Part 3/8 COVID-19: Were SA citizens able to give informed consent? | The Controversy Continues
Were Discovery’s remarks about the vaccine’s safety and effectiveness based on their own research or were they simply repeating other authorities’ opinion? Was their own opinion based on facts, science, studies or any rational explanations? Have the authorities shared sufficient and trustworthy information with the public to enable them to make informed decisions about Covid-treatment? It is absurd to mandate something for which the safety and efficacy trials have not been completed.
On Tuesday 7 June, the Chief Executive of NEASA, Gerhard Papenfus, participated in a panel discussion during the CHRO-SA’s virtual HR Indaba. The topic was Mandatory vaccinations: Where we are now and where we are headed'. Two of the other panellists were Dr Noluthando Nematserani, Head: Centre For Clinical Excellence at Discovery, and Steven Teasedale, Chief People Experience Officer at Discovery. Dr Nematserani invited the CE of NEASA to a further discussion to convince him that taking the ‘vaccine’ is the appropriate action, but she herself has since declined numerous requests for such a debate. This series of videos is about certain comments made by Discovery with regards to Covid vaccines and vaccine mandates. Discovery claims to have played a very important role in convincing South Africa that taking the ‘vaccine’ is the solution to the Covid-challenge.
Participants Dr Herman Edeling (Neurosurgeon), Dr Stephen Schmidt (Physician), Prof Johann Holm (Engineer) and Gerhard Papenfus (CE of NEASA) discuss.