Diagnosis of “COVID19” does not mean that the patient has SARSCov2 Virus

June 18, 2020 By Judy Wilyman PhD

Recently we have seen a serious outbreak of disease in some countries (not a global pandemic) in 2020 and the cause of this disease needs to be properly investigated. There are 2 facts that need to be publicised about the disease that is being called ‘COVID19’:

  1. The new mutated coronavirus 2019 that is being called “SARSCov2” has not been identified in every case or death that is being diagnosed as a COVID19. This is because clinical diagnosis (flu-like symptoms only) is being used in most cases to diagnose ‘COVID19’ and the laboratory tests that are being done cannot  identify the natural SARSCov2 virus – only the generic coronavirus sequences that we are all exposed to every year and many of us will be positive if tested. So we do not have transparent statistics on the cause of this outbreak of disease or the true number of deaths due to the new mutated coronavirus. All of these deaths have co-morbidities that are hidden in the media statistics.
  2. A serious outbreak of disease in some countries is not a basis for declaring that a new mutated coronavirus could result in a ‘global pandemic’. This idea is based on the false premise that a virus always causes disease in the person that it infects and that it will cause serious disease in all countries. The fact that environmental and lifestyle factors play a role in the expression of ‘disease’ (asymptomatic, mild, serious or death) was not factored into the generic ‘prediction contagion model that was used by the private sector to advise all countries of a ‘global pandemic’ with wildly exaggerated statistics on the deaths. Declaring a pandemic would result in countries giving their sovereignty to an outside organisation (under the WHO/GAVI International Health Regulations) whose corporate vested interests are not the same as the public’s interest in health.



no jab no pay

I was always very passionate that all my kids got the jab. I saw it as saving lives. As I began to observe the unfolding events of this pandemic I began to question the motives of world health authorities and those that fund and stood behind them. I found this very prophetic campaign of Elizabeth Heart in 2018 after seeing Rupert the bears involvement.

Rupert the bear
Notes of presentation

The Conflicts of Interest in Mandatory Vaccination (12+ Vaccines) in Australia’s Social Services Policies

Source: http://vaccinationdecisions.net/the-potential-conflicts-of-interest-in-mandatory-vaccination-12-vaccines-in-australias-social-services-policies/

March 9, 2020 By Judy Wilyman PhD

In Australia from 2005 – 2014 the chair of the Australian government’s vaccine advisory board (ATAGI) who recommends new vaccines for the national vaccination program was Terry Nolan. Prior to this job he was the head of the largest vaccine research and development program in Australia – VirGo (1990 – 2005)– at the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute (MCRI). Further, the mandating of 12+ vaccines for social services in Australia (No Jab No Pay/Play legislation) was promoted to Australians through the mainstream Australian media that is ~80% owned by Rupert Murdoch and who established the MCRI with a contribution of $5 million in 1985.

During this decade Terry Nolan’s role was to recommend vaccines directly to the Health Minister and many new vaccines were added during this decade. He was also the deputy-chair of the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) at this time and in this role he influenced the direction of government funding for new research projects on vaccines. This is significant because areas of science can be systematicallly de-funded to produce areas of ignorance in scientific knowledge. This results in ‘undone science’ when important areas of science are left unfunded.

My PhD thesis describes the areas of undone science in vaccination policy that have led the Australian government to make assumptions about the safety and efficacy of vaccines in its national vaccination policy, instead of using empirical knowledge of the benefits and risks of vaccines. These assumptions are even hidden from researchers because the government uses mathematical modeling with algorithms that do not reveal to the public the parameters of ‘risk’ or ‘benefit’ that are being used to claim that a vaccine is a cost-effective measure in the population.

The potential conflicts of interest of Terry Nolan were never publicised on the government website from 2005 – 2014. Terry Nolan retired in December 2014 to return to his role as head of VirGo at the MCRI and in advising the World Health Organisation (WHO) on influenza policy on the SAGE committee. The Australian government did not publish the COI of vaccine advisory board members on the website until February 2015.   

Notes for the kindergarten kids

  • Billionaires seem to be very interested in vaccinations (stating the bleeding obvious)
  • The WHO seems to at the centre of it all
  • The WHO is influencing word health policies. (DUH)
  • Who runs The WHO?

Even though a five year old can understand the above why does the media ignore all calls and questions for accountability? – The answer is found in the media.