I’m a little tough to pin down.
A conspiratardorial deranged anti-vaxxer I am not.
But I’m not a blind worshipper of “science” as the tyrannical pro-vaccine forces boast they are.
I don’t presume to exploit science for political motive nor do I presume to drape superstition and fear with statistical dysfunction for the same reason.
The Left patronizes the Right’s ignorance and denial of science; the Right mocks the Left’s inability to use science objectively in order to unravel the self-apparent suspicions surrounding all things COVID.
Ultimately, those of us who graciously accept our subservience to “experts” are the losers. Experts are a dime-a-dozen in the internet age where everyone is an authority and bullshit is doled out freely.
I have little trust that the pharmaceutical industry’s concern for the well-being of their consumers extends beyond their ability to pay (ahem, insurance firms) for its product. Their business model, lucrative as it is, depends entirely on physical illness or at the very least, the threat of physical illness which must be thwarted with the remedy which is readily available courtesy of their scientific labs. The narrative is spun, a narrative that worms its way to the surface of today’s vaccine-shaming landscape, that to not do so is selfish, dangerous and damaging to society.
As I wrote here, I “willingly” got my Johnson & Johnson jab on April 9, just days before it was revealed that people were dropping like flies from blood clotting which was associated with a specific platelet disorder of the blood, which was associated with the vaccine. The ensuing “pause” was spent apprehensively waiting for symptoms to appear. I subjected myself to this quest for medical inquiry, the salvation of mankind and the eternal drive for corporate profit because it was my token familial effort to keep the peace. And also because at my age, any long-term effects of this experimental vaccine will most likely arise after I’m a goner. If I was in my teens or 20’s, I would not vaccinate. The pharmaceutical purveyors of cutting edge COVID rescue have enervated a dialogue in which their trial and error has experienced a full cyclical discovery period, but mRNA practical tech has not existed long enough to ascertain true long-term effects of the type that genetic hacking would manifest.
It’s OK, though, Pfizer and Moderna, the granddaddies of mRNA hacking and American bloodthirsty capitalist predominance have the market cornered. They’ve shaped the narrative and the narrative has been roused to life and, like a virus, spreads freely among the population with nary a raised eyebrow. You want proof? It’s in your face, plain as day.
To deny the preposterous for what it reveals is to join the viral chorus of blind obedience.
Should people who got the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine consider getting a booster shot of Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna?
The idea recently entered public discussion. Dr. Angela Rasmussen, a virologist based in Canada, tweeted that she received a booster shot of the Pfizer vaccine “to top off the J&J vaccine I received in April,” citing a number of unanswered questions about how protective the one-dose shot is against the ultra-contagious Delta variant of the coronavirus.
And the conclusion after the headline bell has been rung is: of course not.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the U.S. government’s top infectious diseases expert, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that there’s not enough data for the federal government to recommend a booster for people who received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.
New data suggest the Johnson & Johnson vaccine does quite respectably against the Delta variant.
Last week, the company issued a press release contending that its vaccine “generated strong, persistent activity against the rapidly spreading Delta variant and other highly prevalent [coronavirus] viral variants.”
The data show “the vaccine produces a strong neutralizing antibody response to the Delta variant,” UC San Francisco infectious diseases expert Dr. Monica Gandhi tweeted, meaning that the immune system of a person vaccinated with the Johnson & Johnson shot triggered a robust attack on the Delta variant.
Also important, Gandhi added in an interview, is that based on her communications with officials, she understands that people who received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine do not have a worse rate of vaccine failure than people who have received the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna shots.
“What’s compelling is that there is not a difference in breakthrough infections” between all three vaccines authorized for use in the U.S., Gandhi said.
The narrative has been broached and the idea planted.
Who is doing Pfizer’s bidding, I wonder.
Given the story’s volley headline and self-enclosed spike conclusion, what is the point in asking their question? Rhetoric? Why don’t they come back to us when they can tell us boosters are the next level of hypnosis. Right now it’s just corporate PR using the “news” as a broadcast voice.