Never one to not be helpful I feel the need to respond to the Prime minister’s call for a “national conversation” about mandatory jabs.

Perhaps we could start with a conveniently ignored piece of international law known as the Nuremberg Code. There are 10 principles established in this code, which was put into place after the 2nd World war when people finally realised the extent of the evil Nazi medical experimentation.

The first principle of the code says that voluntary consent is essential in any medical experimentation on humans. As we still don’t have full information on the effects of the Covid jabs it could be argued that we are still at the experimental stage of the vaccination roll out. Whilst I accept that many legal opinions and government arguments counter this citing the limited test results brought in before the roll out there is at least a debate to be had here.

There is another and perhaps even more relevant principle at stake. The once enshrined principle of informed consent. This principle states that decision capacity, documentation of consent, disclosure and competency are vital before any medical procedure. It could be argued that it is very difficult to give informed consent to a jab the ingredients of which are not common knowledge and the after effects of are open to conjecture and heated debate.

In order to give informed consent should we not have meaningful and like for like figures for death and injury? We have statistics showing us anyone who has died for any reason within 28 days of contracting the virus perhaps we could compare that with anyone who has died for any reason within 28 days of having the jab? Surely that would be a strong contribution to our national debate?

After considering the first couple of issues in our “national conversation” perhaps we could then move on to discussing whether it is necessary. Research from some quarters suggests that the Covid virus has a similar mortality rate to seasonal flu and the government’s own statistics show a survival rate of approximately 99.7% across the board and far greater in younger, fitter people. The average age for Covid mortality is running at somewhere near 83 years. Do these statistics justify the social disruption, moral bankruptcy and financial cost of mandatory jabs?

The government itself has told us that jabs neither stop you contracting or passing on the virus so one is left questioning how forcing everyone to have a jab is anything to do with controlling a virus. This becomes especially vexing when it appears that boosters may be required several times per year in order to keep a level of protection against serious ill health.

Infinitely the most important issue of all of those needed to be discussed in our conversation is that of my body my choice. As the jab does not prevent passing on the infection arguments comparing it to second hand smoking and suggesting it is a civic duty are spurious at best and deliberately deceiving at worst.

As a libertarian I believe that as long as they are not causing serious and quantifiable issues for others people should have the right to do as they wish and certainly have the right to personal autonomy over what goes into their own bodies.

The principles of freedom which should be always paramount in our minds tell us that we should not just reject mandatory jabs but push back against all of the many injustices and tyrannies perpetuated on us over the last two years. Fear has been used as a weapon against its own people by our shameless government. We need to understand that the real thing we should fear is loss of freedom and the victory of tyranny. The battle is afoot and only by standing strong for the values that make for a free people can we avoid a future far more terrifying than the risk posed by Coronavirus