Vaccine Fetish Rampant

The vaccines are all good and not bad.

All work and no play make Jack a dull boy.

Vaccines can do no harm.

Vaccines all good. 

It's a mantra that has seeped deep into the psyche of minds.

A cult has been formed around an artificial pharmaceutical that is proving to not only not be effective but according a couple of recent studies, even have negative efficacy.

The vaccines are nor as successful as being claimed. It may have had an initial positive impact for a few months, but it's become clear the laws of diminishing returns have kicked. But what are officials who have stupidly staked all their money and reputations to do? Tell the public they took a questionable experimental injection with possible long-term effects for no reason?

The one saving grace for the ruling classes is they pumped enough propaganda and manipulated fear so effectively (ironically, more so than the vaccines) they've convinced people they do prevent sickness and death. 

What's entered the mindset is now "I got Covid despite being double or triple vaxxed but it could have been worse!" and "if only people would take the vaccine I would not have caught it!"

Man's ability to engage in deception knows no bounds.

This is all authorities have now as a reason to get these low quality products That is, "You don't want to catch it'' 

Logical fallacies abound. 

Let's explore these on a basic level. 

Post hoc/high survival

A vaccinated friend of the family knows of an unvaccinated young healthy colleague who died of Covid. 

She immediately concluded a) had the person been vaccinated, she would not have died and b) is convinced the vaccine is saving her life.

Both can be true and both cannot. Or one can and the other not.

The latter (B) is more supported by data than the former (A).

The key data point escaping people and has not entered the public consciousness is the survival rate is extremely high at about 99.985% for the overall population.

So chances are, if you get Covid you will indeed catch a mild form of it and the chances of death are slim to none.

The rate is even higher for kids under 19 and still more so for those under 12 hovering close to 100%.

In this manner, the vaccines serving as a net benefit is limited as there is no way to know who would have caught and died from the disease.

A blanket assumption of 'I got the vaccines I'm safe' is a faulty one as vaccinated people do die. Another fallacy is assuming if you are vaccinated but caught a mild form it would have been worse without it. 

The data shows if you're within a certain healthy demographic you would have had a mild form of it anyway. So we have to be careful with this. Studies also show the vaccines are most effective among the age groups least susceptible to the virus leaving the most vulnerable demographics with less than effective protection. It's a glitch in the system.

So once again, the people least impacted by lockdowns (and its biggest supporters) are benefitting from a vaccine meant to protect a demographic in danger of it.

God's sense of humor is dark.

Omicron is now raging and what would you say if it's been asserted this is definitely a man-made variant both scientifically and artificially induced through mass vaccination as well as mass mask wearing? The vaccinated are leading the way on this one. The attempt to blame the unvaccinated is without base or fact.

The virus doesn't appear to be deadlier. Yet, deaths in some nations are slightly hire. Is there something more at work? Can it be the masks and ADE?

Just something we need to keep in mind. 

We've known for decades masks lead to higher infection rates. They're bacterial traps and are useless as protecting from viruses. 

Now, to return to my example this is a post hoc ergo propter hoc.

So I went into wiki to just check in on how they explain it.

As we know, Wiki is now highly ideological and to be taken very carefully.

And the entry only fuels this suspicion.

Buried in their exanples of this fallacy is the following:

"Reporting of coincidental vaccine adverse events, where people have a health complaint after being vaccinated and assume it was caused by the vaccination."

This is correct.

However, they deliberately neglect a couple of things. 

First off, if you look at their preceding examples, one will conclude, superstition plays a role in this fallacy as well as overplaying coincidences. This can be true.

In my view, this was cynically slid in giving the impression an adverse event can be any of being rare, a coincidence, or even superstitious. Or as has been reported by people who suffered a legitimate injury by doctors, 'it's in your mind'.

The key to logic is the strength to which the argument is based. In other words, it can't be weak to the point it leads to circular logic.

Which leads to the second point, this claim is easily refuted by the simple fact adverse events do take place (e.g. myocarditis and blood clots - which lead to deaths) and in the case of these vaccines, more so than any vaccines in medical history. And as a researcher at Columbia as noted (and well known in general) the injuries and events are likely under reported by a factor of 20. We also know, through a study from Harvard Pilgrim, only 1%-10% of events are reported to VAERS. 

Another mistaken view about VAERS is 'anyone' can go into the system and report which is simply not accurate. It's far more involved than this. But this is not the point of this post here.

The entry is less about logic and more about dogma. It essentially is attempting to claim a logical argument that is false and demeans the millions of people who have been injured by the vaccines often within 28 days and even 4 days of receiving one or two doses. 

This should not be an example and was inserted as pure propaganda.

It's an example of where we dogmatically stand in this moral panic with a dubious medical procedure posing as a solution. 

The other day I learned no studies have ever been conducted looking into whether 'mixing' vaccines is safe. Yet, Fauci is out there basically saying. 'Sure. Mix it up. Take a booster. Have a ball!' 

The last man anyone should trust is Fauci. He has a tyrannical history of irresponsibly manipulating drug development data and ignoring or outright denying studies into the safety of his products going back 35 years.

Tony Fauci doesn't do 'safe and effective'. He does 'patents and profits'. 

By ignoring the potential dangers and shortcomings of these injections serves no one.

No one.

And it's the very definition of anti-science.