Vaccine "hesitant" (pragmatic) VS Vaccine-ignorant obedient

[admin]

Vaccine "hesitancy" VS Vaccine-ignorant obedience

The term "vaccine hesitant" implies that there is some singular universal understanding that the current   unapproved, experimental, genetically engineered, chemically enhanced, biological agents are the answer to ending the COVID-19 pandemic, and thus anyone who hasn't been vaccinated is simply too stupid, or fearful, or just hasn't found the good sense to get around to it - yet. The widely parroted term was developed to demean, marginalize and isolate vaccine pragmatists - that investigate and wait to see what develops rather than blindly trusting government bureaucracies and Big Pharma profiteers - as being the lessors of those that took the jab, in the same way that Goebbels lied about and marginalized Jews in order to mobilize society against them. Lying about unvaccinated being the spreaders of COVID and responsible for creating variants, when the exact opposite is the truth, that vaccinated not only become infected by and carry, but also asymptomatically transmit COVID, while their systems create variants that dodge the narrowly focused leaky "vaccines". It may not be a coincidence that the group with the highest percentage of vaccine resistant individuals is that of PHDs. Far from being knuckle-draggers:  "Study Finds Most Highly Educated Americans Are Also the Most Vaccine Hesitant"

The propagandists narrative suggests that anyone that takes a wait-and-see approach before irreversibly receiving this never-before-tried technology involving genetically engineered organisms - that did not even undergo an animal testing phase before roll out - is somehow being unreasonable, even though vaccines traditionally take from 5 to 20 years of testing before acceptance. Let alone that these vaccines were only tested on healthy subjects on the younger side, with no groups of elderly or those with comorbidities, let alone pregnant women, in the trials. Yet criminally, those were some of the first groups the vaccines were administered to.

Since the U.S. government is a vaccine patent holder, and wildly profiting vaccine manufacturers are completely exempt from liability, the people that peddle the "vaccines" may not be the best place to turn for information or advice. Some unvaccinated simply have better instincts than to just blindly trust the government. Others may have investigated the criminal character of the corporations they would be betting their future health on. For most pragmatists it's a matter of continually calculating the risk VS benefit ratio.

The risk side of not getting vaccinated

"Globally, the survival rate for COVID-19 is 99.8%. Under the age of 70, the survival rate for COVID-19 is 99.97%."
While the U.S. boasts more deaths per 100,000 citizens than average, because we have maintained among the highest COVID death rates in the world, a person would still have to have been pretty sick or intellectually lazy to wind up among the 0.03% under 70 years old that died of COVID. Let alone the manipulation it took tojack the number up to even that high.
But more importantly, of that 0.03% or 3 in 10,000 that died (in the U.S. primarily because of Fauci's NIH "standard of care"), virtually 100% could have been saved through effective early treatment in the hands of competent clinicians like Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, Dr. Brian Tyson, Dr. George Fareed, Dr.s Jean Jacques and wife Dr. Juliana Cepelowicz Rajter, Dr. Simone Gold and hundreds to thousands more throughout the U.S. that are evidence based medical practitioners in the AFLDS, AAPS and FLCCC, as well as tens of thousands more around the world. As world renowned virologist and microbiologist Dr. Didier Raoult put it back in February of 2020 based on early treatment:  "Actually, from all respiratory infections it’s probably the easiest to treat."



So for someone that has prepared their system in advance of infection with a good diet and neutraceuticals, that has discussed and arranged in advance with their doctor to secure their preferred early treatment protocol, the calculation that I arrive at for the risk of not getting vaccinated - for me personally but not for the reader - at 70 years old and not too overweight with no significant comorbidities, might be somewhere in the neighborhood of 0.03% or 3 in 10,000 risk of dying, further reduced down to just 1% of that with effective early treatment. Or a 3 in 1,000,000 chance of dying of COVID. So the risk of not getting vaccinated is somewhat of a known. While even the FDA admits that the risk of getting vaccinated is entirely unknown in terms of developing future problems like "vaccine-enhanced disease".
Death is certainly not the only negative outcome from COVID, and some that allowed it to languish may suffer some damage for life, which is why effective early treatment is essential to nip it in the bud upon the initial onset of symptoms.
Perhaps the future will reveal that vaccination-reduced symptoms precluded some from having serious lingering symptoms, that unprepared unvaccinated received, and while a decision based on risk vs benefit must be frequently reconsidered, there is no such thing as anyone getting unvaccinated.

Risk side of getting vaccinated

On the risk of getting vaccinated, first, we don't know what we can't yet know, when volunteering to be a test subject in the trial of an unapproved, experimental, genetically engineered, chemically enhanced biological agent. But we can begin by visiting the NIH U.S. National Library of Medicine that, as of this writing on September 2, 2021, still had their red outlined box that included:

"IMPORTANT WARNING:
Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine is currently being studied to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. There is no FDA-approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19."

One would think that a vaccine recipient would have to have been informed of that before they got the jab, if this grand drug trial were to comply with the Declaration of Helsinki, regarding a requirement for test subjects in drug trials to be fully informed. Not that I am suggesting that the (heavily conflicted) FDA approval or disapproval of anything is of any relevance in this day and age, after witnessing their promotion of ineffective patented drugs like Remdesivir as the only approved treatment, while quashing proven, cheap, time-tested - near 99+% effective in elderly and high-risk individuals - generic drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.

Next if we visit the FDA site we will find:
https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download
"8.4.Unknown Risks/Data Gaps"
"Vaccine-enhanced disease
Available data do not indicate a risk of vaccine-enhanced disease, and conversely suggest effectiveness against severe disease within the available follow-up period. However, risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown and needs to be evaluated further in ongoing clinical trials and in observational studies that could be conducted following authorization and/or licensure."

Vaccine-enhanced disease response or pathogenic priming, is what killed ferrets in the animal testing phase, of prior failed mRNA vaccines. The ferrets started out with a robust immune response to the targeted virus, but as immunity waned and their systems were challenged by a wild virus, their systems overreacted and the ferrets died. One difference with today's mRNA vaccines is that they simply skipped the animal testing phase before roll out. Vaccine recipients are the animal testing phase.

What the FDA's warning seems to suggest is that anybody that claims the vaccines are safe, can either see into the future, is wishfully hoping, or is lying.

Rather than government bureaucrat Big Pharma shills or vaccine stakeholders, that are whistling past the literal graveyard while stuffing barrels of dough in their pockets, when we try to learn from brave front-line treating physicians that have been wildly successful in treating COVID patients ever since the pandemic began, and have increasingly been warning about vaccines through their evolving observations while vaccines are in increasing failure, we find pragmatic doctors labeled as "quacks" and "anti-vaxxers" in the New Speak of the left.

Like the "anti-vaxxer" Canadian Dr. Charles Hoffe that had vaccinated over 900 individuals before deciding that the vaccines were not remaining in the vicinity of the injection site as the manufacturers had claimed they would, but instead enter and travel throughout the vascular system, prompting his further investigation through D dimer testing and concluding that it's possible that 2/3 of vaccine recipients could die of heart failure within a few years, because of micro blood clots plugging and killing capillaries in the lungs, eventually resulting in their not being able to produce enough oxygen to operate the heart.

Another reluctantly-famous "quack" and "anti-vaxxer" is world class scientist and treating physician Dr. Peter McCullough, the author of 650 peer reviewed papers published in journals and editor-in-chief of two journals, who vaccinated hundreds of patients including his family before he halted vaccinations in light of the ever-mounting evidence of serious short term as well as potential long term consequences of the vaccines.

Of course the detractors of world class doctors are clueless parrot journalists fueled by Big Pharma's shill Anthony Fauci, who hasn't treated a patient in 35 years - much less for COVID-19 - yet for the last year and a half has remained on a pedestal far above peer review, as the uncontested COVID dictator of the U.S. and much of the rest of the world, while the complicit social as well as legacy media lapdogs censor successful front line treating physicians. This in spite of the fact that medicine is traditionally and most successfully engaged in as a collaborative effort. As Big Pharma's shill he not only has quashed effective early treatment with generic drugs and effectively killed 600,000Americans through his NIH "standard of care", but was apparently was highly instrumental in developing the disease itself, in the first place.

What have we learned about vaccines so far?

Well if someone is getting vaccinated so that they won't kill granny, or their coworkers, or fellow students, it would seem perhaps the exact opposite is what they may have accomplished.
Vaccinated people are becoming infected with COVID at the rate of 1/4 to 1/2 that of unvaccinated people.
Vaccinated people carry the same amount of viral load in their nostrils as unvaccinated, of which with the delta variant produces 250 to 1,000 times the viral load as last year's A/B strains.
Vaccinated people spread COVID to other vaccinated, as well as unvaccinated, people.
But here's the kicker.
It has been firmly established since near the beginning of the pandemic that unvaccinated persons cannot transmit COVID-19 unless they have symptoms.
Vaccinated people on the other hand can become infected by, can carry and can transmit COVID, without ever knowing that they have it. Thus they can be an ever-present around-the-clock danger to all those around them whether granny, family, friends, coworkers or fellow students. So vaccinated people can be asymptomatic super-spreaders of infection, or Typhoid Mary styled carriers, as opposed to unvaccinated who cannot spread it unless they are symptomatic.
As Dr. Peter McCullough put it: "This phenomenon may be the source of the shocking post-vaccination surges in heavily vaccinated populations globally."

So much for protecting others as a motivation for vaccination, when it would seem it is the vaccinated that should be checked weekly by their employers or schools, since that is the only way to tell if a vaccinated person is infectious or not.

But how are the vaccines holding up?

Those that got the jab were promised that they could put away their masks and life would return to normal, followed just weeks later that they were going to have to mask up and socially distance. If asked, I'm guessing most of those that got the jab were surprised when talk about a need for boosters began just a couple months after they got their jab, let alone that the schedule for boosters has already shrunk from 8 to 6 months. I wasn't surprised to read that Pfizer's first mention of boosters was to their shareholders. Meanwhile an Israeli study concluded that mRNA vaccines can loose 40% of their efficacy per month.

As far as how the vaccines are holding up to the Delta variant, Pfizer-BioNTech effectiveness is down to 42% and Moderna's down to 76%.

In Israel where vaccination was earlier and quite widespread, as is also the Delta variant:
64% of Israel’s COVID-19 patients in serious condition are fully vaccinated
40% of new COVID patients were vaccinated VS 1% who had been infected previously

And in England where Delta has become quite dominant:
U.K. - symptomatic COVID is up 40% in vaccinated, while down 22% in unvaccinated

So a reasonable counter to being labeled "vaccine hesitant" would be to label in return "vaccine-ignorant obedient", since not one person in a thousand or perhaps even one in ten thousand bothered to sufficiently investigate what the government was compelling them to do, to be able to draw a rational, reasonable and independent conclusion in regard to whether to get vaxxed or not. Most who did likely would not have, if they hadn't otherwise been worn down and talked into it by vaccine-ignorant people around them, or through the constant drumbeat of Big Pharma's lapdog media shills.