By all means, dig up some experts and discuss the merits or demerits of vaccinations … forced or unforced.
It would make a nice change.
I had a telephone consultation with a medical professional on Tuesday, and enquired about fears over a vaccine being mandatory… she said it’s very highly unlikely, and would be available under the current flu vaccination scheme, that of choice.
So you’re fine.
However, “herd immunity” requires a certain critical percentage of the population to be vaccinated or to acquire immunity by exposure.
The vaccine is much more likely to kill me than the virus ever will, which begs the question… why the hell do they put in them what they do? and for what valid and sound reason?
Make vaccines safe again??
Good point, it may be better to call them technocrats.
The technocrats occupy an interesting juncture where science and technology meet business, politics and media.
And there’s nothing necessarily wrong with occupying that juncture.
The trouble comes when they have no respect for democracy or individual and intellectual liberty, and when they don’t have our best interests at heart or in mind.
As a populist, democracy and liberty precede technocracy,
Yes, and they tend to have (human)weaknesses without realizing it. That last part of that is key. It translates into hubris and contempt for critics.
They think that if it can be done, it should be done. I am with the Amish as far as the idea that things should be looked at to see their subtler effects on experiencing life, community, self, etc.
They think that if someone cannot be measured or is too hard at this time to measure, we can just pretend that only those things that can be measured matter. You can see this with things like mandatory drug testing where they will admit to a tiny degree of false positives, but not the very hard to track effects around power dynamics, what some people have the power to test others SAYS to children and adults about what they are and how much they matter. And the effects of growing up where this is the de facto message of mandatory drug testing in schools and workplaces.
They are not trained in introspection or philosophy, so to not have insight in how they themselves may be manipulated by power brokers, may not realize what they do not want to notice because of how they might feel about how they are being used, have little insight into paradigmatic biases and more.
You know they’re lab-created/synthetic and not naturally occurring components, right?
…and therein the problem lies, and was created… in the lab.
I know. That’s not necessarily bad or harmful. And the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks or harm for most people.
That’s not what I’ve been hearing from the experts on the other side… those against Bill Gates, the Clinton Foundation, the deep state, and what they plan to do.
Even these experts are saying what I’ve been saying, that how can they issue a mandatory vaccine and nobody know what is in it… also, once a vaccine has been deemed safe they often swap it for another (untested toxic) one.
Next… 5g
The medical professionals are interested in producing safe and effective vaccines. They are not going to be intentionally producing toxic, dangerous and harmful vaccines. They are not going to be “swapping in” toxic ones.
We are not surrounded by unethical, immoral, malicious and evil people. Most people are caring.
‘Why did you throw (insert population group here) into the ovens’?
‘I was just following orders’.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_human_experimentation_in_the_United_States#1960s
And that’s just what’s on record, on Wikipedia, which’s ran by Marxists.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m__SMOo8rZw[/youtube]
We thought lobotomies were loving and scientific back then, but we’re sure giving babies consecutive aluminum and mercury injections is loving and safe now.
‘But our checks and balances are better today than they were yesterday’.
But they could still be massively improved.
They rush vaccines to market shortly after testing only hundreds of people.
The studies are overseen by people with ties to vaccine companies.
Ultimately we the people are the real checks and balances, if thousands of people and parents didn’t successfully sue and press big pharma to make changes, no doubt they’d be injecting us with many times more soft metals than they are today.
You don’t have anything which shows that vaccines are harmful do you have to refer to come vague dangers.
Vaccine companies are successfully sued for damages all the time in the US, it’s been proven in court, that they’re harmful.
Coffee is harmful too because some granny successfully sued McDonald’s after she spilled hot coffee on herself.
It can be harmful, a strong case can be made they make that shit too hot.
Nothing is absolutely proven, but being successfully sued for damages in court by thousands of people is a mark against your product.
In the US vaccine companies are not liable, however one can sue via the government. IOW taxpayer money can be used as compensation if you can show that vaccines have damaged you or your child. The court is extremely biased against suit claims, however so far they have paid out 4 billion dollars.
Further the way you responded to makes ‘we aren’t surrounded by’ immoral people or people who mean to do us harm. That’s a straw man argument. Very few people are arguing anything remotely like that. Beyond that it just assumes, but carefully does not assert, that to contaminate a vaccine or to ignore data, needs to be done by a large percentage of the corporation making the vaccine (not to speak of ‘all the people we are surrounded by’. But it doesn’t require that. You would not need many people at all.
It’s interesting that many of the critics of vaccines talk about the additives and adjuvants in the vaccines. In the Swine flu virus, the government of germany and other power brokers had pure vaccines made without all these extra chemicals. It was discovered. This was embarrassing. It was supposedly not going to be distributed.
But what did they know. Why would a company go along with giving the most powerful people a vaccine that should be less effective than the one they would be distributing to less powerful people. REally, that’s just not how corporations work.
Right now the precautionary principle is hardly used at all. GM foods spread with little public information extremely rapidly including into farm animals aimed at food. Wireless technologies includling the one that scares a lot of doctors and scientists 5G is ready to come out now. Nano tech is spreading with little debate, despite the fact that nano particles are showing up in animals brains. That’s right in animal brains and probably ours.
Very few people believe that if you get a vaccine you will drop over. A few do. A few others developed problems quite fast. The primary worry is the longer term effects on the immune and nervous systems. More subtle effects that will be incredibly hard to distinguish from the effects of all these other technological experiments.
I really can’t get how someone coming from the Soviet Union cannot imagine that groups of people with power might put at risk people’s health, not take enough care, or knowingly expose people to dangerous things. because they don’t care or because they intend to.
What will it take for people to consider it possible that power can corrupt, that governments can do horrible things and hide them and that corporations can. I understand wanting more evidence, but in responding to Mags it is as if she is per se silly to even consider it.