A Foolish Consistency is the Hobgoblin of Little Minds

Thanks all, for the Well Wishes.
I'm feeling much better now.

 Conclusion


The COVID‑19 vaccines were rushed through the developmental and regulatory processes with the pre-determined intent among policymakers to mass vaccinate the population. The clinical trials upon which emergency use authorization or licensure is based provided early evidence that the immunological phenomenon of “original antigenic sin” might be a problem with these pharmaceutical products, yet the “public health” establishment willfully blinded itself to this risk and has pushed these products on the population anyway, including now increasingly on children, who were already at very low risk of severe COVID‑19 to begin with and are at even lower risk now that most have already acquired immunity.



Consequently, by recommending parents to vaccinate their children without considering the opportunity cost, policymakers may be responsible for increasing the risk of COVID‑19 throughout their lifetimes. This is a reasonable conclusion to draw based on the data currently available, which consistently show that the vaccines offer only short-term protection, with waning of immunity to statistical insignificance and then to significantly negative effectiveness. We can also anticipate that booster shots will only delay rather than prevent this outcome.



Such observations of negative vaccine effectiveness are also being willfully ignored by public vaccine policy advocates, yet these observations are consistent with studies that have now demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that original antigenic sin is a real problem with these pharmaceutical products.



This also serves as another illustration of how public vaccine policy violates the right to informed consent. Logically, anyone unfamiliar with the term “original antigenic sin” is incapable of exercising truly informed consent when it comes to making a decision about whether or not to get vaccinated. While there have been rare acknowledgements of the risk of this phenomenon in the medical literature, such as by VRBPAC member Paul Offit, the risk has not been communicated to the public via statements from “public health” officials or reports in the mainstream media.



This speaks to intent. Rather than aiming to empower people with the knowledge they need to make a truly informed choice about whether to vaccinate themselves or their children, the “public health” establishment along with the media have chosen to engage in policy advocacy, aiming instead to persuade everyone to get vaccinated by exaggerating the benefits and downplaying or ignoring altogether the risks.



In short, what government officials and agencies like the CDC do is to issue endless propaganda, while the media advocate public vaccine policy rather than doing journalism. As always, what the government and media say science says about vaccines and what the science actually tells us are two completely different things. This is certainly no less true for COVID‑19 vaccines than for other vaccines recommended by the supposed “authorities” who are evidently more concerned with exercising power and control over the population and generating profits for the pharmaceutical industry than in ensuring good public health.