After a couple years of reading and listening to the information being put forward by the media and by many doctors and other highly qualified scientists and researchers, I decided to do a Q and A type format to share what I have learned so far regarding COVID and the mRNA vaccines. These answers may seem vague. They are not intended to be definitive. For the average person on the street, trying to find definitive answers around COVID and the vaccines can be a little like trying to grab an eel. There is no shortage of “true believers” on either side of the vaccine issue looking to proselytize you. It behooves all of us to look into this subject from both the pro and con perspectives. Possibly this Q and A can help you begin to formulate a viable risk/benefit analysis for your own decisions.
Q. Does COVID exist? A. Yes. There seems to be little dispute among qualified doctors and scientists that the COVID virus exists.
Q. Are some people dying from COVID? A. Yes.
Q. Do some people survive COVID without having been vaccinated? A. Yes.
Q. Does having been vaccinated reduce the severity of symptoms if contracting COVID? A. For some, not for all.
Q. Are there some lasting adverse health effects from having had COVID? A. For some.
Q. Are there risks associated with taking the vaccines? A. Yes. For some more than others.
Q. Are some people dying from the vaccines? A. Yes.
Q. Are some people experiencing severe, but non-fatal, adverse effects from the vaccines? A. Yes.
Q. Do all people who receive the vaccines experience lasting, adverse side effects? A. No.
Q. Does being vaccinated mean that you cannot transmit COVID to others? A. No.
Q. Do the vaccine manufacturers, or the governments which mandate vaccines, stand behind them by paying for losses due to adverse side effects? A. No. This was something which was definitively determined before the vaccines were released.
Q. Is it more dangerous for a school aged child to be vaccinated than to contract COVID? A. It depends upon the child. For some children, taking the vaccine has definitely produced tragic results.
Q. Are there effective treatments, other than vaccines, which are being used to protect people from COVID? A. Yes.
Q. Are these “other than vaccine” treatments safe and effective? A. Some are definitely safer and more effective than others.
Q. Can my doctor tell me if I am someone at a greater or lesser risk for adverse side effects if I am trying to decide whether or not to be vaccinated? A. With the amount of time that vaccinations have been taking place, and with the tens of thousands of cases of those who have experienced adverse side effects available for review, one might tend to think so. However, ask your doctor.
Q. If, due to pre-existing conditions, I believe I am at higher risk for an adverse reaction to the vaccines, will my doctor prescribe one or more of the medications which are showing efficacy in treating COVID? A. Ask your doctor. Good luck with that.
Q. Is the blanket statement that the vaccines are safe and effective true? A. No. Resultsin both areas, safety and effectiveness, can and do vary, sometimes greatly, from individual to individual.
Q. Especially with relatively safe and effective alternative treatments available, why isn’t the highly regarded practice of individual treatment plans, which take an individual’s existing health issues and personal lifestyle choices into account, being used when prescribing, or administering, mRNA vaccines? A. Good question.
Q. Is it true the sale of vaccines is producing extravagant profits for some? A. Yes.
Again, this Q and A presentation is not meant to be a definitive review of the topics presented. In fact, it may well produce more questions for you than answers. If so, that can be a good thing if you follow through and research the information, both pro and con, on the questions you have.
This is a brief examination of the essence of the concepts of egalitarianism and socialism. While capitalism is mentioned, I think most people are all too aware of what capitalism is and how it is playing out in our world. I am very confident that, in the world today, there are many people who claim to want a socialist society when, in reality, the concept they have in their mind is of a more egalitarian society. In 20/20 hindsight, I know I have made that semantic error. Words are powerful. Using the correct term to accurately express the concept we have in our mind is important. I think we often fall into the error of the misuse of a term, especially when that misuse is common around us.
“1: a belief in human equality especially with respect to social, political, and economic affairs
2: a social philosophy advocating the removal of inequalities among people”
I think, when a lot of people use the word “socialism”, the above qualities are actually what they have in their mind. One other notable aspect which I think often accompanies the use of the word “socialism”, is that when thinking of increased equality, it is common for a person to be thinking only in terms of the rewards, the benefits, available within a society. True equality also means sharing in the work involved in developing and maintaining a society. There is much needed, in many different areas, to maintain a healthy society. Everything from picking up the trash on the side of the road, to brain surgery. It all matters. There cannot be viable equality in a society in which some only receive, or in which some only give. The imbalance will cause the society to topple. It’s such a simple principle, yet one that is so often overlooked: imbalance engenders instability which can, and will, result in a toppling.
All that being said, Merriam-Webster’s definition of socialism is as follows:
“1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done”
I do not believe that this is what most people today who are using the term “socialist” or “socialistic” have in mind. I have a great deal of confidence that most people in the United States who use this term do not have “no private property” in mind. I know I don’t. I want to be able to leave my home in the morning and return to find it is still my home. The same with my car, tools, and essential personal property. On the other hand, sometimes working and contributing together to see that essential goods and services are available to all is a very good thing. Such a method is used widely to provide schools, police, fire fighter, and emergency response services. There are more essential goods and services which using a similar societal/cooperative approach in the provision of, could stand to benefit humanity greatly. That is another topic, not for this article.
It seems to me that the common use of the term “socialism” in the United States is a reaction to the extreme economic imbalance which is only increasing under the current capitalistic economic system. In every city, I venture every town, in the United States today we see people being marginalized. People are experiencing their needs going unmet, often not for a lack of actively contributing to the wellbeing of their community. We are seeing the end result of allowing the predatory reality, which is a purely capitalist system, to determine our economic reality. However, in contrast to egalitarianism, socialism opens the door just as wide as capitalism does to an extreme imbalance in economic reality and political power. I recommend those using the term “socialism”, as an alternative to “capitalism”, more closely examine it’s definition. Then examine the definition of “egalitarian”. Words matter. What term more accurately describes the reality you want to see emerge in the world?
I just looked up “socialism” in a copy of Webster’s New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1991. It does not have the same definition as what I have above which came from the online version of Merriam-Webster. Most significantly, it does not include the idea of no private ownership. It does include the phrase “…in which the private ownership of the means of production and distribution has been eliminated.” I cannot help but wonder if the more extreme version has something to do with weaponizing the word? We live in a world in which we are seeing our language altered, definitions changed, sometimes clearly to benefit one group or another. We need to have greater reverence for our language, which is a significant part of our cultural, intellectual, environment.
Over the past 6+ decades “our” Federal Government has lied to us about the JFK and RFK assassinations. Also, the Vietnam war, the Oklahoma City Bombing, the first WTC bombing, MK Ultra, UFO’s, 9/11, WMD’s in Iraq, and more. Why are so many people so willing to blindly accept that we are getting the truth about COVID and the “vaccines”?To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a time, nor a set of issues, when so many qualified, independent, professionals have felt compelled to speak out against what the Government and media are presenting to us. Professionals from various medical, biological, other scientific and legal disciplines. They are putting their professional credibility, their livelihoods, on the line to speak out.
What is the reason for the “tunnel vision” that has gripped so many educated, caring people? The “masses” have blindly followed the directives to destroy livelihoods, to impose isolation, to deprive youth of educational opportunities, to witness dramatic increases in poverty, depression and suicides. To be complicit in coercing neighbors to be injected with a known hazardous substance which those people did not want inside their bodies. All this based in fear of a disease, which, if left totally untreated, has a 99.9% + survival rate. If the WHO had not unilaterally redefined the term “pandemic”, from it’s traditional meaning, during the time of the Swine Flu, what is going on would not be a “pandemic”.
It is time to remember our humanity, our individuality. It’s time to stop trying to force our own health care decisions upon everyone. The value and necessity of individualized care has been a standard within the medical field for some time. Right now, are people which the data shows to be highly susceptible to adverse reactions to the vaccines being truly given the benefit of informed consent? Again, to the best of my knowledge, there has never been a time when those at the top of the pyramid of the medical, political and media establishment in the United States have so diligently kept accurate information about a disease, and about treatments, away from the general public. And there has never been a time when the American public has been so amenable to such censorship.
Nothing kills the ability of individuals to run for office and make a difference like partisan politics. Once a country has accepted the presence of political parties, and those parties become so powerful it is all but impossible for an average citizen to successfully run for a national office without their support, they, the parties, own the system. And therefore, those who run the parties run the system. Those controlling the parties become the political “bosses”.
Within this type of political structure it doesn’t matter who runs for office, because, whoever is elected is only going to be the new mouthpiece for the bosses. Yet, the bosses know it helps obfuscate their presence by running candidates who at least have the appearance of being distinct political personalities.
It’s time we end political parties. Let individuals run for office. Return to a system wherein the media must give equal time to all candidates. That will also limit the number of repetitive political ads we’re subjected to. I’m sure the media will be happy to simply run one or two informative programs or articles on who the candidates are and what their positions on the issues are. In such a system we have an infinitely better chance of a candidate actually following through with their stated positions if they’re elected.
Much of what’s taking place in the world today has been made possible by amazing communication technologies. While these technologies bring much of positive value to the world, as with so many other developments, they also offer those with dishonorable motives new avenues through which to prey upon communities. The latter application of these technologies has reached such proportion, If I wasn’t seeing it happen, I’m not sure I would have believed it to be possible. I grieve that it is.
I was born in 1950. I remember the U.S. Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy. I remember what I saw as a child of life in those times. I remember the post WWII mind set which was predominant in those days in the midwestern United States. There was an undercurrent of optimism, positivity. Diseases were being conquered, diplomacy, rather than war, occupied the headlines. People felt good that tyranny, authoritarianism, genocide, had been defeated. As is all too clear now, the world wasn’t as free of some of these human problems as many believed.
It’s not that everything was ideal, not at all. There were (and sadly still are) issues of ignorance, misunderstanding, fear, hatred, between people of differing races and religions. There were the major rifts between the nations identifying with capitalism and those identifying with communism. However, during WWII, people from many nations, nations with histories of distrust, antagonism, had pulled together to defeat a common enemy. There was optimism that the common values which had surfaced during the war could be built upon to establish lasting peaceful relationships. It was a time of the belief in unlimited possibilities for a better world.
What is absolutely apparent now, is that those who perceived the possibilities for improving the conditions of life for all people, weren’t the only ones seeing unlimited possibilities. There were those who saw the potential of using the new technologies, the developments in transportation, communication, psychology, medicine, and other disciplines, as tools for plunder. Rather than embracing the opportunities to engage in massive development, to facilitate improvements for the common good, they saw, and continue to see, human deficits through the lens of exploitation. Not as areas of need to be addressed with pervasive development and education, but as openings to be exploited in order to establish themselves in predatory positions of power within the systems of the world.
It is apparent now, that post WWII, those seeking personal wealth and power have been working, manipulating public perception. Often co-opting the very symbols which had represented the defeat of tyranny, authoritarianism and inhuman behaviors. They employ words and symbols which once stirred the most positive motives within people to obfuscate and shield their predatory agendas. One of the first major coups these people won was, via magazines, television, and other media, establishing the idea of unrestrained pursuit of personal wealth as a positive primary value in the psyche of people around the world. Once that lie, a lie which ignores basic values necessary to maintaining both healthy individuals and healthy cultures, was pervasively established in the minds of the population, the door to pandemonium was opened.
Competitive economics establishes a system in which those at the top have the distinct advantage. The oppressive, sometimes murderous, methods used to maintain and expand the wealth of those at the top become just the methods of “business as usual”. After all, it’s what you would do if you had all that money? Isn’t it? It’s the value system the media repeatedly portrays as the way of the world. And many, especially those who have never been exposed to something different, simply assume that impression to be the global, inescapable reality.
Abraham Maslow provided us with a working framework, a skeleton, within which it is possible to “flesh out” not only healthy, thriving individuals, also healthy, thriving cultures.
How do we know what is needed to “flesh out”, to establish a viable, worldwide, thriving human culture? We have the findings of the work done in many scientific disciplines over many centuries to guide us. Psychology, sociology, medicine, agriculture, engineering, all of these disciplines, and more, hold information which provides the necessary answers. There are the developments in science and the arts which provide much instruction for the establishment and maintenance of a healthful, thriving human culture. There are answer available to us to the problems of housing, health, energy, pollution, and more. Sometimes these answers go unused because they interfere with the profit motive of those in positions of power. And we accept it because the culture of competitive economics has become normalized.
The thing is, we have got the tools we need to establish a world in which people of many different backgrounds can live together as vital aspects of our world ecology, interacting and enhancing each other’s experience of life. What is missing is the focus to make it happen. I would have said the “will” to make it happen, but I believe that will is present, inside every living human being. Sometimes it is dormant, sometimes it has been covered in so much pain and trauma, so many lies and misdirections, that it expresses itself in twisted, destructive ways. But it is there.
As a teacher of mine once said: “Life takes work, it’s death that’s easy. Just do nothing and you will die.”
All people emanate from and are inextricably a part of the Divine Creative Spirit. This aspect of our existence is represented by the golden circle in the center in the diagram above. The next area, the circle which surrounds the center circle, is the “Worldly Persona” which is the identity the rest of world knows us by. It is defined by our words and deeds which are observable to the rest of the people in the world. It is this persona that is the product of the process described below. Our persona reflects the sum total of our worldly experiences, desires and decisions.
There are no “bad people”, there are no “good people”, there are only people. What makes the difference between tyrants such as Adolf Hitler, Mary I of England, or Pol Pot and revered personalies such as Gautama Buddha, St. Teresa of Calcutta, or Martin Luther King Jr.? It is not some mysterious, unknown variables. The difference lies in the sum total of their individual experiences (education, indoctrination, relationships, interactions), their desires, and their decisions. It is important to note here that the “sum total” may include the experiences, desires and decisions of many lifetimes. Also that biology and/or injuries can play a major role in the development of an individual’s persona.
However, we are thinking beings with free will. We have the potential to change. We can mold not only ourselves, but the world we live in. If we decide we desire a better, more harmonious, world, and we act upon that desire, we can bring that vision to reality. It may take time, but the sooner we start, the sooner we arrive.
With the determination to do so, bitterness can be transmuted to understanding. Fear and hatred can be transmuted to caring and love. However, we must stay aware that the opposite is also true. Caring and love, with enough abuse and trauma, especially when accompanied by input and reinforcement to do so, can be replaced with hatred and cruelty. We must end the mistreatment, the cruelties we impose upon one another. We must see each other as being the children of the same Creator, which we are. As we now know, we are all inextricably interconnected. Isn’t it time we established the positive, harmonious, joyful, reality we all, at the core of our being, long for?
In summation, while we all can, at times, be negatively affected by the world around us, through enlightenment, education, understanding, we can transmute negative impulses into constructive actions. We can play a more positively determinate role within our own lives, within our relationships, and within the world around us.
At this time, around the world, we are being advised by individuals and agencies, which wield substantial worldly power, to be fearful. We are being urged, coerced, to be compliant, to follow the instructions we’re being given. Instructions which appeal to the fear the media and corporate powers are largely responsible for instilling. In their positions of power within the media, the corporate powers are wielding an incredible ability of censorship over information. They routinely do not publish truths which disagree with, which dispute the predatory agendas they are implementing. A predominant one at this time is the COVID/”vaccine” agenda. Any information which contradicts the fear based agenda they are pushing, is either censored in corporate media, or, if it is referred to, it is done so in such a way as to discredit that information.
A collection of various and sometimes overlapping people have introduced a previously unknown disease into the world apparently in the pursuit of a homicidal, special interest, agenda. And they may introduce more. They are offering toxic, death-dealing treatments and doing all they can to repress the knowledge of the existence of safe, effective treatments. And throughout it all, they are engineering the flow of vast amounts of the world’s wealth into their hands. Yet we can make the decision to comply with this heinous agenda, or not. We have the final decision in whether or not to allow the pollution of our minds and spirits with the fear and hate they are promoting. And, we have the final decision whether or not to allow the pollution of our bodies with the toxic substances they are pushing.
Changing the focus back to our inherent divine origin and heritage, even when we are being motivated by fear, anger, hatred, even then, through the filters of our mind which are active at that time, we are expressing the innate desire for life which is present within all of us. However, if we desire a more harmonious, healthful, joyful life, we need to discipline ourselves to refrain from expressions which lead to more harm, more trauma, more fear, anger and hatred in the world. While we cannot ignore such emotions when they are present, we must learn to see through to the primary, underlying reality of the desire for life which is there. We must learn to see it not only within ourselves, but in “the other”. When we can do that, and when we embrace the values of negotiation, understanding, mutuality, and the desire for resolutions which enhance the harmony of human interactions, we can have a genuine heaven on Earth.
All through my life I have heard skeptics, cynics, say that such a thing is “too idealistic”, not practical, not possible. Even they, in doing so, inadvertently acknowledge the ideal nature of such thinking. If we aren’t devoting our time and energies toward seeking and establishing the ideal, what are we spending them on? Seeking and establishing the mediocre? The dysfunctional? Or are we just letting entropy, the slow slide into dissolution, be our guiding motive?
Ultimately, whether in the United States or someplace else in the world at large, the term coined in the U.S. by the authors of the Declaration of Independence, “We the People“, represents a reality which can stop tyrannical abuses andelevate humanity. It is within our individual decisions, that we collectively possess the ability to determine the direction this period of history will follow.
In recent years and months, the long-held definitions of three words all changed, with immense ramifications for public health policy in the midst of COVID-19
WHO’s original definition of a pandemic from May 1, 2009, specified simultaneous epidemics worldwide “with enormous numbers of deaths and illnesses”; this definition was changed in the month leading up to the 2009 swine flu pandemic, removing the severity and high mortality criteria
COVID-19 vaccines are technically gene therapies and did not meet the definition of vaccine, until Merriam-Webster’s vaccine definition was recently changed to — conveniently — include a description of the experimental gene therapies
From June 2020 to November 2020, WHO changed their definition of herd immunity to imply that it’s a concept that only applies to vaccination, not naturally acquired immunity gained from prior infection
The implication for society is that by putting out this false information, they’re attempting to change your…
I have personally witnessed a physician ridicule Dr. Zelenko for his assertion that there are self assembling nanobots. What that reveals to me is how reticent some people, even M.D.’s are to doing their own research. That is a major problem. If physicians were all content to stay regimented to the status quo, we’d still be seeing the use of leeches as a common medical practice. I venture few physicians are spending much time doing research on the incredible success of Ivermectin in India. I know when I mentioned it to one physician, they thought it was Remdesivir which had been the medication used to achieve the success. That is the propaganda physicians are being spoon fed via the established hierarchical information system they seem to rely upon. The problem is, when profiteers are sitting at the apex of the hierarchy, the information flowing through the system is not only vulnerable, but likely to be manipulated to facilitate a profit oriented, not necessarily a health oriented, agenda.
Below is a link to just one more piece of information which a lot of people do not believe is a reality. Radio controlled nanoparticles used to affect cellular activity. The more information which comes to light, the more it is becoming apparent that the most seemingly far-fetched allegations made by researchers into the contents of the COVID “vaccines” do relate to actual technology. There is no question that much has been hidden from the public about the contents of the mRNA injections.
I think we may be witnessing the creation of sequences of unintended consequences the like of which the world has never seen.
Let’s say a group of people are walking in the wild and they all fall into a nest of poisonous snakes, they all are bitten and they all begin to show symptoms of the effects of the poison. Some of the group, out of desperation, begin eating a plant which they know to have medicinal properties but are unsure if it will work against the snake venom. Miraculously it does! Within a short time, almost all who have eaten of the medicinal plant have fully recovered. However, another group, who call themselves scientists, state that they need time to conduct a double-blind study before they risk eating the plant. Several of them die.
It sounds ridiculous, right? That couldn’t happen in real life, could it? The group who call themselves scientists would see with their own eyes the miraculous recovery of the group who had eaten the plant, they would recognize the empirical legitimacy of what they’ve seen, and they would eat the plant and save themselves. Yes that, in all probability is what would happen if this imaginary example were to play out in the real world. Well, on a much larger scale, this example is playing out in the real world. Incredibly, the group who, in the example are the group who call themselves scientists, are not eating plant. Instead, as in the example, they claim they want to first conduct their double-blind studies.
There are some important distinctions in what’s happening in the real world as opposed to the example I’ve given above:.
The people who are dying aren’t limited, as in the example, to the group who call themselves scientists. They are the thousands of common people in the United States and it other countries who are dying from COVID and are being denied the benefits of Ivermectin. People whose physicians are following the directives of persons in positions of power within the public health community. Persons in positions of power who are speaking against, or forbidding, the widespread use of Ivermectin to treat COVID. But who, in the meantime, can claim to be objective by conducting, or authorizing, studies on Ivermectin’s efficacy and safety fighting COVID. Studies which, if used as a reason to withhold Ivermectin, are both ridiculous and serving a profit oriented agenda.
However, the supreme ludicrousness of it all is that however many people the NIH, or CDC, or the WHO, or whomever, might have in their experimental groups, that number will not even begin to approach the millions in India who are already the living proofs of the hypothesis that Ivermectin will effectively and safely, treat COVID. They have taken Ivermectin and dramatically benefited from doing so. There are no large numbers of adverse reactions. In other words, the experiment has already been conducted, in real life, and the results are in. In the meantime the pharmaceutical profiteers want to coerce millions more into taking their questionable, sometimes fatal, sometimes crippling, treatment. In fact, the experiments being conducted, or authorized as mentioned in item 1. above, seem more a delaying tactic to further facilitate the ongoing push of the mRNA injections.
If those fighting against Ivermectin were not making any money, but doing so just from an overabundance of caution, that could be seen as an idiosyncratic, but innocent, characteristic of that group. It would still be resulting in many unnecessary deaths, but it would be less criminal. However, the reality is that powerful people are making money from the ban on Ivermectin. And not just a little money, but raking in millions upon millions of dollars. Meanwhile, people are dying. People who, the vast majority of, the courageous real world, Indian experiment with Ivermectin indicates, would be saved if only they would be allowed that medicine.
It’s time all American medical practitioners are called upon to rouse from their complacency.Stop blindly following the wishes, the orders, from the profiteers who are endeavoring to disallow Ivermectin as a treatment for COVID! Follow the Hippocratic oath which states “I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required…”. Step forward, access the knowledge gained by your colleagues in India. Apply it here and now. Do what the people of America hope and count upon: save lives, engage in effectively treating the American public.
Most anyone who has taken a Psychology 101 course is familiar with Pavlov and his dogs. He taught them to salivate when he rang a bell. Such a simple thing, such profound implications. Over one hundred years since Ivan Pavlov and his assistant, Ivan Tolochinov, did their work on conditioning of reflexes, we find ourselves facing an application of the principles of his work in the most massive, and heinous, assault on humanity in recorded history.
For those who didn’t have the pleasure of taking a Psychology 101 course, what Pavlov did was to ring a bell before he gave food to the dogs that were in his experiment. He had surgically implanted a device to measure the dogs’ salivation. He found that, after repeating this sequence a number of times, the dogs would begin salivating after they heard the bell ring, before they received their food. The dogs had been taught to so closely associate the bell with the arrival of food, they now had a “conditioned reflex”. The dogs would even salivate when no food followed the bell.
In summary, a conditioned reflex is when a living thing, a dog, cat, bird, human being, has learned, or been taught, to respond in a certain way in response to a stimulus. A common example of a conditioned reflex in humans is, when driving a car, stopping for a “STOP” sign. Especially in those situations in which it may be perfectly clear there are no other cars on that section of road to worry about.
In Pavlov’s experiment what he didn’t have to teach the dogs is their reaction to food. That is a reaction they had learned, developed, from countless encounters with food. Pavlov just trained (conditioned) them to reacting the same way even when food wasn’t forthcoming.
Fast forward to the present.
There is no question that one of the major benefits societies today have experienced, over decades, is the ability of vaccines to protect individuals from certain diseases. The polio vaccine, smallpox vaccine, in Europe the tuberculosis vaccine and some others. Of course any good thing can be overdone, but that is another topic. The point is vaccines are most widely associated with saving lives. People have been conditioned to trust the word “vaccine”. Not as part of some diabolical plan, but just as a function of what most people’s experiences with vaccines, either directly or indirectly, has been. When I grew up I can remember two individuals in the small town in which I lived who bore the crippling after effects of having had polio. I venture there are many reading this who have never seen such effects. The reason for that is commonly attributed to the advent of the polio vaccine.
Just as having learned to salivate when given food was a reflex learned by Pavlov’s dogs simply by the reality of food, trusting vaccines is something that most people have learned from visits to benevolent doctors and nurses who oversaw the administration of them. I will qualify that generalization by saying that has not been everyone’s experience, even with polio vaccines. However, for the vast majority of people in the world, we have become conditioned, via decades of life experiences, decades of positive associations, to regard vaccines as a good thing. A great number of people on the face of the Earth have, via these experiences and associations, developed a conditioned reflex to “vaccines”.
What many may not stop to think about is that, along with the development and proliferation of vaccines, a definition of what a vaccine is and how a vaccine is made has been established. The following is direct quote from The CDC’s website. This is what was on the site on 8/13/2021 under the heading “Vaccines; The Basics“: (I have added italics.)
“Vaccines contain the same germs that cause disease. (For example, measles vaccine contains measles virus, and Hib vaccine contains Hib bacteria.) But they have been either killed or weakened to the point that they don’t make you sick. Some vaccines contain only a part of the disease germ.
A vaccine stimulates your immune system to produce antibodies, exactly like it would if you were exposed to the disease. After getting vaccinated, you develop immunity to that disease, without having to get the disease first.
This is what makes vaccines such powerful medicine. Unlike most medicines, which treat or cure diseases, vaccines prevent them.”
This definition of vaccines accurately describes every product defined as a vaccine which has ever existed, up until now. This definition does not describe the products which are being presented to the public as “COVID vaccines”. The COVID vaccines are not what is described in the CDC’s longstanding definition of a vaccine. None of the COVID “vaccines” have been made in the manner described and none of them function in the manner described. As anyone who has ever worked in a modern medical and/or technical field knows, accurate, reliable, terminology is essential. For centuries scientists have regarded the process of correctly, appropriately, classifying a new discovery as of the utmost importance. To try to inaccurately, inappropriately name a thing, to try to pass it as something it is not, is contrary to the entire concept of an orderly, reliable, scientific system. Which brings us to the question: why would the companies who have developed the mRNA injections want to call them a vaccine? If bringing a new treatment method to the world, why not celebrate it for what it is? Why try to pass it as something it is not?
There are some glaringly obvious answers to those questions. And, regrettably, none of them have to do with the health and wellbeing of the American citizenry or of any other nation’s citizens. Here are three of them:
The process of bringing a vaccine to market is much less complicated, much less expensive than bringing an entirely new treatment method to market. There is a less rigorous demand on safety testing. After all, vaccines are widely accepted as being generally safe. We know that, in reality, vaccines do have their fair share of problems which are too often cavalierly overlooked, however,that is another topic for another time.
The U.S. government has seen fit to grant vaccine manufacturers immunity from prosecution for adverse effects resulting from the use of their products. No other pharmaceutical nor treatment method of any kind has such a blanket absolution from any injuries which might result from their use. I’m sure every developer of a new pharmaceutical or treatment method would dearly love to be able to claim such immunity.
The word “vaccine” carries with it a conditioned reflex, a conditioned acceptance. A new vaccine, in general, do not evoke the appropriately circumspect attitude that people would have toward a new, particularly a new and not thoroughly tested, treatment method. A treatment method which has never been widely used on human beings, ever. A treatment method with virtually unknown long term effects.
If you think about those three benefits from being able to call the mRNA injections “vaccines”, it should be apparent to you that every shady operator dealing in any questionable product in the world, of any kind, would dearly love to have such advantages going for them. Call your product whatever you want. Don’t worry about penalties, liabilities. Capitalize upon a widespread trust that another product has established. Wow, it’s a charlatan’s dream come true.
How does a new product get away with calling itself something it is not, bypass stringent testing and safety protocols such a product is supposed to follow, and gain complete immunity from liability for whatever is going to happen when it is released upon an unsuspecting, and misled public? The only possible answer I can think of is “connections”, that’s how. Knowing the “right” people in the “right” places. Possibly having those same people beholden to you. And, possibly, by being involved in the pursuit of covert agenda which those in positions of power happen to also be involved with.
In closing, such a thing would not be possible without the conditioned reflexes which have been established, over decades, within peoples’ psyches toward “vaccines” and the entities responsible for public safety, such as the FDA. What is going on with how the mRNA injections are being depicted within the media and by public health officials. and in the push to see as many people as possible injected with the mRNA treatment, is a deliberate, glaring and unconscionable abuse of the public trust.
For over a year we have seen small businesses closed, people isolated, depression on the rise, suicides on the rise, homicides on the rise. We have seen billions funneled toward Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson and Johnson, and Astra Zeneca. We have seen the “big box” stores; Walmart, Costco and others, including the online store Amazon, reaping billions from the shut down of competition. Now thousands, if not millions, are losing, or will lose, their jobs due to the draconian mandates by President Biden and many State Governors. There are millions experiencing death and crippling reactions from the so-called “vaccines”. The most authoritative report on the subject, the “Lazarus Report”, more formally entitled “Electronic Support for Public Health-Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (ESP:VAERS)” in their study of the adverse event reporting system, data collected from 6/2006 to 10/2009, they found that only 1% of vaccine adverse reactions are reported. The current VAERS report of deaths from the COVID vaccines is 16,766. Using the aforementioned Report’s findings, that predicts deaths from COVID vaccines are more in the area of 16 million. This is not even counting crippling neurological reactions and other adverse reactions.
There has never been such an egregious case of the “cure” being worse than the disease. Yet, driven by the media’s fear mongering, millions of Americans, blinded by that fear, continue to support harsher and more pervasive mandates. All being done under the misguided, if not criminal, pretense of protecting the public. All in response to a virus which has negatively affected far fewer lives than has the brutality of the official responses; shutdowns, mandates. We are seeing first-hand how fear can drive people to abandon both rationality and civility.
In the midst of all this we should not lose sight of the fact that an elite few are reaping windfall profits from the ongoing events. And that those few occupy positions of extraordinary influence within the halls of government and industry, including all forms of media.
Now the profiteers are looking to expand the sales (and it is sales, we do pay for the injections people are receiving “for free”, via our tax dollars) to inject children over the age of 5. Considering the extremely high probability that most of the damage being done by these “vaccines” is going unreported, being almost entirely ignored by media, this is a move which is heinous in it’s disregard, if not it’s contempt, for the lives of the children being targeted.