Medical apartheid fractures best practice medicine

Rob Verkerk PhD; founder, executive & scientific director

Just at a time when it seemed there had been a consensus decision to move towards more equitable ways of treating people – irrespective of their age, gender choice, ethnicity, culture, faith, background or culture – we see a widely supported U-turn. A U-turn that directly affects one category of individual: those who have not accepted a particular type of largely experimental medical intervention, namely covid-19 synthetic biology, gene therapy-based ‘vaccines’.

New forms of ‘apartheid’?

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director General of the World Health Organization (WHO), warned the world back in May that we’re now entering an era of “vaccine apartheid”. Of course, Tedros’ concerns were that some lower income countries, where vaccine uptake currently sits at less than 3%, just aren’t getting enough, while others are holding onto supplies for their own use or control. That’s apparently ‘vaccine apartheid’ – the label, presumably justified, not because of any evidence of health inequities that result from not being vaccinated, but because of the ethnicity of those who’re less likely to be vaccinated. There have been no admissions from those orchestrating global mass ‘vaccination’ that discrimination against the unvaccinated leads to a two tiered society with significant numbers having greatly restricted fundamental rights, freedoms and privileges. Leading to what could readily be described as a form of medical and social apartheid.