had not been “fully vaccinated” against COVID.

AAPS indicates that this contrasts with Claimed by the American Medical Association 96 percent of medical practitioners have been fully vaccinated. The AAPS survey sample was 700 physicians while the AMA’s survey sample was only 300.

The AAPS makes sure to note that none of the surveys “represent a random sample of all American physicians, but the AAPS survey shows that physician support for the mass injection campaign is far from unanimous.”

It is wrong to call a person who refuses an injection an ‘anti-vaccination’. advertiser Jane Orient, executive director of the AAPS “There are practically no ‘antibiotics’ or ‘anti-surgery’ clinicians, while everyone is opposed to treatments they believe are unnecessary, likely to do more harm than benefit the individual patient, or have been inadequately tested. .”

Take control of your family’s health – immune system support kit (advertisement)

When giving reasons for refusing the vaccine, 54 percent of respondents said they were aware that patients had a “significant adverse reaction”. of unvaccinated doctors, 80% said “I think the risk of injections outweighs the risk of disease الإصابةand 30% said “I’ve already contracted COVID.”

Other reasons for rejecting the shotAccording to the survey, the unknown long-term effects included, use of aborted fetal tissue, “it is experimental”, availability of effective early treatment, and reports of mortality and thromboembolism.

“Causality is not established. However, many of these episodes may have resulted in significant product liability or award misconduct if it occurred after a new drug,” stated Dr. Orient. Providers of COVID products are protected from lawsuits.

And she’s right. You can actually prove that you or your child has been harmed by the vaccine and yet the vaccine maker is fully protected from liability. Even if you get cash compensation through the NVICP, it’s the taxpayers that are at stake, not the vaccine makers.

What’s more, as the TFTP reported in May, more than a hundred doctors and nurses working for the Houston Methodist Hospital Network sued the company, arguing that they didn’t want to be forced to take the “experimental” vaccine.

A total of 117 plaintiffs insist that the hospital is. “Illegally requiring its employees to inject an experimental vaccine”. The lawsuit stated that the hospital is forcing employees to be “guinea pigs” on the condition that employment continues.

Unfortunately for the group, their lawsuit was dismissed.

In December, many Health care workers on the front lines They openly stated that they were wary of the vaccine, citing the experimental nature of the episode.

Then, on Monday, America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) Apply Seeking immediate judicial assistance in Alabama federal district court to stop emergency use authorization (EUA) COVID vaccines — Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson (J&J) — for three groups of Americans.

according to press release, AFLDS asks to stop taking it immediately experimental COVID vaccines for anyone 18 or younger, all who have recovered from COVID and have acquired natural immunity, and every other American who has not received informed consent as defined by federal law.

the movement 67 pages The judge is required to issue a preliminary injunction in accordance with § 360bbb – 3 (b) (1) (C) for the following reasons:

  • There is no emergency, which is a prerequisite for the issuance of EUA and EUA renewals for COVID vaccines.
  • There is no serious or life-threatening disease or condition.
  • Vaccines do not diagnose, treat, or prevent SARS-CoV-2 or COVID.
  • The known and potential risks of a vaccine outweigh its known and potential benefits.
  • There are adequate, approved, and available alternatives to vaccines.
  • Healthcare professionals and vaccine candidates are not adequately informed.

Source: free thought project

Matt Auguste is an honorably discharged USMC veteran and former intelligence operator tasked directly by the National Security Agency. This past experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been a freelance journalist for over a decade and has appeared in major networks around the world. The agorist is also the general editor at the Free Thought Project. Follow @MattAgorist on TwitterAnd SteemitAnd now onwards minds.

See also: Vaccination lawsuit filed: Insider whistle on cover-up – exclusive interview with lawyer

What do you think?

Written by Joseph

Leave a Reply

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

How Marsha used thinner, lighter and stronger to lose 10 pounds in just 7 months

For Better or Worse, Cryptocurrency Depends on Tether