Featured Image
Melle StewartScreenshot/YouTube

LONDON (LifeSiteNews) — The news that London-based Australian actress Melle Stewart will be taking AstraZeneca to court, claiming that she was misled over vaccine safety, is not only a sad tale of harm, it has also highlighted the differences between Britain’s and Australia’s approach to vaccine injuries. Had the injury occurred in Australia, it is likely that Stewart would have been dismissed as a “conspiracy theorist” and have had great difficulty getting legal or financial redress. 

Stewart received her first dose of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine on May 24, 2021. She began having seizures two weeks later, eventually losing her ability to speak. She lost all movement on the right-hand side of her body and was diagnosed with the blood clotting condition Vaccine-Induced Thrombocytopenic Thrombosis (VITT). To save her life she underwent a craniectomy to reduce the pressure on her brain by removing a portion of her skull, which now has a titanium plate. 

According to her husband, Ben Lewis, from the beginning the doctors pursued the hypothesis that Stewart’s condition was linked to the vaccine, especially given that she had never had any medical issues before. That would not have happened in Australia. Doctors have been under extreme pressure to deny there are any vaccine injuries at all, under threat of losing their licence. Stewart received £120,000 ($150,000 US) from the British government as compensation for the vaccine damage. According to Lewis, blood tests revealed specific markers to confirm the vaccine as the cause. That test is unlikely to have been run in Australia. 

Australia does have a Covid-19 vaccine claims scheme, but it is tortuously slow in recognising harms and paying compensation. In April of this year Services Australia had received 3501 applications but paid out on only 137 claims. The number of claims also seems suspiciously small. According to the Therapeutics Goods Association (TGA), there had been 139,654 reports of adverse events from vaccines by the end of October 2023. Small wonder that some are turning to class actions to get legal redress, the most high profile of which has been initiated by Queensland GP Melissa McCann 

READ: British MP argues COVID jab is responsible for excess deaths in first Parliament debate on issue

The slow walking by Australia’s health authorities is part of a highly effective cover up. The strategy is to ignore evidence of harm and to delay action as long as possible in cases where harm cannot be denied in the expectation that, by the time they are resolved, most of the population will have forgotten. Especially appalling is the TGA’s decision to no longer include instances of myocarditis and pericarditis, disturbingly common side effects affecting the heart muscle, in its vaccine safety reports. This is not incompetence, it is cynical manipulation of the data to avoid being held accountable for coercing the population into taking an untested drug, the dangers of which are becoming increasingly apparent. Australian all-cause mortality continues to be excessive: in the first half of 2023 it was 12.1 per cent above the base line average. Yet the Australian parliament has decided not to investigate what is a statistically extremely improbable event that has alarmed actuaries. 

If the quick payout to Stewart shows the difference between British and Australian authorities, another aspect of her story is very Australian. Somewhat incredibly, Stewart and her husband are “staunch and proud” advocates for vaccines. She has reportedly received other non-AstraZeneca Covid vaccines since her injury. Such eagerness to accept what the authorities say is typical of the vast majority of the Australian population and perhaps the main reason why the government cover up is proving so successful.  

Why “pride”? The answer is probably that Australians have long believed their medical workers and health system to be world class. That meant it was, and is, beyond their capacity to imagine that such a level of harm would be inflicted on them by those they deeply trusted. And if they do not trust what their doctors are saying, who can they trust?  

One of the worst surprises in the COVID debacle was that Australian doctors proved to be easy to intimidate and did not exercise independent critical thinking – or even basic logic. How can they have told patients the vaccines were safe when safety by definition must apply to the medium and long term and the inoculations had been available only in the short term? Why did they not see that for the first time in medical history perfectly well people were being treated as “cases”, about four-fifths of those who tested positive? There was some limited resistance within the most senior ranks of the Australian medical community, but most of the Australian health community fell into line with the government edicts. 

Some Australians are aware of these failures, but even those who are feel they have little option but to go along with the medical establishment. Consequently, they prefer to forget. The willingness to believe medical authorities is even more pronounced with patients who rely heavily on their doctors. Variations of that unquestioning response are being played out across Australia. It is why there will be no accountability for what has been the greatest medical crime in the nation’s, and the world’s, history. 

READ: Soldiers booted for COVID jab refusal receive letter on how to fix discharge records, rejoin US Army