Not A Comprehensive List by Mira Low 


1. Govt harps on the 6% minority who are unvaxxed and paint a picture that the minority are the reason why we haven't been able to curb COVID. By doing so, absolved themselves of any blame for their incompetency in managing the COVID situation which is the key reason for the surges. Just look at other countries with low vax rates whom are managing better than us and you'll know who the fault lies with. Who caused the KTV, fishery port, foreign dorm clusters and allowed covid to spread? Reminds me of a historical figure who cleverly divided the society into two classes and pinned all the country's problems on the Jews. And instead of standing up to the unjust discrimination, he even received the blessings and support of the majority. Sounds familiar? 

If with the world's highest eligible vaccinated rate of 94%, we still can't prevent daily double digit deaths, ICU overcrowding, and thousands of daily cases, this is very telling of both the vaccine's (in)efficacy and the government's lack of competency.

2. If unvaxxed are the majority taking up ICU and hospital beds, MOH should prove this by releasing the ABSOLUTE (ACTUAL) numbers of vaxxed and unvaxxed in ICU, hospitals and their respective death tolls - which MOH refuses to publish for whatever reason (only proportion figures are available). Is there any good reason why MOH can't simply publish the actual figures? MOH never failed to highlight in daily reports that most who (were vaxxed and) died had underlying illnesses (are they suggesting these fully vaxxed died due to underlying illnesses, not solely from covid?). In that case shouldn't MOH release data and their definition of underlying illnesses? Does having high blood pressure or high blood sugar which is common amongst most adults in their 40s and 50s count as having an underlying illness? Why hasn't MOH reported what exactly these are so people can take note and better protect themselves? Again, a lack of transparency they should address.

3. The unvaxxed already have restricted social access to places (many workplaces have started the ban ahead of 1 Jan). Unvaxxed are also banned from malls, hawkers and F&B establishments. Yet, we continue to have thousands of daily cases (and these are only the official covid count at that, excluding ART positive cases). What does this tell you about vaccine efficacy? Baffling that our health minister thinks that chasing a zero unvaxxed rate is the solution to bring numbers down when fact has shown that bringing our vax rate up over the past few months has not helped. Cases even surged. 

4. MOH and pro vaxxers promote vaccination as a means to protect yourselves and your loved ones. Many brainwashed pro vaxxers go as far as to state that the vaxxed should be accorded privileges as they've done their part to protect the community e.g. Hossan Leong who laments that he's being punished and held hostage because of the selfish unvaxxed. State owned media reports that the (mere 6%) eligible unvaxxed are threatening the healthcare system and govt says that restrictions are placed on the unvaxxed to protect them and to prevent the risk of transmission in the community. What utter nonsense when studies have shown that Delta does not discriminate by vax status and are as equally transmissible?

How does getting vaxxed protect others when it can't even protect yourself from infection, transmission, hospitalisation, serious illness and even death? If the unvaxxed can endanger the vaxxed, it means the vaccine doesn't protect you. If the vaccine doesn't protect you, there's no meaningful difference between a vaxxed and unvaxxed person. Unvaccinated doesn't mean diseased. Unvaccinated people are regular healthy people. Even if you want to be a discriminatory bigot, it should be infected vs. uninfected. Some people can take 3 shots and wear double masks and still feel scared of the unvaxxed. And deep down they know the vaccine shots don't really do anything to protect them. Instead of the unvaxxed, shouldn't the fervent provaxxers blame the vaccine company if it can't prevent them from getting seriously ill? Oh wait, you signed a clause that says vaccine manufacturer can't be held liable, not even if you died from getting the vaccine.

5. Government claims they banned the unvaxxed to protect them. Yet they allow the immunocompromised unvaxxed to go to work and malls as long as they're certified that they're unfit to get the vaccine while healthy unvaxxed are penalised. Seeing that almost all death cases so far have underlying illnesses, shouldn't ill people be encouraged to stay home regardless of vax status if the govt's intent is really to "protect" them? Current policies are obviously to punish. It's hard to believe that the government and our National Trade Union Congress encourages companies to fire the unvaxxed because they care for them. It's hard to believe that the government refuses to pay for hospitalised unvaxxed and leave them to die because they care for them. Why should the unvaxxed have to pay taxes to fund hospitalisation fees of the vaxxed (whom are the majority in hospitals) when they themselves do not enjoy the same benefits as other tax payers? On top of paying for the hospitalised vaxxed, the unvaxxed has to fund the vaccine costs that did not protect the hospitalised vaxxed and essentially pay double?Govt announced that from Jan 1, unvaccinated people can no longer show negative swab test result to bypass entry curbs. What is the logic for discriminating and barring healthy unvaxxed people who are tested COVID-free while allowing entry to untested vaxxed people who may have COVID? If the govt's intent is really to protect, shouldn't they discriminate and protect old people who make up a large majority of the deaths even when fully vaxxed? Stats have shown that majority who died are not the unvaxxed but rather, those in older age groups regardless of vax status.

6. The govt claims that they have considered the medically ineligible. Yet, if you read the T&C fine print on MOH's website, having this scheme is as good as nothing. To be certified ineligible, they have to be "unable to complete the vaccination regime due to allergies or a PREVIOUS SEVERE REACTION to ALL vaccines under the national vaccination programme". This means that even if you're advised by a medical professional NOT TO GO FOR VACCINE DUE TO YOUR UNDERLYING ILLNESS/ALLERGIC HISTORY, you still have to take MRNA vaccine and risk sustaining injuries then take another non-mrna vaccine to sustain further injuries before being given a chance for exemption. Doctors are not allowed to issue you a memo even if they think that you shouldn't get the jab unless you have already taken 2 jabs. There are only 3 limited categories that may be exempted without the 2 mandatory jabs such as organ transplant. Is the government saying any other illnesses are not legitimate? I have a friend who was hospitalised several times for food and other allergies and advised by his doctor not to go for the jab and I also know people with severe asthma who were advised against taking it. But their doctors can't issue them a memo due to MOH regulations even though they strongly advised against the vaccine. So what, they have to go for 2 jabs to risk sustaining injuries for a chance of exemption? Will the government be responsible for their injuries or even foot their medical bills? Or will they just be another pre-existing illness case that is non-vaccine related?

7. Studies have shown for optimal efficacy, the period between getting the first and second jab is 8 weeks. Why is our government shortening the period to 3 weeks and why did they aggressively send out SMSes to push people to bring ahead their second jab appointments in August? Being able to open the borders asap in September is deemed more important than our health?

8. OYK ought to explain why 3 primary shots of Sinopharm is mandated for fully vaxxed status when WHO has not mandated it and not even the vaccine manufacturer has. WHO only recommended it AS A BOOSTER for those above AGE 60 and it is to be taken 6 months after the 2nd jab while PAP sets a 4 months expiry. Has any credible studies been conducted by PAP to show that it is required for those below age 60 and to justify a 4 months expiry? The people are not for you to experiment on.

Furthermore, 2 shots of Sinopharm has dosages equivalent to 3 shots of Sinovac according to info on WHO's site. So please explain how PAP came up with these mandates.Composition (Sinovac)The final vaccine product in each 0.5 ml dose is composed of 3 μg of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 virus. The excipients are aluminium hydroxide, disodium hydrogen phosphate, sodium dihydrogen phosphate, sodium chloride, and water for injection (4).

Composition (Sinopharm)The final vaccine product in each 0.5 ml dose is composed of 6.5 U (4 μg) of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 antigens and aluminium hydroxide adjuvant in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) (3). PBS is composed of disodium hydrogen phosphate dodecahydrate, sodium dihydrogen phosphate, and sodium chloride.

9. Has any credible large scale studies been done on the vaccine safety and long term side effects for pregnant women, their foetus and for 5-11 year olds? Why is the government recruiting kids for vaccine trials at KKH on our local children when the onus is on the vaccine manufacturer to demonstrate its safety? Perhaps our ministers should lead by example and those with young kids such as Tin Pei Ling and Sun Xue Ling could send their kids for trial to instill public confidence in these experimental vaccines. OYK and LW can get their nieces and newphews to volunteer as well.

10. Regarding opening of borders, the standard metric that is widely used to measure infection spread is positivity rate (number of positive as a % of number of tests). WHO recommends not more than a 5% positivity rate for at least 14 days before considering relaxing measures. Why is MOH not using/reporting that instead? @breekelo

11. Constant flip flop by government has diminished all credibility. From saying Trace Together abides by PDPA to using it as a crime solving app. From saying people who have gotten two shots won't lose their status if they choose not to go for boosters yet silently including a clause that the vaccine expires 12 months after the second jab. From claiming that Jade Rasif is lying when she said that MOM allowed her COVID infected domestic helper to roam free and posting a half assed apology when Jade Rasif threatened to release evidence. From our local experts saying healthy people don't need masks to making it a crime for not wearing masks. From shifting the goal post generously again and again from claiming the vaccine prevents infection to saying it only prevents serious illness (but apparently vaccinated peeps do not just get a "mild flu" or stay asymptomatic like what OYK claimed. If they are, we wouldn't have thousands of fully vaxxed hospitalised.) Government claimed that they aren't making constant flip flops and say they're being flexible to changes. Of course, but there is a difference between the two. And it's crystal clear the government falls into the former. Changing policies every other week does not demonstrate flexibility. It demonstrates poor foresight and planning. They haven't spared a thought for F&B owners, many of whom are already struggling due to the pandemic. Each time there's a flip flop, F&B owners have to scramble to make a change in rooster and staffing arrangements. Those who've been in F&B would understand what a challenge manpower is. Need an example that the government is flip flopping rather than being flexible? You can see their piecemeal policies of banning unvaxxed from malls and only announcing days later that concessions would be made for clinic visits and childcare drop-off within the malls after questioned by the public. Months after banning the medically ineligible for so long, they only addressed that exceptions can be made if they get an exemption cert after increased public complaints. Why aren't all of these addressed along with the announcement of the ban? Any college graduate can come up with reactive piecemeal policies like these. 

12. Govt declared endemic and aggressively opened borders yet suspended home visits and shifted meet the people's session to virtual sessions. Why is that?

13. It was recently published in British Medical Journal that Pfizer's vaccine trials are corrupted. Whistleblower is a well respected researcher. Given the fact that it's reported by the reputable medical journal like BMJ, the whistleblower must have provided irrefutable, concrete evidence for BMJ to even publish it. Why should we be coerced into taking vaccines with no transparent trials and whom liability is exempted by governments - even when they cause injuries and deaths? 

15. Why doesn't MOH publish statistics of vaccine injuries and deaths? Vaccine injuries and deaths are well documented overseas - are our Pfizer and Moderna vaccines special such that we have none?

16. "Vaccination is key to protecting our population even as SMMs are further relaxed. From 1 December 2021, we will expand VDS to more settings and activities. By restricting entry to only individuals who have been fully vaccinated, we can further reduce the risk of transmission in such settings." - MOH's latest announcement as of 21 Nov.

So vaccination is key and border controls is not key?? And the cases are caused by the unvaxxed rather than the aggressive opening of borders? Such an irresponsible tactic by PAP to absolve themselves of blame for the covid cases. And dear PAP, please educate yourself. What do you mean by "further reduce the risk of transmission?" Numerous credible scientific studies have proven that getting the vaccine does not prevent transmission. Shame on the government for propagating this lie and continuing to pin the blame on the unvaxxed. 

This is not a comprehensive list of the govt's failures - will do a part 2 when I have the time. Meanwhile, do share this post if you agree and let me know in the comments which point in my post disgusts and angers you the most. Feel free to share any others not mentioned in here.