Letter to businesses for access
21 December 2021

Prepared by Abir Ballan, MPH

Dear ………………….. [name of the company] management,

It has come to my attention that you are not allowing parents/ clients to enter your premises without proof of Covid-19 vaccination or a negative PCR test.

I appreciate that you are trying to ensure the safety of your clients, however, I urge you to consider the following points:

What are the benefits of implementing such a policy?
What are the costs?
Are businesses entitled to discriminate against people based on their health preferences/ status?

Here are some facts for your attention:

  1. The Covid-19 injections are not mandated by the ……..……. [name of country] government. [hyperlink a reference or delete this sentence if not applicable].
    Under all biomedical ethical guidelines, individuals have the right to informed consent (the right to consent to a medical procedure without pressure, coercion or force) and bodily autonomy (the right to make decisions pertaining to one’s body and health). Consider reading this informed consent for the Covid-19 injections.
  2. Unvaccinated individuals don’t pose a higher risk to society than vaccinated individuals. Vaccinated individuals catch and spread the virus to others in a similar way, and sometimes more, than unvaccinated people.
  3. The PCR tests are very unreliable in determining infectiousness, especially at high cycle thresholds (e.g., 97% of positive tests are false at Ct of 35) and may remain positive for up to 3 months following infection when the individual is no longer infectious.
  4. Recovered individuals have far better immunity against further infection or transmission than the vaccines provide.
  5. Exerting social pressure on individuals to influence their medical choices is wrong morally and ethically. It leads to individuals, who do not  benefit from the Covid-19 injections, to be injected in order to be able to access services. They are thus endangering their lives through risking potential adverse events associated with the injections.

Although your policy is well-intentioned, its inherent discriminatory nature can have serious deleterious implications on society.

Discriminatory policies have never served us well in the past.

I am happy to discuss  any of the above with you at your convenience.

Kind regards,

 

[Full Name]

Publisher’s note: The opinions and findings expressed in articles, reports and interviews on this website are not necessarily the opinions of PANDA, its directors or associates.

Share this

Post Tags

RELIABLE. RESEARCHED. RATIONAL.

YOU CAN SUPPORT PANDA’S WORK SO WE CAN REACH FURTHER

Our News In Your Inbox

Subscribe to our newsletter

RECENTLY ADDED TO THE SITE

Essential Questions to WHO on Pandemic Preparedness and Response

Essential Questions to WHO on Pandemic Preparedness and Response

In line with the founding principles of the WHO and orthodox principles of public health, PANDA has decided to publish its submission for the INB hearings in advance, to encourage open debate in ensuring global pandemic preparedness is underpinned by a strong evidence base, which gives full consideration to the COVID-19 response. 

Here’s Why a WHO-Led Pandemic Treaty is a Terrible Idea

Here’s Why a WHO-Led Pandemic Treaty is a Terrible Idea

by Dr David Thunder | The World Health Organization has proposed that the international community negotiate and eventually ratify an international “accord” or “treaty” that would effectively consolidate the position of the WHO as the pre-eminent public authority responsible for guiding and coordinating international pandemic responses.