When an organization attempts to persuade rather than inform during a period of rapidly evolving knowledge of a subject, that organization can become trapped into reinforcing nonsense when the data starts to diverge from the original thesis.
This should be true for the 70 doses of ridiculous childhood shots kids are required to get by age 18…immunity needs to be removed. That schedule would likely drop precipitously
After this I have completely fallen off the vaccine for everything and everyone bandwagon. I, like many now with the spike shots, had been snowed by the propaganda from the vax church. I’ve been forced to wake up and do my homework. The reality of it all is crushing. We have the sickest children in history. Autism rates are through the roof. Anyone who is critical is demonized. There can be no dialogue with the faithful. It will take a major reckoning for change to happen.
Gosh, señor Gato, it's almost as though the motivations around the vaccine aren't about protecting people from a virus at all, but about following through on a longitudinal obedience experiment and doubling down on policy decisions to avoid ever having to admit the slightest fraction of fault or responsibility, ever!
First great article and observations. There’s a lot to unpack here but I’ll hit a couple high points without getting into the weeds— I don’t want to write my own article to discuss, lest I want to start publishing on Substack lol.
That said, the construct around how vaccines exist in the marketplace is absurd. This model would not be tolerated in any other market, including the remaining wing of pharmaceutical products. The combination of lack of liability, govt ‘coercion’ and promotion, and little consumer choice creates a real issue for many.
Imagine a situation where a car manufacturer was able to to corner the market on a particular vehicle deemed so safe that govts required individuals to use this vehicle to drive on state funded roads. But, if the vehicle resulted in injury or death, the company was not responsible. In fact, people injured when in this vehicle are often told it wasn’t the vehicles fault, and safety data is not scientifically collected or published.“You have a choice” advocates say, “you can always not use state roads when you drive, or ride a horse instead.” I could go on in this example, but it looks and sounds absurd, because it is. This is the same construct as the vaccine market.
Again, as I’ve said before— we grant these manufacturers complete freedoms from liability and allow them to run their own safety studies, in spite of the fact that every single one of them has committed fraud and/or other atrocities in related to the pharmaceutical products in which they ARE liable for. (Except Moderna, who never put a product to market). The level of trust here boggles my mind.
Corporations, including big Pharma, do not care about you. Skepticism is a good thing. People need to insist on corporate responsibility and liability.
At this point, I really do believe that people would buy a parachute that's actually an anvil and jump out of a plane anyway if they were told by Fauci, et al., that it was an effective treatment against Covid.
If St. Fauci solemnly announced on CNN that butt plugs prevented Delta every Bidenista in the country would be walking bowlegged and latex futures would go through the roof.
Never before health care had been taken over by war rules.
Even at wartime the marching orders putting life and limb at risk, fighting for a flag or frontier, never crossed that sacred line where human life became universal, the ultimate one to fight for, either friend or foe, under the Hippocratic Oath.
For the first time in History humankind chose to cross that border, jumping into an abyss conflating life and health care with war.
Just as "friendly fire" and "collateral damage" are acceptable concepts under war rules, as high as that toll may be, so we are being forced to accept them, for a fight against a virus.
From cannon to vaccine fodder, from the Hippocratic to hypocritical oath.
Medicine long ago abandoned "health care," it is a system of "sick care" where the objective is to keep you alive but every increasingly relying on more (read $$$) interventions, medications etc.
If medicine really wanted to promote health, then fasting glucose AND insulin levels would be obtained. ANY deviation of either number (the insulin spikes appear first, long before TD2 is diagnosed) and would stop promoting nutrition science that makes health worse.
Look at the % of obesity in hospital staff. They eat hospital food. Which is mandated by the Fed Government by officials paid off by Big Ag/Food.
Good point. It is a hybrid war. Some argue that the only way to make sense of covid is to see it as a struggle between US and China, just one element of the Empire's multi-front hybrid war to try to get China to bend the knee before the Empire disintegrates. Covid was intended to weaken China's economy and to permanently reconfigure supply chains to satrapy states like India. Other elements of the attack include regime-change ops in HK, the fabricated genocide narrative in Xinjiang, pushing Taipei into a suicidal confrontation with Beijing, attacks on Huawei and attempts to restrict Chinese access to chip supply. The list is long. So far China has weathered these to greater or lesser degrees and has made clear what will happen if Taiwan conflict breaks out. Question is whether they have the balls to do what Russia did to US/NATO op in Ukraine back in April.
Even without intentionality, if those actually became the trenches in an unintended hybrid global war strategy cascading out of an unforeseen sequence of events, much like the world found itself dug into in WWI, out of an assassin's shot at Sarajevo, then four years before the previous pandemic, I can't but fear the odds democracies, with their short term focus, would be facing against the longest player in History.
China's mindset didn't change over millennia, merely replacing a dynastic Emperor for an ideological one, keeping almost everything else in place, especially the structures and stamina sustaining a draining fight over time, precisely what the west eroded long ago.
And even if those odds weren't enough, my deepest fear is a possible (probable) stalemate and détante where we'd morph ourselves as societies into what we're supposed to be fighting against in the first place.
An enemy doesn't need to conquer land or capture resources when it can simply change wills and win minds.
Basically the Roman Empire M.O. and I'd guess what's going on right now on the Middle Empire's closer edges, Australia and New Zealand.
Coming soon(er than you'd bet) to a border near you...
Agreed. The window to takedown China militarily is closed, but the delusion persists that it can be taken down through hybrid war. Everything the Empire tries, like covid, eventually boomerangs back and lops one of its many heads off. My sense is both China and Russia--which both lost more than 20 million people in WW2--want no part of any war and have no Imperial ambitions, at least not in the Imperialist sense. Trying now to facilitate the end of the Empire with the least collateral damage.
I honestly don’t think independent evaluation is necessary. Putting the risk of full liability on the manufacturer is plenty of incentive to meet or exceed safety standards - see the car seat and vehicle market, where many manufacturers (who are required to self-certify) actively compete to ensure their products are not just safe and reliable, but perform better then their competitors’ products. The risk of liability is plenty enough to keep them honest in self-certification. The free market drives the competition for better, safer product options.
Just so. Restoring true liability would create a market demand for underwriters who in turn would create a demand for reliable testing. No government needs to do a thing, except undo what they did.
But wait, why pick on poor Pharma? I mean, having one "independent" organ of the government "investigating" potential wrongdoing of another organ of the government is totally fine, right?
You know, just like when you go to court, represented by a "public" defender, who, along with every other single person working there, including the jury, is on the State's payroll - the organization that just happens to be persecuting you.
"there is simply no basis for trust between the public and public health officials."
True but they don't want trust. You need trust for lies, and truth for that matter to work. To have utility and that's not how they are playing the game.
I read a while ago that world leaders don’t lie to other countries because trust is too low to begin with. You can't manipulate them. Oddly, leaders of democracies are more likely to lie to their own people than autocrats are. i.e. Saddam was truthful he had no WMDs while Bush lied. Without trust, there's just raw power and things are more predictable if you just tell the truth about that rather than lie. What you want is fear. And that's clearly what they are after.
This seems true of anything the government gets its self involved in. Since the government has an open pocketbook it really has no reason to be efficient and deliver the best product. I would use the school system as a number one example.
And when the public unions figure that out, they demand more and more -- and get it. After all, what does the government care? Certainly some of those dollars will come back as campaign funds..........
All this force has convinced me even more not to get it. What about those test animals that didn’t survive wild virus after being jabbed with these types of vaccines? I’d rather take my chances with my God created/evolved immune system.
Me too. Is it really the unvaccinated who are hospitalized? I too am gambling on my immune system…Also taking Vit D, Zinc, and hydroxy chloroquine (for a mild autoimmune thingey which showed up in blood work.)
no one is usa is tracking, proly do not want to know.
boosters suggest the vaxx strategy is wrong. more wrong plan after each failure.
i am retired military and do a lot of reading. looking at the panic we have strategies as bad as those before pearl harbor but no one will allow or assign reasons for a pearl harbor defeat of the losing plans.
censoring and the owned by corporate press are evil.
Live Not By Lies by Rod Dreher (sp?) is on my shelf. We are bathed in lies. I am taken aback by people , who should know better, who have bought into the lies.
I am a primary care doctor at a major academic center that has recently mandated the vaccine for all employees. In our meeting this week there was a discussion about how many pregnant nurses are asking their OB docs to write medical exemptions for them while they are pregnant and how the OB group now has a policy not to do this. The OB group sent us a letter to please not write these letters as patients are turning to their primary to try to avoid the vaccine.
So many of the docs in my group just laughing and ripping on these women and it turned into a real nasty ordeal of docs listing all the “stupid” reasons people have said to them to try to get out of the vaccine. Very hard for me to listen to as I have an autoimmune condition and have not gotten the vaccine myself but my colleagues dont know this yet.
I actually took some of the very first covid swabs in my state working in urgent care when this hit. I was the first outpatient provider working on our hospital side during the surge in cases and spent a month at the peak running a hospital ward. Not so long ago I was a "healthcare hero" and now I am some sort of social deviant wrongthinker.
I guess I will lose my job next month. I dont really have a plan b it seems.
Here's a letter template written by an attorney to assist in fighting employer mandates. Feel free to edit it as you see fit. Hopefully all or some of this works for you. Worst case scenario, don't quit. Make them fire you, you'll have better grounds for recourse.
Employer Letter Example: Vaccine Mandate Objection
No authorship claim or copyright asserted...A letter that also came to me via a route like a letter in a bottle.
Dear Boss,
First, I request a religious exemption. "Each of the manufactures of the Covid vaccines currently available developed and confirmed their vaccines using fetal cell lines, which originated from aborted fetuses. ( https://lozierinstitute.org/an-ethics-assessment-of-covid-19-vaccine-programs/ ) For example, each of the currently available Covid vaccines confirmed their vaccine by protein testing using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. ( https://lozierinstitute.org/an-ethics-assessment-of-covid-19-vaccine-programs/ ) Partaking in a vaccine made from aborted fetuses makes me complicit in an action that offends my religious faith. As such, I cannot, in good conscience and in accord with my religious faith, take any such Covid vaccine at this time. In addition, any coerced medical treatment goes against my religious faith and the right of conscience to control one’s own medical treatment, free of coercion or force. Please provide a reasonable accommodation to my belief, as I wish to continue to be a good employee, helpful to the team.
Equally, compelling any employee to take any current Covid-19 vaccine violates federal and state law, and subjects the employer to substantial liability risk, including liability for any injury the employee may suffer from the vaccine. Many employers have reconsidered issuing such a mandate after more fruitful review with legal counsel, insurance providers, and public opinion advisors of the desires of employees and the consuming public. Even the Kaiser Foundation warned of the legal risk in this respect. (https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/key-questions-about-covid-19-vaccine-mandates/)
Three key concerns: first, informed consent is the guiding light of all medicine, in accord with the Nuremberg Code of 1947; second, the Americans with Disabilities Act proscribes, punishes and penalizes employers who invasively inquire into their employees' medical status and then treat those employees differently based on their perceived medical status, as the many AIDS related cases of decades ago fully attest; and third, international law, Constitutional law, specific statutes and the common law of torts all forbid conditioning access to employment, education or public accommodations upon coerced, invasive medical examinations and treatment, unless the employer can fully provide objective, scientifically validated evidence of the threat from the employee and how no practicable alternative could possible suffice to mitigate such supposed public health threat and still perform the necessary essentials of employment. As one federal court just recently held, the availability of reasonable accommodations like accounting for prior infection, antibody testing, temperature checks, remote work, other forms of testing, and the like suffice to meet any institution’s needs in lieu of masks, public shaming, and forced injections of foreign substances into the body that the FDA admits we do not know the long -term effects of.
For instance, the symptomatic can be self-isolated. Hence, requiring vaccinations only addresses one risk: dangerous or deadly transmission, by the asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic employee, in the employment setting. Yet even government official Mr. Fauci admits, as scientific studies affirm, asymptomatic transmission is exceedingly and "very rare." Indeed, initial data suggests the vaccinated are just as, or even much more, likely to transmit the virus as the asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic. Hence, the vaccine solves nothing. This evidentiary limitation on any employer's decision making, aside from the legal and insurance risks of forcing vaccinations as a term of employment without any accommodation or even exception for the previously infected (and thus better protected), is the reason most employers wisely refuse to mandate the vaccine. This doesn't even address the arbitrary self-limitation of the pool of talent for the employer: why reduce your own talent pool, when many who refuse invasive inquiries or risky treatment may be amongst your most effective, efficient and profitable employees?
This right to refuse forced injections, such as the Covid-19 vaccine, implements the internationally agreed legal requirement of Informed Consent established in the Nuremberg Code of 1947. (http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/nuremberg/ ). As the Nuremberg Code established, every person must "be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision" for any medical experimental drug, as the Covid-19 vaccine currently is.
Second, demanding employees divulge their personal medical information invades their protected right to privacy, and discriminates against them based on their perceived medical status, in contravention of the Americans with Disabilities Act. (42 USC §12112(a).) Indeed, the ADA prohibits employers from invasive inquiries about their medical status, and that includes questions about diseases and treatments for those diseases, such as vaccines. As the EEOC makes clear, an employer can only ask medical information if the employer can prove the medical information is both job-related and necessary for the business. (https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/questions-and-answers-enforcement-guidance-disability-related-inquiries-and-medical). An employer that treats an individual employee differently based on that employer’s belief the employee’s medical condition impairs the employee is discriminating against that employee based on perceived medical status disability, in contravention of the ADA. The employer must have proof that the employer cannot keep the employee, even with reasonable accommodations, before any adverse action can be taken against the employee. If the employer asserts the employee’s medical status (such as being unvaccinated against a particular disease) precludes employment, then the employer must prove that the employee poses a “safety hazard” that cannot be reduced with a reasonable accommodation. The employer must prove, with objective, scientifically validated evidence, that the employee poses a materially enhanced risk of serious harm that no reasonable accommodation could mitigate. This requires the employee's medical status cause a substantial risk of serious harm, a risk that cannot be reduced by any another means. This is a high, and difficult burden, for employers to meet. Just look at the all prior cases concerning HIV and AIDS, when employers discriminated against employees based on their perceived dangerousness, and ended up paying millions in legal fees, damages and fines.
Third, conditioning continued employment upon participating in a medical experiment and demanding disclosure of private, personal medical information, may also create employer liability under other federal and state laws, including HIPAA, FMLA, and applicable state tort law principles, including torts prohibiting and proscribing invasions of privacy and battery. Indeed, any employer mandating a vaccine is liable to their employee for any adverse event suffered by that employee. The CDC records reports of the adverse events already reported to date concerning the current Covid-19 vaccine.(https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/vaers.html )
Finally, forced vaccines constitute a form of battery, and the Supreme Court long made clear "no right is more sacred than the right of every individual to the control of their own person, free from all restraint or interference of others." (https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/141/250)
Doctors laughing at pregnant women who are unwilling to risk their unborn child's health to an experimental gene therapy? Have these doctors heard of Thalidomide? It's been a minute since I was pregnant, but I recall avoiding sushi and pepperoni on pizza, afraid to take a cold tablet and switching to decaf lest something I ingest causes harm to the baby. But a new vaccine with no safety profile and with very serious possible side effects is somehow safe and effective? This isn't medicine and those cackling fools aren't doctors.
I'm sorry. This is such a twisted situation. You should not have to come up with an "excuse" not to take a brand-new drug. The word "no" should be enough. But I like to inform "health care providers" that this is the same group that used to think you could bleed people back into good health (or more recently shock people back into sanity). Many of us have not had good experiences with the medical system. They have no room for their "yucking" it up. Many of them couldn't find their ways out of a wet paper bag without a compass and a map.
Great post as always. It's basic common sense that if the people who made a product aren't liable for the results of the product, they don't stand behind it and neither should I. But government has only one tool -- a giant fucking hammer -- so guess what every problem looks like?
If tomorrow government decided that food was 'too important' to be left to the market, we'd be starving by Thanksgiving.
This is the clearest indication how bad the vaccine situation really is. The range of vaccine caused deaths is unbelievably wide and seems to be widening. The lack of interest and attention to children and young people dying... is truly a sign of malevolence. And as you say, a lot of people are very blind to it.
Mathew/ROE suggests 200,000 US vax deaths. So, 6 million worldwide.
When an organization attempts to persuade rather than inform during a period of rapidly evolving knowledge of a subject, that organization can become trapped into reinforcing nonsense when the data starts to diverge from the original thesis.
Noticed yesterday that AZ changed highway signage about the vax
From “3.7 million people vaccinated, get yours” to “7.2 million doses, get yours.”
Small indicator of desperation on their part to coerce the naysayers
This should be true for the 70 doses of ridiculous childhood shots kids are required to get by age 18…immunity needs to be removed. That schedule would likely drop precipitously
And the recommendations greatly increased post 1986, when liability was removed from manufacturers.
Exactly, totally coincidental
After this I have completely fallen off the vaccine for everything and everyone bandwagon. I, like many now with the spike shots, had been snowed by the propaganda from the vax church. I’ve been forced to wake up and do my homework. The reality of it all is crushing. We have the sickest children in history. Autism rates are through the roof. Anyone who is critical is demonized. There can be no dialogue with the faithful. It will take a major reckoning for change to happen.
You aren’t alone in that assessment friend
Gosh, señor Gato, it's almost as though the motivations around the vaccine aren't about protecting people from a virus at all, but about following through on a longitudinal obedience experiment and doubling down on policy decisions to avoid ever having to admit the slightest fraction of fault or responsibility, ever!
First great article and observations. There’s a lot to unpack here but I’ll hit a couple high points without getting into the weeds— I don’t want to write my own article to discuss, lest I want to start publishing on Substack lol.
That said, the construct around how vaccines exist in the marketplace is absurd. This model would not be tolerated in any other market, including the remaining wing of pharmaceutical products. The combination of lack of liability, govt ‘coercion’ and promotion, and little consumer choice creates a real issue for many.
Imagine a situation where a car manufacturer was able to to corner the market on a particular vehicle deemed so safe that govts required individuals to use this vehicle to drive on state funded roads. But, if the vehicle resulted in injury or death, the company was not responsible. In fact, people injured when in this vehicle are often told it wasn’t the vehicles fault, and safety data is not scientifically collected or published.“You have a choice” advocates say, “you can always not use state roads when you drive, or ride a horse instead.” I could go on in this example, but it looks and sounds absurd, because it is. This is the same construct as the vaccine market.
Again, as I’ve said before— we grant these manufacturers complete freedoms from liability and allow them to run their own safety studies, in spite of the fact that every single one of them has committed fraud and/or other atrocities in related to the pharmaceutical products in which they ARE liable for. (Except Moderna, who never put a product to market). The level of trust here boggles my mind.
Corporations, including big Pharma, do not care about you. Skepticism is a good thing. People need to insist on corporate responsibility and liability.
At this point, I really do believe that people would buy a parachute that's actually an anvil and jump out of a plane anyway if they were told by Fauci, et al., that it was an effective treatment against Covid.
If St. Fauci solemnly announced on CNN that butt plugs prevented Delta every Bidenista in the country would be walking bowlegged and latex futures would go through the roof.
LOL thanks for the much needed levity.
If the SAT still had analogies, they could ask:
FAA is to Boeing as ...
Answer: FDA is to Pfizer
Never before health care had been taken over by war rules.
Even at wartime the marching orders putting life and limb at risk, fighting for a flag or frontier, never crossed that sacred line where human life became universal, the ultimate one to fight for, either friend or foe, under the Hippocratic Oath.
For the first time in History humankind chose to cross that border, jumping into an abyss conflating life and health care with war.
Just as "friendly fire" and "collateral damage" are acceptable concepts under war rules, as high as that toll may be, so we are being forced to accept them, for a fight against a virus.
From cannon to vaccine fodder, from the Hippocratic to hypocritical oath.
Medicine long ago abandoned "health care," it is a system of "sick care" where the objective is to keep you alive but every increasingly relying on more (read $$$) interventions, medications etc.
If medicine really wanted to promote health, then fasting glucose AND insulin levels would be obtained. ANY deviation of either number (the insulin spikes appear first, long before TD2 is diagnosed) and would stop promoting nutrition science that makes health worse.
Look at the % of obesity in hospital staff. They eat hospital food. Which is mandated by the Fed Government by officials paid off by Big Ag/Food.
Good point. It is a hybrid war. Some argue that the only way to make sense of covid is to see it as a struggle between US and China, just one element of the Empire's multi-front hybrid war to try to get China to bend the knee before the Empire disintegrates. Covid was intended to weaken China's economy and to permanently reconfigure supply chains to satrapy states like India. Other elements of the attack include regime-change ops in HK, the fabricated genocide narrative in Xinjiang, pushing Taipei into a suicidal confrontation with Beijing, attacks on Huawei and attempts to restrict Chinese access to chip supply. The list is long. So far China has weathered these to greater or lesser degrees and has made clear what will happen if Taiwan conflict breaks out. Question is whether they have the balls to do what Russia did to US/NATO op in Ukraine back in April.
Even without intentionality, if those actually became the trenches in an unintended hybrid global war strategy cascading out of an unforeseen sequence of events, much like the world found itself dug into in WWI, out of an assassin's shot at Sarajevo, then four years before the previous pandemic, I can't but fear the odds democracies, with their short term focus, would be facing against the longest player in History.
China's mindset didn't change over millennia, merely replacing a dynastic Emperor for an ideological one, keeping almost everything else in place, especially the structures and stamina sustaining a draining fight over time, precisely what the west eroded long ago.
And even if those odds weren't enough, my deepest fear is a possible (probable) stalemate and détante where we'd morph ourselves as societies into what we're supposed to be fighting against in the first place.
An enemy doesn't need to conquer land or capture resources when it can simply change wills and win minds.
Basically the Roman Empire M.O. and I'd guess what's going on right now on the Middle Empire's closer edges, Australia and New Zealand.
Coming soon(er than you'd bet) to a border near you...
Agreed. The window to takedown China militarily is closed, but the delusion persists that it can be taken down through hybrid war. Everything the Empire tries, like covid, eventually boomerangs back and lops one of its many heads off. My sense is both China and Russia--which both lost more than 20 million people in WW2--want no part of any war and have no Imperial ambitions, at least not in the Imperialist sense. Trying now to facilitate the end of the Empire with the least collateral damage.
I would also like testing to be conducted by an independent organization. Pharma should not evaluate their own products.
I honestly don’t think independent evaluation is necessary. Putting the risk of full liability on the manufacturer is plenty of incentive to meet or exceed safety standards - see the car seat and vehicle market, where many manufacturers (who are required to self-certify) actively compete to ensure their products are not just safe and reliable, but perform better then their competitors’ products. The risk of liability is plenty enough to keep them honest in self-certification. The free market drives the competition for better, safer product options.
Just so. Restoring true liability would create a market demand for underwriters who in turn would create a demand for reliable testing. No government needs to do a thing, except undo what they did.
Great point. I agree with you.
But wait, why pick on poor Pharma? I mean, having one "independent" organ of the government "investigating" potential wrongdoing of another organ of the government is totally fine, right?
You know, just like when you go to court, represented by a "public" defender, who, along with every other single person working there, including the jury, is on the State's payroll - the organization that just happens to be persecuting you.
Lo siento, gato, me digerco.
And doctors should not police their own...
"there is simply no basis for trust between the public and public health officials."
True but they don't want trust. You need trust for lies, and truth for that matter to work. To have utility and that's not how they are playing the game.
I read a while ago that world leaders don’t lie to other countries because trust is too low to begin with. You can't manipulate them. Oddly, leaders of democracies are more likely to lie to their own people than autocrats are. i.e. Saddam was truthful he had no WMDs while Bush lied. Without trust, there's just raw power and things are more predictable if you just tell the truth about that rather than lie. What you want is fear. And that's clearly what they are after.
This seems true of anything the government gets its self involved in. Since the government has an open pocketbook it really has no reason to be efficient and deliver the best product. I would use the school system as a number one example.
And when the public unions figure that out, they demand more and more -- and get it. After all, what does the government care? Certainly some of those dollars will come back as campaign funds..........
Hear, hear. Great essay.
All this force has convinced me even more not to get it. What about those test animals that didn’t survive wild virus after being jabbed with these types of vaccines? I’d rather take my chances with my God created/evolved immune system.
wondering why deaths are climbing in fl.......
i took the jab, i gambled. i will not do the booster bc i hope,my b cells were enervated to the protein close enough to enervate again.
and i made one bet against ade i will not take another.
btw ex has immune deficiencies and her bet is on the booster
to each their own betting parlor.
Me too. Is it really the unvaccinated who are hospitalized? I too am gambling on my immune system…Also taking Vit D, Zinc, and hydroxy chloroquine (for a mild autoimmune thingey which showed up in blood work.)
no one is usa is tracking, proly do not want to know.
boosters suggest the vaxx strategy is wrong. more wrong plan after each failure.
i am retired military and do a lot of reading. looking at the panic we have strategies as bad as those before pearl harbor but no one will allow or assign reasons for a pearl harbor defeat of the losing plans.
censoring and the owned by corporate press are evil.
Live Not By Lies by Rod Dreher (sp?) is on my shelf. We are bathed in lies. I am taken aback by people , who should know better, who have bought into the lies.
I am a primary care doctor at a major academic center that has recently mandated the vaccine for all employees. In our meeting this week there was a discussion about how many pregnant nurses are asking their OB docs to write medical exemptions for them while they are pregnant and how the OB group now has a policy not to do this. The OB group sent us a letter to please not write these letters as patients are turning to their primary to try to avoid the vaccine.
So many of the docs in my group just laughing and ripping on these women and it turned into a real nasty ordeal of docs listing all the “stupid” reasons people have said to them to try to get out of the vaccine. Very hard for me to listen to as I have an autoimmune condition and have not gotten the vaccine myself but my colleagues dont know this yet.
I actually took some of the very first covid swabs in my state working in urgent care when this hit. I was the first outpatient provider working on our hospital side during the surge in cases and spent a month at the peak running a hospital ward. Not so long ago I was a "healthcare hero" and now I am some sort of social deviant wrongthinker.
I guess I will lose my job next month. I dont really have a plan b it seems.
Here's a letter template written by an attorney to assist in fighting employer mandates. Feel free to edit it as you see fit. Hopefully all or some of this works for you. Worst case scenario, don't quit. Make them fire you, you'll have better grounds for recourse.
Employer Letter Example: Vaccine Mandate Objection
No authorship claim or copyright asserted...A letter that also came to me via a route like a letter in a bottle.
Dear Boss,
First, I request a religious exemption. "Each of the manufactures of the Covid vaccines currently available developed and confirmed their vaccines using fetal cell lines, which originated from aborted fetuses. ( https://lozierinstitute.org/an-ethics-assessment-of-covid-19-vaccine-programs/ ) For example, each of the currently available Covid vaccines confirmed their vaccine by protein testing using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. ( https://lozierinstitute.org/an-ethics-assessment-of-covid-19-vaccine-programs/ ) Partaking in a vaccine made from aborted fetuses makes me complicit in an action that offends my religious faith. As such, I cannot, in good conscience and in accord with my religious faith, take any such Covid vaccine at this time. In addition, any coerced medical treatment goes against my religious faith and the right of conscience to control one’s own medical treatment, free of coercion or force. Please provide a reasonable accommodation to my belief, as I wish to continue to be a good employee, helpful to the team.
Equally, compelling any employee to take any current Covid-19 vaccine violates federal and state law, and subjects the employer to substantial liability risk, including liability for any injury the employee may suffer from the vaccine. Many employers have reconsidered issuing such a mandate after more fruitful review with legal counsel, insurance providers, and public opinion advisors of the desires of employees and the consuming public. Even the Kaiser Foundation warned of the legal risk in this respect. (https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/key-questions-about-covid-19-vaccine-mandates/)
Three key concerns: first, informed consent is the guiding light of all medicine, in accord with the Nuremberg Code of 1947; second, the Americans with Disabilities Act proscribes, punishes and penalizes employers who invasively inquire into their employees' medical status and then treat those employees differently based on their perceived medical status, as the many AIDS related cases of decades ago fully attest; and third, international law, Constitutional law, specific statutes and the common law of torts all forbid conditioning access to employment, education or public accommodations upon coerced, invasive medical examinations and treatment, unless the employer can fully provide objective, scientifically validated evidence of the threat from the employee and how no practicable alternative could possible suffice to mitigate such supposed public health threat and still perform the necessary essentials of employment. As one federal court just recently held, the availability of reasonable accommodations like accounting for prior infection, antibody testing, temperature checks, remote work, other forms of testing, and the like suffice to meet any institution’s needs in lieu of masks, public shaming, and forced injections of foreign substances into the body that the FDA admits we do not know the long -term effects of.
For instance, the symptomatic can be self-isolated. Hence, requiring vaccinations only addresses one risk: dangerous or deadly transmission, by the asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic employee, in the employment setting. Yet even government official Mr. Fauci admits, as scientific studies affirm, asymptomatic transmission is exceedingly and "very rare." Indeed, initial data suggests the vaccinated are just as, or even much more, likely to transmit the virus as the asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic. Hence, the vaccine solves nothing. This evidentiary limitation on any employer's decision making, aside from the legal and insurance risks of forcing vaccinations as a term of employment without any accommodation or even exception for the previously infected (and thus better protected), is the reason most employers wisely refuse to mandate the vaccine. This doesn't even address the arbitrary self-limitation of the pool of talent for the employer: why reduce your own talent pool, when many who refuse invasive inquiries or risky treatment may be amongst your most effective, efficient and profitable employees?
This right to refuse forced injections, such as the Covid-19 vaccine, implements the internationally agreed legal requirement of Informed Consent established in the Nuremberg Code of 1947. (http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/nuremberg/ ). As the Nuremberg Code established, every person must "be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision" for any medical experimental drug, as the Covid-19 vaccine currently is.
Second, demanding employees divulge their personal medical information invades their protected right to privacy, and discriminates against them based on their perceived medical status, in contravention of the Americans with Disabilities Act. (42 USC §12112(a).) Indeed, the ADA prohibits employers from invasive inquiries about their medical status, and that includes questions about diseases and treatments for those diseases, such as vaccines. As the EEOC makes clear, an employer can only ask medical information if the employer can prove the medical information is both job-related and necessary for the business. (https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/questions-and-answers-enforcement-guidance-disability-related-inquiries-and-medical). An employer that treats an individual employee differently based on that employer’s belief the employee’s medical condition impairs the employee is discriminating against that employee based on perceived medical status disability, in contravention of the ADA. The employer must have proof that the employer cannot keep the employee, even with reasonable accommodations, before any adverse action can be taken against the employee. If the employer asserts the employee’s medical status (such as being unvaccinated against a particular disease) precludes employment, then the employer must prove that the employee poses a “safety hazard” that cannot be reduced with a reasonable accommodation. The employer must prove, with objective, scientifically validated evidence, that the employee poses a materially enhanced risk of serious harm that no reasonable accommodation could mitigate. This requires the employee's medical status cause a substantial risk of serious harm, a risk that cannot be reduced by any another means. This is a high, and difficult burden, for employers to meet. Just look at the all prior cases concerning HIV and AIDS, when employers discriminated against employees based on their perceived dangerousness, and ended up paying millions in legal fees, damages and fines.
Third, conditioning continued employment upon participating in a medical experiment and demanding disclosure of private, personal medical information, may also create employer liability under other federal and state laws, including HIPAA, FMLA, and applicable state tort law principles, including torts prohibiting and proscribing invasions of privacy and battery. Indeed, any employer mandating a vaccine is liable to their employee for any adverse event suffered by that employee. The CDC records reports of the adverse events already reported to date concerning the current Covid-19 vaccine.(https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/vaers.html )
Finally, forced vaccines constitute a form of battery, and the Supreme Court long made clear "no right is more sacred than the right of every individual to the control of their own person, free from all restraint or interference of others." (https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/141/250)
With Regards,
Employee of the Year,
Thomas Paine"
Doctors laughing at pregnant women who are unwilling to risk their unborn child's health to an experimental gene therapy? Have these doctors heard of Thalidomide? It's been a minute since I was pregnant, but I recall avoiding sushi and pepperoni on pizza, afraid to take a cold tablet and switching to decaf lest something I ingest causes harm to the baby. But a new vaccine with no safety profile and with very serious possible side effects is somehow safe and effective? This isn't medicine and those cackling fools aren't doctors.
I'm sorry. This is such a twisted situation. You should not have to come up with an "excuse" not to take a brand-new drug. The word "no" should be enough. But I like to inform "health care providers" that this is the same group that used to think you could bleed people back into good health (or more recently shock people back into sanity). Many of us have not had good experiences with the medical system. They have no room for their "yucking" it up. Many of them couldn't find their ways out of a wet paper bag without a compass and a map.
Great post as always. It's basic common sense that if the people who made a product aren't liable for the results of the product, they don't stand behind it and neither should I. But government has only one tool -- a giant fucking hammer -- so guess what every problem looks like?
If tomorrow government decided that food was 'too important' to be left to the market, we'd be starving by Thanksgiving.
The Bayh-Dole Act and the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 must be overturned.
"VAERS is reporting around 7k deaths from vaccines. this is almost certainly far lower than reality as reporting is certainly incomplete (though how incomplete is anyone’s guess)" yes, and yes. But the German pathologist reporting 30-40% of deaths caused by vax https://freewestmedia.com/2021/08/03/german-chief-pathologist-sounds-alarm-on-fatal-vaccine-injuries/ tempers this a bit. I've been trying to persuade Buzz Hollander (did you see his recent essay? https://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2021/08/23/lets_stop_pretending_about_the_covid-19_vaccines_791050.html) and Eric Osgood to look more deeply into material here and from Rounding the Earth and Rollergator but they are blind to it, so it seems.
This is the clearest indication how bad the vaccine situation really is. The range of vaccine caused deaths is unbelievably wide and seems to be widening. The lack of interest and attention to children and young people dying... is truly a sign of malevolence. And as you say, a lot of people are very blind to it.
Mathew/ROE suggests 200,000 US vax deaths. So, 6 million worldwide.
Crickets.