I don't think it's really just that they need a bogeyman. The vaxxed vs unvaxxed thing is divide and conquer, sure, but it's also just about breaking down and disposing of the long-standing precedents around medical consent and bodily autonomy. The vaccines themselves are already not benign, and the endless booster updates mean they could get arbitrarily less benign in the future.
If we were to acquiesce to the mandates in overwhelming majorities, then it would be on to the next stage. That's about vaccine passes... and then a "social credit" system. Total and absolute state control over the individual is the goal. Look at Lithuania!
So there is this lovely lady that I have had the great fortune to walk with for almost a quarter of a century. But then the strange cold viral rain started. I heard a few voices say that a small shop on a side road sold I-tin transparent rain coats that worked pretty well. I got one. It fit. Back out on the road that beautiful lady's attention was drawn with most others, to heed brilliant flashing signs directing all to well lit stores with Safe and Effective Super Umbrellas. It was said that everyone would stay dry once enough of the umbrellas were carried. She got one early.The lines for those grew and grew. The first to get them, the lovely lady among them, proudly wore crests of honor. The lines grew even longer, and though some folks with good eyesight were seeing leaks in the new umbrellas and began to warn others, the demand for umbrellas still increased. Soon it seemed the brilliant Safe and Effective signs were everywhere, and other shops carrying alternatives were whitewashed or closed altogether as experts clearly stated that the only true protection was from the Super Umbrellas. This clearly troubled those with good eyesight because they could now easily see the tatters of some umbrellas on the street. More and more and more brilliant signs were posted by the government on behalf of the people and the science to get the umbrellas immediately and to separate themselves from anyone so foolish as not to believe that umbrellas work. Those who spoke against this very obvious truth, including those with I-tin rain coats were understandably progressively ostracized and of course sometimes had to be ridiculed for the public good. There continued a pernicious tendency for the I-tin types to hoist banners saying the umbrellas weren't at all as advertised, but those were quickly dispensed with, with general ovation from the crowd. This was no time indeed for such miscreant activities. The crowd progressively separated into the good umbrella holders and the odd I-tin ducks. By that time it began being clear even to the umbrella crowd that they weren't holding up very well. A very few even decided to furtively find the few remaining sources of I-tin raincoats. But most enjoyed the warmth of the large crowd, and the clarity of the brilliant Safe and Effective signs, even as some in the crowd got quite wet and fell, chilled to the bone, to the ground, and had to be carried away. But new brilliant signs pointed out that if only everyone would carry umbrellas, the crowd would be safe and eventually the rain would mostly stop and some happy normalcy would return. And this goodness only required that the I-tin types stop being so self absorbed. Understandably, anger towards the irreverent I-tin types grew. And yes those types did seem to really believe for some strange reason or another that they were doing the right thing. Arguments within families grew bitter. Ties were destroyed. And the main crowd clearly had to acknowledge that the umbrellas were breaking down. But new brilliant signs heralded new repair booster kits for the umbrellas. Problem solved!
Returning back to the lovely lady I referred to earlier, it seems I will most likely will never have the fortune to walk with her again. I went for the I-tin, and she, obviously more sensibly went (with her good and successful family) with the Super Umbrellas. We maintained as one despite the difference in crowd allegiance for some time, but the embrace succumbed.
Mine is just a small small face in this very cold and rainy world. Even so, my tears are visible, and my efforts to hold them back are failing. I have lost a fortune, and worse, am unable to even offer any protection to that lovely lady should her umbrella, even just now fortified with a brand new booster, fail. And looking about, I am sided by few, but at least they see the rain and the storm and the crowds as I do. But as for me this hurts, very very deeply. And as this awful situation continues, I know my hurt is completely, utterly trivial compared to what is and will progressively be suffered by parents and children as contortions of society, mind and spirit relentlessly continue. This is not the best of times.
(Brief summary) The Pfizer vaccine study for children chose way too small a sample to catch adverse events, only looked for myocarditis, nothing else, is not looking at long term immune system problems, and obliterated the control group by vaccinating them, so no longer term data can ever be looked at... https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/ten-red-flags-in-the-fdas-risk-benefit
Given all of the above, how on earth did the FDA claim any benefits at all from this shot? You should probably sit down for this part because it’s a doozy! Here’s the key sentence:
Vaccine effectiveness was inferred by immunobridging SARS-CoV-2 50% neutralizing antibody titers (NT50, SARS-CoV-2 mNG microneutralization assay).
Wait, what!? I’ll explain. There were ZERO cases of severe COVID-19 in the clinical trial of children ages 5 to 11. So Pfizer and the FDA just ignored all of the actual health outcomes (they had to, there is no emergency, so the application is moot). INSTEAD Pfizer switched to looking at antibodies in the blood. In general, antibodies are a poor predictor of immunity. And the antibodies in the blood of these 5 to 11 year old children tell us nothing because again, there were zero cases of severe COVID-19 in this study (none in the treatment group, none in the control group). So Pfizer had to get creative! What they came up with is “immuno-bridging”. Pfizer looked at the level of antibodies in the bloodwork of another study, this one involving people 16 to 25 years old, figured out the level of antibodies that seems to be protective in that population, then figured out how many kids ages 5 to 11 had similar levels of antibodies in their blood, and then came up with a number for how many cases, hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths would be prevented by this shot in the 5 to 11 population in the future, based on the antibody levels and health outcomes from the 16 to 25 year old population. If your head hurts from that tortured logic, it should, because such chicanery is unprecedented in a risk-benefit analysis.
So when the FDA uses this tortured logic at the beginning of their briefing document, all of the calculations that stem from this will be flat out wrong. Not just wrong but preposterous and criminally wrong.
The analogy I've heard doctors give is the seatbelt. The v_e is just like a seatbelt, we all (in Australia) accept laws to mandate them while driving because seatbelts keep us safe. Except, call me a consipracy theorist, but my not wearing a seatbelt isn't really going to change how the belted experience a car crash.
Seems like you need go no further than flu shots for a proper analogy. The COVID shot seems to be roughly similar in efficacy to the flu shot, and as far as I know the flu shot has always been voluntary and an individual choice based on individual circumstances.
It's not just that the un-umbrella-ed won't perform their civid duty and get an umbrella, so the rest of us can stay safe and dry.
They won't take Tylenol when we have a headache.
They won't work out, so we can lose weight.
They insist on taking vitamin D and zinc, even though the "health authorities" say it doesn't help.
And don't even get me started on the horse medicine...
Sadly, many people have lost all ability to think rationally. The CDC director admitted in early August that the jabs don't stop infection or transmission, but many still think mandates are reasonable.
It is the terrible realization that the government and most of my fellow citizens won't even shy away from mandating HOW and WHEN I am to to DIE, that opened my eyes during this pandemic.
I don't think it's really just that they need a bogeyman. The vaxxed vs unvaxxed thing is divide and conquer, sure, but it's also just about breaking down and disposing of the long-standing precedents around medical consent and bodily autonomy. The vaccines themselves are already not benign, and the endless booster updates mean they could get arbitrarily less benign in the future.
If we were to acquiesce to the mandates in overwhelming majorities, then it would be on to the next stage. That's about vaccine passes... and then a "social credit" system. Total and absolute state control over the individual is the goal. Look at Lithuania!
So there is this lovely lady that I have had the great fortune to walk with for almost a quarter of a century. But then the strange cold viral rain started. I heard a few voices say that a small shop on a side road sold I-tin transparent rain coats that worked pretty well. I got one. It fit. Back out on the road that beautiful lady's attention was drawn with most others, to heed brilliant flashing signs directing all to well lit stores with Safe and Effective Super Umbrellas. It was said that everyone would stay dry once enough of the umbrellas were carried. She got one early.The lines for those grew and grew. The first to get them, the lovely lady among them, proudly wore crests of honor. The lines grew even longer, and though some folks with good eyesight were seeing leaks in the new umbrellas and began to warn others, the demand for umbrellas still increased. Soon it seemed the brilliant Safe and Effective signs were everywhere, and other shops carrying alternatives were whitewashed or closed altogether as experts clearly stated that the only true protection was from the Super Umbrellas. This clearly troubled those with good eyesight because they could now easily see the tatters of some umbrellas on the street. More and more and more brilliant signs were posted by the government on behalf of the people and the science to get the umbrellas immediately and to separate themselves from anyone so foolish as not to believe that umbrellas work. Those who spoke against this very obvious truth, including those with I-tin rain coats were understandably progressively ostracized and of course sometimes had to be ridiculed for the public good. There continued a pernicious tendency for the I-tin types to hoist banners saying the umbrellas weren't at all as advertised, but those were quickly dispensed with, with general ovation from the crowd. This was no time indeed for such miscreant activities. The crowd progressively separated into the good umbrella holders and the odd I-tin ducks. By that time it began being clear even to the umbrella crowd that they weren't holding up very well. A very few even decided to furtively find the few remaining sources of I-tin raincoats. But most enjoyed the warmth of the large crowd, and the clarity of the brilliant Safe and Effective signs, even as some in the crowd got quite wet and fell, chilled to the bone, to the ground, and had to be carried away. But new brilliant signs pointed out that if only everyone would carry umbrellas, the crowd would be safe and eventually the rain would mostly stop and some happy normalcy would return. And this goodness only required that the I-tin types stop being so self absorbed. Understandably, anger towards the irreverent I-tin types grew. And yes those types did seem to really believe for some strange reason or another that they were doing the right thing. Arguments within families grew bitter. Ties were destroyed. And the main crowd clearly had to acknowledge that the umbrellas were breaking down. But new brilliant signs heralded new repair booster kits for the umbrellas. Problem solved!
Returning back to the lovely lady I referred to earlier, it seems I will most likely will never have the fortune to walk with her again. I went for the I-tin, and she, obviously more sensibly went (with her good and successful family) with the Super Umbrellas. We maintained as one despite the difference in crowd allegiance for some time, but the embrace succumbed.
Mine is just a small small face in this very cold and rainy world. Even so, my tears are visible, and my efforts to hold them back are failing. I have lost a fortune, and worse, am unable to even offer any protection to that lovely lady should her umbrella, even just now fortified with a brand new booster, fail. And looking about, I am sided by few, but at least they see the rain and the storm and the crowds as I do. But as for me this hurts, very very deeply. And as this awful situation continues, I know my hurt is completely, utterly trivial compared to what is and will progressively be suffered by parents and children as contortions of society, mind and spirit relentlessly continue. This is not the best of times.
(Brief summary) The Pfizer vaccine study for children chose way too small a sample to catch adverse events, only looked for myocarditis, nothing else, is not looking at long term immune system problems, and obliterated the control group by vaccinating them, so no longer term data can ever be looked at... https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/ten-red-flags-in-the-fdas-risk-benefit
Given all of the above, how on earth did the FDA claim any benefits at all from this shot? You should probably sit down for this part because it’s a doozy! Here’s the key sentence:
Vaccine effectiveness was inferred by immunobridging SARS-CoV-2 50% neutralizing antibody titers (NT50, SARS-CoV-2 mNG microneutralization assay).
Wait, what!? I’ll explain. There were ZERO cases of severe COVID-19 in the clinical trial of children ages 5 to 11. So Pfizer and the FDA just ignored all of the actual health outcomes (they had to, there is no emergency, so the application is moot). INSTEAD Pfizer switched to looking at antibodies in the blood. In general, antibodies are a poor predictor of immunity. And the antibodies in the blood of these 5 to 11 year old children tell us nothing because again, there were zero cases of severe COVID-19 in this study (none in the treatment group, none in the control group). So Pfizer had to get creative! What they came up with is “immuno-bridging”. Pfizer looked at the level of antibodies in the bloodwork of another study, this one involving people 16 to 25 years old, figured out the level of antibodies that seems to be protective in that population, then figured out how many kids ages 5 to 11 had similar levels of antibodies in their blood, and then came up with a number for how many cases, hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths would be prevented by this shot in the 5 to 11 population in the future, based on the antibody levels and health outcomes from the 16 to 25 year old population. If your head hurts from that tortured logic, it should, because such chicanery is unprecedented in a risk-benefit analysis.
So when the FDA uses this tortured logic at the beginning of their briefing document, all of the calculations that stem from this will be flat out wrong. Not just wrong but preposterous and criminally wrong.
Nice article, clean logic.
The analogy I've heard doctors give is the seatbelt. The v_e is just like a seatbelt, we all (in Australia) accept laws to mandate them while driving because seatbelts keep us safe. Except, call me a consipracy theorist, but my not wearing a seatbelt isn't really going to change how the belted experience a car crash.
I want my digital passport to say UNVACCINATED for COVID. That's my right.
I want my umbrella... upside down.
..."You'll find your fortune falling all over town
Each red and yella umbrella is up up up up upside down" (Pennies from Heaven)
Seems like you need go no further than flu shots for a proper analogy. The COVID shot seems to be roughly similar in efficacy to the flu shot, and as far as I know the flu shot has always been voluntary and an individual choice based on individual circumstances.
It's not just that the un-umbrella-ed won't perform their civid duty and get an umbrella, so the rest of us can stay safe and dry.
They won't take Tylenol when we have a headache.
They won't work out, so we can lose weight.
They insist on taking vitamin D and zinc, even though the "health authorities" say it doesn't help.
And don't even get me started on the horse medicine...
Sadly, many people have lost all ability to think rationally. The CDC director admitted in early August that the jabs don't stop infection or transmission, but many still think mandates are reasonable.
Great metaphor! Thank you, Tessa!! So explainable this way.
https://youtu.be/GukIoZ8d3Ew
Another analogy, for some chuckles
It is the terrible realization that the government and most of my fellow citizens won't even shy away from mandating HOW and WHEN I am to to DIE, that opened my eyes during this pandemic.
It is Trump's fauci. We need to fire djt.
Apartheid! Dead on. That's our fearless Tessa!