Following the implementation of the health pass in France in August 2021, a major constraint has been imposed on flight crew members in the airline industry. Depending on the destination, they must present proof of a vaccine injection or a PCR test, less than 24 hours old. The law on the vaccine pass voted in haste in January 2022 reinforces our fears.

Since the injection is an irreversible act, it is essential to take the time to rigorously analyze these two options in order to make an intelligent and thoughtful choice. We propose here to carry out a « D.O.R.D.A.R. » type of analysis, as we learn to do in civil aviation.


A new coronavirus, known as SARS-CoV-2, with a lethality estimated to be around 0.2-0.3%, the equivalent to a severe influenza, emerged in late 2019 in China, after likely circulating quietly for several months.


Option A: Making the choice of injection.


  • The official clinical trials will not be completed until late 2022 or mid-2023, depending on the manufacturer. We are therefore in the experimental phase.
  • This is the first time that such a technology has been used on a large scale, in humans.
  • The exact content of the injected product remains, to this day, an industrial secret.
  • This content does not include any pathogenic element of SARS-COV2, but simply a genetic message sent to our cells.
  • The manufacturers have signed a disclaimer agreement with the Governements regarding side effects.
  • No vaccine against any coronavirus has so far, proven its real efficiency in animal model.

  • Option B: Refusing the injection and privileging prevention : caring for our natural immune system and using possible early treatments.

    Note : we observe a very strong opposition against early treatments from the authorities, especially in the West, in rich countries, where the links between the pharmaceutical industry and the decision makers are tenuous.


    Option A Benefits: : the vaccination, theoretically, provides protection against a virus or a bacteria, by using the body's « immune memory ». It is, therefore, attractive to be vaccinated to avoid the disease in the future.
    Nevertheless, if the flight crew member has already been infected with SARS-CoV-2, the natural immunity conferred is, according to sources, effective between 99.6 and 99.88%. If some people have contracted the virus twice despite this natural immunity, the occurrence is rare, and the same thing also happens with the vaccination.
    If the flight crew member has not shown signs of infection, the immune system may still provide a robust defense without the need for vaccination. These people are said to be asymptomatic. They are naturally protected and show no signs of disease. Whether or not they are contagious is still an open question, at this time. These individuals are mostly young and healthy. According to a Chinese study conducted in May 2020, they have a higher level of T helper lymphocytes or CD4+, which have an essential role in the immune response, than people with physical manifestations. The benefit, below the age of 60, does not seem obvious, unless the person is significantly overweight, or if afraid of dying from Covid (and to paraphrase Dr. Didier Raoult), then the benefit seems real.

    Risks : Agreeing to be injected with a product that is officially experimental is, of course, an informed personal choice. Even the director of the famous and prestigious British Medical Journal, Peter Doshi, thinks that this injection does not fall under the classical definition of a vaccine, and that it is therefore a "gene therapy". The effectiveness over time has not yet been proven, only time will tell. The risk of COVID19 vaccination has three aspects :

  • Low efficiency of the vaccination, giving the illusion of being protected.
  • Undesirable effects in the medium and long term (6 months and more) totally unknown.
  • Weakening of the natural innate immune defenses<.

  • If the risk of adverse effects on a restricted part of the population (elderly, with co-morbidity), may be minimal in terms of public health, it becomes a major issue for the general population, the vast majority of which is healthy and young.

    In the U.S. military, military doctors have already expressed concerns for the safety of personnel, arguing, that already many more U.S. servicemen have died shortly after the injections than from Covid-19 itself.

    It should be noted here that the products currently available are all still subject to conditional marketing authorization until at least the end of 2022. Of the four original manufacturers, three (Astra-Zeneca, Johnson & Johnson, and Moderna) are banned for people under 30. To date, two of them have been withdrawn from the market for the entire French population.

    The truth of this epidemic is much more complex than a simple vaccine solution put forward, in March 2020, and pre-sold by the pharmaceutical industry. A whole part of the population, via its T lymphocytes, has an innate humoral immunity against this disease, and seems not to be able to be touched. The natural immunity against this disease (for the primo-infected) is very robust (higher than 99.6% in all serious studies, which no vaccine will ever reach), and durable in time. Studies have shown that 17 years after the episode of SARS-CoV-1, the patients of that time still had antibodies in the blood. This is, how we achieve herd-immunity, naturally.

    The mRNA technology is attractive and innovative because it allows our cellular machine to produce molecules in large quantities. It is therefore up to us to know which molecule is produced by our body in the context of a vaccine. These injections force the body to become an advanced protein factory, called Spike, for about two weeks. But this « Spike Protein », like any pharmakon, can be a remedy but also a poison, because it mechanically creates micro-clots in the blood; this is why some scientists, accused of being opposed to the COVID-19 vaccination, say : We are not « anti-vax », we are « anti-Spike ».

    Many recent studies have demonstrated the toxicity of this Spike protein. It is a characteristic element of the SARS-COV2 virus, and it causes considerable damage to the body as evidenced by the pathological signs of this disease (blood clots, stroke, inflammation of the myocardial muscle, attack of the blood vessel wall). During the mRNA injection, the Spike protein is produced in big quantity by the person's own body, without being weakened or rendered harmless, as in a conventional vaccine. On the contrary, its toxicity is one of the main reasons for the numerous adverse reactions recorded by official pharmacovigilance organizations.

    Here, we unroll Covid-19 vaccine mortality figures as of mid-October 2021, from major global pharmacovigilance sites :

  • France : ANSM report (Agence Nationale de Sécurité du Médicament): nearly 1,000 official deaths declared to date.
  • Europe : EudraVigilance : more than 26,000 deaths to date.
  • USA: VAERS : more than 16,000 deaths, to date.
  • A very complete article from France-Soir, summarizes this problem well. If the official figures of deaths, linked to the COVID vaccine are impressive, those of the undesirable effects are even more so, because they affect the youngest and our health in the long term. There is, therefore, a major medical risk of loss of licenses as a result of the « COVID vaccine ». Peter McCullough, a renowned cardiologist with an H-index of 118, a giant of American academic medicine, rings the alarm and denounces the « medical nihilism » of our management of the Covid-19 crisis.

    Finally, in a VAERS study, we see that the risks of myocarditis and pericarditis increase significantly with the number of doses, and, in particular, for younger men.

    We have not yet discussed the long-term risks of these injections of genetic material (like cancers, autoimmune diseases, neurodegenerative diseases, etc.), but their unknown character needs to be added to the balance, as Dr. Gérard Delépine, an oncologist, reminds us in an article in

    Option B

    Benefits : Debates are raging about whether hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin work; the best thing to do is to read a recent article, in Le Point, where we can only observe that the AP-HM (Marseille Hospitals) got away with a mortality rate 3.5 times lower than that of the AP-HP (Paris Hospitals), over a period of one and a half years, here is an extract&bnsp;:

    Here, we provide two sites where full meta-analyses of the two known early treatments can be found :

  • Covid-19 Treatment Studies for HCQ
  • Covid-19 Treatment Studies for Ivermectine
  • The results are clear. These treatments are simple, inexpensive, and very effective.

    Risks : Both hydroxychloroquine, prescribed in tens of billions of tablets for more than 70 years, and ivermectin, for which the Japanese professor Satoshi Omura received the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 2015, have shown their safety, especially when, given for a short week, while these molecules are otherwise used for long-term treatments (rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, river blindness, etc). In summary, and since the flight crew members all benefit from regular ECG monitoring of their heart, the risk of taking these molecules, only in case of proven symptoms of the disease, is nil.


    Each individual flight crew member must be able to choose between the risks associated with the injection of an experimental product and the risk of being naturally infected. However, in order, for this choice to be free and informed, and for consent not to be withheld, the information available, to each individual must be impartial and of good quality. This site aims to contribute to the debate, by being as informed as possible.

    A : ASSIGN

    Whatever the individual's choice, they must be informed, free and respected. It is not a question here of criticizing the choices of some and others. What is at stake is our freedom of opinion, to be able to choose what we think is best for our health and physical integrity. It is therefore fundamental that each of us show tolerance and open-mindedness towards our colleagues. If a flight crew member opts for option B, there should be no impediment to the right to prescribe, in our country; no psychological pressure or threat of salary suspension should be imaginable.

    R : REVIEW
    If, in the future, new data were to appear, for example, a classic vaccine with deactivated virus, a technique that has been mastered and has proven its efficacy and safety, as the Nantes-based company, Valvena, has planned (they are currently in phase 3 trials), we could repeat the FORDEC loop, with new options, which would, de facto, allow for new informed individual decisions.

    It is worth noting that the most vaccinated countries (Israel, Singapore, Australia, Iceland) are unfortunately, now experiencing a major epidemic resurgence. If we compare with Sweden, which has never confined its population, never imposed masking, nor vaccination, and which is the country in the world where the epidemic of variant delta has been the lowest, we can therefore affirm, and, this was the whole point of the Great Barrington Declaration, that it seems to be the collective immunization of a population that stops an epidemic due to a new pathogen, rather than a single solution in favor of "all vaccine" which, a fortiori, could lead to a lasting and destructive crisis.

    The argument that a « vaccinated » flight crew member would protect others better than a non-vaccinated one, deserves a comment: all serious studies, i.e. without conflict of interest, show that vaccinated people have a viral load equivalent to that of non-vaccinated people, or even higher (IHU study in Marseille), in case of infection. In reality, and according to Jay Bhattacharya, professor of epidemiology at Stanford University and co-signatory of the indispensable Great Barrington Declaration, « anyone who advocates compulsory vaccination is in fact largely against vaccination », since they would seem to reject the very principle of the vaccine according to Pasteur : a prior infection gives robust immunity through the production of natural antibodies.

    In a final analysis, and whatever the promoters of mass vaccination may say, a vaccine is an individual protection, and certainly not a collective protection; this is based on a recent study showing that the vaccination rates by country do not influence the shape of the epidemic.

    October 2021