The following is commentary intended for discussion. Add your comments.
Some public health officials are presenting one-sided and, sometimes, inaccurate information in an attempt to push as many people as possible to get the Covid-19 vaccine.
It seems clear theses officials believe they need to do so to meet their goals, and those of the vaccine industry.
The media assists with weirdly one-sided reporting that pretends as though there are only benefits to vaccination, ignores natural immunity, and pretends there are no incidences of side effects from vaccination.
It’s contrary to how any normal news story used to be covered.
Today, there is no time or space given to full scientific studies and views if they are not in line with what the government and vaccine industry are promoting.
News personalities and reporters openly serve as advocates for one side in controversies rather than presenters of information.
Rare instances of healthy people dying of Covid are given great prominence– as long as the victims were unvaccinated. Stories of people who get sick and regret not getting vaccinated are also reported in a one-sided fashion and given great attention.
Never is there a balance of viewpoints or stories highlighting the majority of people who recover from Covid-19, or who get it and have no symptoms, or are who are injured by the vaccine and regret their decision to get vaccinated.
What the public health officials and media fail to grasp is that the very strategy they’re using to try to convince the public to get vaccinated ends up making many people skeptical of the advice and of vaccination when they otherwise might not have been.
Millions of Americans are reading studies that don’t get much publicity, have doctors who are giving them information contrary to the public health narrative, and are using their own common sense.
So they recognize they are only getting part of the story in much of the media and from public health officials.
That makes them wonder: what else are these entities hiding? They become skeptical of everything.
Public health officials haven’t figured out that even with a great deal of censorship of factual information that’s contrary to the government-vaccine narrative, people still seek knowledge and have ways to get impartial information.
Instead of advocating for one path only in the face of emerging science or scientific controversies, public health officials and the media should take care to acknowledge what’s disputed and what’s unknown.
The best way to build confidence in public health advice, and to repair the damage in confidence, is for public health officials to be forthright and accurate in presenting information.
What do you think? Leave your comments below.
Next time you go into a cemetery, see if you find any baby graves. Look at the dates of birth and death. See how close the death date is to the 2-, 4, or 6-month “well baby” checkup dates. The other day, I saw a grave with the baby’s death date being only one day after his 4-month birthday. I’m guessing there are many such graves, with babies who may well be alive today if the parents had resisted those “well baby” visits.
You have to ask yourself why would the CDC restricted the use of ivermectin, and hydroxycloriquine in the fight against Covid? You would think if getting over the pandemic was the goal then all tools to combat it would be left on the table. Why not push prevention. Several prominent physicians have stated zinc, vitamins B12, D, C are huge when it comes to prevention. But you don’t hear any of this. All you hear is the push to get vaccinated. Something stinks!
My hesitancy is due to the lack of debate and outright censorship about the safety of vaccines, the true numbers of patients dying FROM SARS-COV-2 rather than WITH it, the efficacy of masks, vaccine-related injuries and deaths, therapeutics like HCQ and Ivermectin, etc. There’s no informed consent without that debate. It’s gotten to the point that I probably won’t even get a flu vaccine this year because I no longer trust the CDC or NIH. The insane push to vaccinate children – even babies! – without knowing if there will be long-term side effects really crosses the line. The desperate push for vaccination rather than therapeutics is extremely suspicious. What’s behind it – money, big pharma?
To me, this describes what has been happening all over the world since the covid mess began: It is well worth watching.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09maaUaRT4M
All good points. I dug back into college biology to resurrect information on DNA, RNA and the human immune system. The vaccine was the right thing for me, since I am in a high risk group. It may not be the same for others.
Very timely. I had just read Yahoo News’ latest ivermectin hit piece – facts available at c19study.com – and was wondering why no one else was seeing it.
Thanks.
I am aware of two people who were fully vaccinated and caught COVID. They were briefly hospitalized and recovered after receiving monoclonal antibody treatment. When they felt better, they checked their hospital paper-work and found they were labeled as “unvaccinated.” This might begin to explain why a nation like Israel has admitted that most of their new COVID cases are in vaccinated people and yet the U.S. says we have “an epidemic of the unvaccinated.” Maybe we are not being given accurate information here.
I would like to see a poll of vaccinated, had they waited, would have chosen to not get the jab. I did not because the long term effects have yet to be determined and I was not willing to participate in that experiment. When the vaccinated start dying from side effects there will be a much bigger emergency.
It is sad that so many people have such a difficult time getting objective and timely information on this issue . Information that is not skewed by the press, the politicians, and the media. It is evident that folks reading Sharyl Attkisson newsletter’s are finding information that is not inside the lame stream media box, and not censored by big tech. This information needs to become mainstream.
I’ve been told that the recent “FDA approval” the media is touting is actually inaccurate and false, but I can’t find any link or document or explanation – anyone have more info on this? I work for a local government and any second now I’m expecting a mandate – get it or lose it – I’m fully prepared to demand a religious exemption, have all my ducks in a row, but I’m getting more and more nervous listening to the workplace rumor mill and this supposed FDA approval (which shouldn’t even have happened until 2023 at the earliest. My workplace doesn’t even enforce the mask mandate (they tell the shot takers they’re okay, but tell the rest of us to put it on – the mandate in place says “regardless of status”) but there you go! They want everyone to plainly see which of us did it, and which of us has a brain and uses it!
“It’s contrary to how any normal news story used to be covered.”
An interesting “then and now” comparison, as it pertains to this particular “news story” –i.e. vaccines and the news coverage of such–would be how the MSM covered the Swine Flu vaccine, created and aggressively promoted by our government under President Ford, in/or about 1976.
I recall there was a lot of skepticism and “vaccine hesitancy” on the part of the general public (only 32% eventually got the vaccine), but I don’t recall how exactly the MSM of the day covered the whole story, from outbreak (at Army base Fort Dix) to mass vaccination efforts.
I do recall, however, when a small percentage of the vaccinated developed Guillian-Barre Syndrome as a side effect of the vaccine, they reported that fact rather intensely.