If the COVID-19 Vaccines Are Dangerous, How Come the Media Isn't Telling Us? (Pt. 1 of What to Consider Before Getting a COVID-19 "Vaccine" or Semi-Annual Re-Vaxx)

-

NOTE: Below is part 1 of What to Consider Before Getting a COVID-19 "Vaccine" or Semi-Annual Re-Vaxx that was originally published May 24, 2021. If you haven't read the introduction, you may click the prior-referenced link to read it, which will also include the further parts that will be subsequently added.

#1 If the COVID-19 Vaccines Are Dangerous, How Come the Media Isn't Telling Us?
As of May 21, 2021, despite being a fraction of the billions upon billions of vaccines given since 1990 in the United States, COVID-19 vaccines represented 46.06% of all death (4,265 out of 9,258) and 21.65% (3,284 out of 15,165) of all permanent disability incidents reported since 1990 to the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) [*1], a voluntary-reporting tool healthcare workers and individuals may use if they believe a vaccine may have caused an injury or death (meaning not all possible incidents are recorded). U.S. COVID-19-vaccine incidents total 248,947, or 24.8% of all incidents reported since 1990, as of publication of this piece( UPDATE: as of, July 30, 2021, they total 40.9% worldwide on VAERS, with 603,686 incidents). . This percentage rapidly increases as we progress further into 2021 and beyond. You won't read about this most places, but the data can be readily accessed here [*2].

A report to VAERS doesn't necessarily mean the injury or death after a COVID-19 vaccine was definitively caused by that vaccine. But how many incidents are not reported to VAERS? A 2010 report on the VAERS system, submitted to a federal agency, stated [*3]:
[F]ewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. … Barriers to reporting include a lack of clinician awareness, uncertainty about when and what to report, as well as the burden of reporting: reporting is not part of the clinician's usual workflow, takes time, and is duplicative.
Why don't the vast majority of the media report negative COVID-19 vaccine information? It's important to recognize that you are not the customer. You are the product being delivered to the real customer: advertisers that include pharmaceutical companies with a vested financial interest in being paid for as many vaccine doses as possible.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., lawyer and vaccine-safety advocate, describes the dilemma in shocking detail in his foreword to Dr. Joseph Mercola's May 2021-published book, The Truth About COVID-19 [*4]:
Big Pharma’s $9.6 billion annual advertising budget gives these unscrupulous companies control over our news and television outlets. Strong economic drivers (pharmaceutical companies are the biggest network advertisers) have long discouraged mainstream media outlets from criticizing vaccine manufacturers. In 2014, a network president, Roger Ailes, told me he would fire any of his news show hosts who allowed me to talk about vaccine safety on air. "Our news division," he explained, "gets up to 70% of ad revenues from pharma in non-election years [emphasis added]."
Regarding social media companies' constant censorship and "fact checking" to ensure their readers (i.e. their human products they sell to advertisers) won't doubt the safety and/or efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, these companies are funded by advertisers that use the platforms to target specific people, including people that researched information on particular drugs. The Washington Post reported on March 4, 2020 [*5], "Spending on Facebook mobile ads alone by pharmaceutical and health-care brands reached nearly a billion dollars in 2019, nearly tripling over two years, according to Pathmatics, an advertising analytics company [emphasis added]." Advertisers go as far as to bully social media companies for not actively censoring "misinformation" about their products. According to Pfizer, one the biggest COVID-19 vaccine makers, as CBS reported on June 30, 2020 [*6]:
Pfizer said it will be removing all of its advertising from Facebook and Instagram for the month of July. “Today, we are asking Facebook to take proactive steps to ensure their platforms are safe and trusted spaces for all,” the company said.
And, Facebook and Instagram at least, not only bent the knee to Big Pharma but lowered both knees and assumed the position for them. In leaked documents from Facebook, released by Project Veritas on May 24, 2021 [*7], we learned Facebook actively removes or demotes comments by users sharing information they refer to as "vaccine hesitancy" via a trial program affecting 1.5% of their 3.8 billion world-wide users. The document reveals 19.42% of comments on pages discussing vaccination are negative or "vaccine hesitancy." Such comments represent 25.3% of those on "Health Authority Pages." Despite these comments being the minority, Facebook states a goal of reducing them further.



Comments that are anti-vaccine are outright removed, depending on their user-reach and level of discouragement, while comments that are true but not actively discouraging taking the vaccine, like personal stories about negative effects or factual information that's negative to the vaccines, are "demoted." This means hidden from other viewers, or, as it's colloquially referred to, "shadow banned."





Pages, groups, or accounts explicitly dedicated to discouraging vaccination are "removed" if they become too visible, while non-explicit vaccine-discouraging accounts simply have their comments related to "vaccine hesitancy" made less visible to the general public.



There's even a scoring system applied to comments for deciding what action the censorship algorithms will take.



We're all familiar with the labels social media puts on posts users share on any topic even tangentially related to COVID-19 vaccines, reminding us of how safe and effective they are alleged to be. We're also familiar with the "fact checks" they add to any negative vaccine information, to reassure us there is either another side of the argument or the article shared is "false," "mostly false," or (my favorite) "missing context." 

The social-media pleas they self-refer to as "fact checks" on COVID-19 vaccines are to ensure their customers (pharmaceutical companies) advertise on their platforms. But they are laughably inept. Even the "fact checks" from the general more-reputable media are feckless. Take this Reuters "fact check" on whether the vaccines prevent human-to-human-transmission of COVID-19 [*9]. Reuters admits the vaccines were never tested on human-to-human transmission (which, one would think, disqualify said pharmaceutical products from the label "vaccine") [*9] but argues that, because there is no evidence the labeled vaccines don't prevent human-to-human transmission, claims saying they don't are false.

There is no proof snake oil triples the size of the male penis, but, because there is no proof snake oil doesn't do this, doubting the veracity of the claim is false! See how this works? The aforementioned Reuters "fact check" is so feckless and wickedly dishonest, I screenshot it below, as it dispels belief when merely quoted.





The heuristic regarding the efficacy of substituting the word of authorities for foundational knowledge is usually a sound shortcut to navigate life decisions, since we can't critically examine everything we claim to "know" [*10]. We rely on news reports, papers, and books we commonly refer to as "authorities" to inform us as a proxy. We don't have the time or knowledge-base, let alone legal authority, to create pharmaceutical products in our basements, run experiments at home, and find 100,000 test subjects to track efficacy and safety of our creations. So, we trust the conclusions of authorities that have done similar things for us, who could easily get their data, let alone their conclusions from that data, wrong. How wrong? The UC San Diego News Letter reports [*11]:
[A May 21, 2021-published study *12] analyzed data from three influential replication projects which tried to systematically replicate the findings in top psychology, economic and general science journals (Nature and Science). In psychology, only 39 percent of the 100 experiments successfully replicated. In economics, 61 percent of the 18 studies replicated as did 62 percent of the 21 studies published in Nature/Science.
If the raw data the conclusions we call "science" are that inaccurate, imagine how much worse the sophistry of pharmaceutical-funded media and social media companies who relay this kind of information is?

Continued in Part 2: False Efficacy: the Difference Between Absolute and Relative Risk

All subsequent and prior parts to the full piece, as they are published, can be read here.
---
FOOTNOTES
[*1] https://stratagemsoftheright.blogspot.com/2021/05/covid-19-not-vaccines-represent-41-of.html
[*2] https://wonder.cdc.gov/vaers.html
[*3] https://digital.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/docs/publication/r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-2011.pdf
[*4] Mercola, Joseph; Cummins, Ronnie. The Truth About COVID-19 (p. xiv). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition. https://www.amazon.com/Truth-About-COVID-19-Lockdowns-Passports-ebook/dp/B08WRDXLVY
[*5] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/03/03/facebook-pharma-ads/
[*6] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/30/chobani-pfizer-and-sap-join-list-of-companies-pulling-faebook-ad-spend.html
[*7] https://www.projectveritas.com/news/breaking-facebook-whistleblowers-expose-leaked-internal-docs-detailing-new/
[*8] https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-transmission-idUSKBN29N1UH
[*9] https://stratagemsoftheright.blogspot.com/2021/04/to-get-or-not-get-not-vaccine-anatomy.html
[*10] https://stratagemsoftheright.blogspot.com/2021/02/evidence-in-long-shadow-of-civilization.html
[*11] https://archive.is/xLGE5#selection-181.208-181.247
[*12] https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/7/21/eabd1705
Science Advances 21 May 2021: Vol. 7, no. 21, eabd1705 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abd1705

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Analysis of the Moon-Hoax Confession Made by Eugene Ruben Akers

-
Image
On September 11, 2022, Bart Sibrel released a death-bed video by Eugene "Gillmore," whose real name was Eugene Ruben Akers, the son of Cyrus Eugene Akers, explaining how his father made a death-bed confession about Apollo 11 being filmed at Cannon Air-Force Base, by Clovis New Mexico, on June 1-3, 1968 [*1]. Eugene died on February 13, 2022. He did not want the video released until after his death. I transcribed the audio of Eugene Ruben Akers below. A link to the video recording is hyperlinked above ( and here ). Bart Sibrel notes the video was recorded on April 12, 2020 and taken by Eugene's son. Hello. My name is Gene Gillmore. Um, my birth-given name is Eugene Ruben Akers. I don't want any money for what I'm doing, because hopefully this video won't come out until after my death [note by Eugene's son: Died February 13, 2022]. So, I have nothing to gain, nothing to profit, by telling you what I'm going to tell you. And, um, a lot of what I'm go...
Read more

What You Should Know Before Opposing U.S. Employer-Mandated COVID-19 Vaccination (Especially in Illinois)

-
Image
NOTE: Since publishing this article, the Illinois legislature, during the last week of October 2021, passed a law that the Illinois governor will likely sign that may, or, as I argue, may not change Illinois' Healthcare Right of Conscience Act. On November 3, 2021, I published a piece discussing this issue you can read here . 1805 British political cartoon by James Gillray, "The Cow-Pock—or—the Wonderful Effects of the New Inoculation!” Edward Jenner vaccinates patients in the Smallpox and Inoculation Hospital at St. Pancras, as patients develop features of cows. The "anti-vaxx" debate has raged for centuries. In response to a U.S. executive order signed on September 9, 2021 [*1], and other executive orders signed by state governors, many employers are mandating employees receive COVID-19 vaccination or face termination ( UPDATE: On November 5, 2021, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration filed a regulation, going into effect January 4, 2022 , mandating ...
Read more

An Epistemological Study of Apollo 11: Is There a Noble Lie?

-
Image
This essay is divided into three parts: (1) a discussion of when, if ever, lying is noble, (2) proof that, in no uncertain terms, the Apollo manned lunar voyage and landing record is fraudulent, and (3) discussion of what the Apollo lie means and if it was justified. While readers less interested in an inquiry into the nature of truth (epistemology) are welcome to scroll down to the second part due to the length of this piece, the Apollo record, when skeptically analyzed, forces epistemological questions far more interesting than answering simply whether or not two or a dozen men landed on the Moon. Ask yourself: how do you know what you claim to know?  I. The Noble Lie Is there such a thing as a noble lie? We're all familiar with "white lie," the common sense adage to gracefully avoid giving a harsh opinion, especially regarding an inconsequential matter, to someone we care for. We recognize the possible good, at least to ourselves, in avoiding telling a spouse she look...
Read more

Exposing Lyndon Johnson's Apollo Fraud and Big Tech's Censorship of Bart Sibrel's Book, Moon Man

-
Image
NOTE:   This piece analyzes Bart Sibrel's September-2021-published book,  Moon Man: The True Story of a Filmmaker on the CIA Hit List , spoiling some of its shocking contents. Because the book is being digitally shadow-banned from searches, I aim to boost this critical information to the widest audience possible. Mr. Sibrel sacrificed his career and familial and church relationships to bring us the information in his book, only available on Amazon for now. Please click here and purchase a copy to support him  and visit his website here to follow him and purchase a copy of his two documentaries: A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon and Astronauts Gone Wild.   On September 22, 2021, an audio version of Moon Man will be available as well. To hobbyist Moon-landing deniers, like myself, the Apollo fraud, that occurred 1968-1972 (Apollo 8 through Apollo 17), is palpably obvious. The photographic record was shot in a studio with false backgrounds. The background...
Read more

When U.S. Republicans Will be Allowed to Win Again

-
Image
We know exactly how the U.S. political system works. (1) Millions of mail-in ballots are registered ahead of time in key districts around the country. (2) The voting machines are connected to the internet. (3) Remote operators access the machines, alter necessary data, and discover how many votes they need to "find" for the mail-in ballots. (4) Mail-in ballots are then released and/or produced and added to the totals to match what is needed for the desired candidates. (5) The desired candidate(s) then "win" the chosen election(s), despite mathematical improbability. (6) The U.S. media claims the result is legitimate and labels any questions or investigations raising doubt as "conspiracy theory" and a danger to "democracy." (7) Feckless boomers cave to media pressure and rhetoric enhanced by their friends and family who accept this media narrative. (8) Court challenges to the elections are dismissed without any hearing on the merits, as courts def...
Read more

An Epistemological Study of Apollo 15: What If We Never Went to the Moon?

-
Image
How much of our knowledge of the material world is derived from the authority of others as opposed to of our own investigation? Perfect certainty of truth in the material world is impossible; we simply approximate the greater odds that the knowledge we hold is correct versus not and believe accordingly. As the old adage goes, we see through a glass darkly. But we see enough. This is why criminal justice in many nations is served upon knowledge that guilt is beyond a reasonable doubt as opposed to by perfect certainty. There's always room for doubt, because knowledge of events in the material world can never be perfectly certain. To require perfect certainty before acting would paralyze all our activity. Thus, we never require it to take action. Even our most certain knowledge, like what we had for dinner last night, can't be held in perfect confidence. Our memories can fail us. While mathematics may be known with absolute certainty, as equations have objectively correct ans...
Read more

COVID-Vaccine Deaths Represent 75.13% of All Vaccine Deaths Reported on CDC's VAERS System Since 1990 (As of June 3, 2022)

-
Image
See anything unusual below? I pulled the above table from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for data through June 3, 2022 ("ALL LOCATIONS"), which is  available on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website  [*1] and tracks vaccine-related injuries and deaths in the United States since 1990. VAERS is a voluntary self-reporting tool that is used by health-care workers but can also be used by individuals. If an unexplained injury or death occurs, like from blood-clotting, temporally connected to a recent vaccine administered, a report can be made. This doesn't mean the injury or death was definitively caused by the vaccine. But how many incidents are  not  reported to VAERS? A  2010 report on the VAERS system, submitted to a federal agency, stated  [*2]: [F]ewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. … Barriers to reporting include a lack of clinician awareness, uncertainty about when and what to report, as well as ...
Read more

Adverse Effects from COVID-19 Vaccination Represent 62.12% of U.S. Vaccine-Related Deaths (and 67.03% of All) Reported to the CDC, 1990 - November 5, 2021

-
Image
NOTE: This piece will be periodically updated to include the latest data available (LAST UPDATED NOVEMBER 14, 2021). See anything unusual below?    I pulled the above table from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for data through November 5, 2021 ("ALL LOCATIONS"), which is available on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website [*1] and tracks vaccine-related injuries and deaths in the United States since 1990. When the search is refined to "U.S./territories/unknown," the figure halves, meaning over half of deaths reported to the CDC come from outside the U.S ( UPDATE: I explore this anomaly in a piece here,  about 1/5th of VAERS reports are foreign, but HALF of COVID-19 deaths are foreign , which is evidence of shenanigans or gross underrepresentation in the U.S. data reporting).     VAERS is a voluntary self-reporting tool that is used by health-care workers but can also be used by individuals. If an unexplained injury or d...
Read more

The Broken Thumb: Heuristics in the Fall of Civilization

-
Image
Most knowledge comes from a rule of thumb, a heuristic, that because a consensus of authorities portrayed to us by our news media and educational and governmental institutions state something to be true, it must, therefore, be true. It's not that we observe for ourselves the events reported in the news, history books, Google searches, or the data that constructs what we call science. Instead, we place trust in authorities telling us what is true. Our knowledge is a proxy, a symbol of our trust in these authorities. We assume these authorities almost always, or at least usually, state the truth and that we can rely on that truth to plan our day-to-day lives. This is the foundation of what we call civilization. You don't have to build most items you use from scratch; you trust an expert to furnish you with that item in exchange for money. You don't have to examine the item you're purchasing and test it yourself or even understand how it works; you can, instead, read revie...
Read more

When They Realized They Could Get Away with Anything...

-
Image
How did we get here? How did we go from "two weeks to slow the spread" to a demand for perpetual jabs in exchange for seasonal permission to engage in public leisure and our right to earn a living [*1]? How did an obviously-senile man become ruler of the post-free world, as we pretend he (and not his handlers) makes decisions for us? Why the Wicked Need Our Irrational Belief to Rule Us The  comically-obvious U.S. election fraud of 2020 [*2],  that even foreign leftists are not only conceding but worrying about the ramifications of  [*3], reveals how critical controlling the U.S. is to the global power structure that rules us. The U.S., as an empire, rules most of the world, not with an iron fist, but implicitly, as decisions in jurisdictions around the world commonly mirror U.S. policy. Non-U.S. jurisdictions fear the consequences of not following U.S. lead, like economic sanctions, potential military action, or the U.S. intelligence apparatus overthrowing their govern...
Read more