Would the Covid Jab Mandate Ground All Commercial Pilots?

What Do You Think?

For various reasons, I suspect that my commercial airline pilot friend that I mentioned growing up with may not be Covid jabbed. I noticed around 2020 he moved his whole family from UAE back to Ohio. He was flying cargo planes for awhile and now I have no idea what he is doing. It looks like he was raising chickens for a time.

He certainly never posted one of those “I just got my Covid vaccine!’ Facebook thingies. He’s been very tight lipped about the jabs in general. His behavior suggests to me that he might have opted out of flying in the name of job or jab mandates. Good for him if he did.  

I suspect that he knows some things and doesn’t want to talk about it. This article by Children’s Health Defense highlights this high pressure culture. Many pilots are terrified of talking about their jab injuries because they fear not being able to pass physical exams for flying. They suffer in silence first from being required to take an experimental gene therapy to keep their jobs then not being able to get help for problems that might have arisen from them. If insurance companies are anything to go by (life insurance claims are up 163% for Lincoln according to this zerohedge article) they need to classify the disability or death as arising from ANYTHING but the jab. Otherwise you, sad widow with the dead husband, don’t get paid.

Obviously doctors, desperate to label vaccine injury as something else, have to make up new terms for things. But the following explanation in the article about pilots caught my eye:

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/pfizer-covid-vaccine-questions-safety/

“Waters explained that Australia’s Civil Aviation Safety Authority, similar to other such bodies globally, has “a 1% rule” for pilots: If they have a medical condition “that presents a greater than 1% chance of resulting in an incapacitation event within the next 12 months, then they are considered medically unfit to fly.”

This makes a lot of sense. Commercial pilots are mandated to retire at 65 because older people have more strokes and heart attacks. You want the people flying the airplane to be in good physical condition and statistically unlikely to have any problems in mid air. A lot of lives depend on it.

But the 1% rule got to me. How likely is a significant adverse event for one year following the conjabs? I found this in a CDC article related to EUA approval of the Pfizer “vaccine.”

“Serious adverse events were defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, or resulted in persistent disability/incapacity. The proportions of participants who reported at least 1 serious adverse event were 0.6% in the vaccine group”

Serious adverse events sound like they would have almost total overlap with the pilot rule regarding an “incapacitation event.” The original Pfizer trial ran for six months if I remember correctly, before everyone was unblinded and the control group was taken out. Assuming that SAEs have an equal chance of happening throughout 12 months (they may not but since the trial data cuts off before any longer term outcomes we don’t know) then the risk of such an event would be 1.2%.

Does that mean that airlines forced a jab on pilots that had a risk profile that would effectively ground all of them? What do you think?