L
Loki
are you for or against our current vaccines? I genuinely don't like taking vaccines that haven't had enough studies done to make sure there are no complications, but what is the alternative? The alternative is potentially being on life support in a hospital in an induced coma.
I am not "for" or "against" the vaccines. I feel they are important public health measures which have helped and will continue to help us get to the other side of COVID nightmare world. What I am "for" is the ability of people to make what they feel is the best decision for themselves and their families based on their own assessment. I have to say that all the current advertising around the jab is farcical, because it's all just a
fait accompli - "they" have already decided what your decision regarding whether or not to get vaccinated should be, and "they" will use all manner of coercion to ensure it. That's why the messaging is funny - they're all like "Hi, I'm Dr. So-and-So, the city's chief physician, urging you to speak with your doctor about the vaccine and any concerns you may have, so you can make the best decision for you and your family" -- yet "the best decision" has already been made for you under pain of job loss, inability to enjoy any of society's normal perks, inability to travel etc. That's the hidden subtext that they put the glossy, nonsensical veneer over. It's a joke to me, because it's flagrantly dishonest and everyone knows it. No different than a guy who has a gun behind his back smiling at you and asking you to "make the best decision for you and your loved ones," but only if that decision is to hand over all your valuables. You know, he knows it, we all know it. Comical messaging for anyone with eyes to see in light of what's going on in the world.
The degree to which this is all a done deal already, and all the trials, "debates" etc. are just theatrics for the rest of us, can be seen in the following progression of events (taken from a post I made elsewhere one month ago):
1) Pfizer/Moderna EUA granted on the basis of 3-4 MONTHS worth of "phase 3" trial data. Normally 1-2 years' worth of data is required.
2) Full FDA approval sought and granted within 3 months of petition. This is normally a 10-12 month process; even their "priority review designation" aims to grant approval within 6 months per the FDA themselves, yet it ended up being 3 months; also, per the FDA's website, priority review "does not affect the length of the clinical trial period." Really? I guess that at the time of approval these vaccines had the standard 2-4 years' worth of phase 3 data behind them? Oh, wait, they didn't? Interesting. Well at least they had ~11 months of data on whether the experimental group from the original phase 3 trial had any adverse reactions as compared to the control group, right? Ooops, no they didn't, because Pfizer, in an unprecedented move, administered the vaccine to their entire "control" group several months before FDA approval. Thus no meaningful long term comparisons of outcomes between the two groups - whether regarding efficacy against COVID or incidence of adverse outcomes - can be made.
3) No public hearings/arguments were permitted during the approval process as is typical for other drugs. This, combined with the rapidity of the approval process and the contamination of the control group, undermines faith in the entire endeavor - or at least it should make you question things. Based on the preceding and what follows, it is clear both that the FDA was/is under tremendous political pressure to approve these vaccines (and subsequently boosters, approvals for younger age groups despite a considerably different risk/benefit ratio etc.), and that the approval was fast-tracked for purely political, messaging, and policy reasons (e.g. mandates could then be enacted, which they couldn't be under an EUA; also, vaccine uptake had stalled, and having the imprimatur of the FDA's "full approval" removed a mental impediment to vaccination for some folks).
4) Within ONE DAY of FDA approval, various cities/states/federal agencies enacted or announced mandates; this is a clear sign that, despite their insistence mere months prior that mandates/passports were not being considered, they were simply waiting for the legal/regulatory framework to be in place to allow them to implement these measures. Essentially, they were chomping at the bit the entire time waiting for this "approval."
5) Mandates proceeded and expanded at an alarming rate here in the US. Biden's federal level mandates being the most overreaching of them all (the military vax mandate, federal employee vax mandate, and quite likely illegally enacting a private business mandate for companies of over 100 employees - that's 50+% of all companies in the US - under the auspices of OSHA). Within one week of FDA approval, numerous Fortune 500 companies announced strict vaccine mandates as a condition of employment. Virtue signaling definitely played a role here, but the thrust is clear.
6) Public discussions around both boosters and extending the EUA/approval to younger age groups began to occur around the same time. There was/is, as expected, little to no public discourse in the mainstream media regarding the VASTLY different risk/benefit calculus for these vaccines when talking about people under 20 years of age and especially under 12 years of age.
7) In the UK, the government went AGAINST the recommendation of their vaccine advisory panel and approved the vaccine for all 12-15 year olds. Again, fait accompli.
8) The drum had already started to beat for vaccinating 5-11 year old children over a month ago, despite their risks from COVID being VANISHINGLY small. These children literally have an equal chance of getting struck by lightning than dying from COVID. The Casper the Ghosts of society will shriek "but even one death of a child is too many!" And while any child's death is a tragedy, the adults in the room need to rein in such histrionics and clearly state that incredibly rare events cannot and should not dictate public policy. Else we should mandate that these kids walk around in rubber suits of armor every day, lest one of them get struck by lightning, which most assuredly happens at times. I ask you, in light of all the preceding, IS THERE ANY DOUBT WHATSOEVER that vaccines will be approved (and eventually mandated for school attendance - we already see it in Los Angeles) for 5-11 year old children inside of 2-3 months? It's already a done deal - all of the submissions, data, "arguments" etc. is all a dog and pony show. They were essentially approved as soon as the vaccine existed.
9) Mandates and passports will continue to get more stringent over the coming months, and will encroach on every aspect of life: your ability to find gainful employment, procure housing (many big landlords are already mandating the vax for renters), travel (mandates for int'l travel are coming any day now, and domestic flights will not be far behind them before the end of the year). The Biden administration was even looking at requiring vaccines for interstate travel BY CAR, with checkpoints between states at major choke-points. It won't surprise me one bit if this comes to pass within 6 months.
ADDENDUM: Booster approval sought and granted within 1 month for those 65+ years of age. Then within one more month, boosters were approved for all age groups despite vocal opposition from several FDA board members, and the resignation of two top, tenured FDA officials over what they felt was "undue pressure" to approve child vaccines and boosters.
EDIT: I was too conservative in my timetable, as the above re: child vaccination was written one month ago, and within 3 weeks (not 2-3 months as I stated), the vax was authorized for the 5-11 year old age group. Further proof that this is all decided beforehand - they just go through the motions to make you think that there was actually a possibility of it being otherwise.
Still think that any other outcome was possible except what we have currently? Don't be blind.