Why Did the Government Lie About the COVID Vaccines?

The increasing freedom of information enabled by an uncensored media is gradually waking people up to the many harmful things being done to them on a daily basis. That uncomfortable reality is traumatic to come to terms with, which in turn leads many to want to understand why it’s happening.

In my own case, whenever I observe something pernicious, my question is always whether the events were:

• A naturally emergent phenomenon resulting from human nature and the specific circumstances at play — one that likely would have occurred regardless of who was involved.
• A coordinated plot by a group of bad actors (e.g., powerful sociopaths) who deliberately harmed the world for their own benefit.

Virus Mania: Corona/CO... Scoglio, Stefano Check Amazon for Pricing. The essential problem is that in most cases, a strong case can be made for either interpretation, so which one you settle on is typically a product of what your mind is primed to focus on. In my own case, I seriously consider both — I’ve spent decades reading about the people behind the scenes who pull the strings, and I’ve lost count of how many malevolent things I’ve seen enacted in a coordinated, systematic manner over years if not decades. But as time has gone on, I’ve leaned toward the naturally emergent perspective because:

• I keep seeing the same processes play out across so many different spheres.
• In many cases, bad actors don’t directly orchestrate things so much as amplify existing dysfunctional dynamics to move things in their preferred direction.
• Putting all your focus on one bad actor rarely proves productive. Those fights drag out for years and rarely go anywhere (e.g., we are still waiting for Fauci to be brought to justice for COVID), and intensely focusing on a single person just creates a niche for other bad actors to do the same thing. In contrast, focusing on the core dynamics that allow evil to arise provides a much more lasting immunity against it.

For example, all things considered, the COVID-19 health freedom movement has been incredibly successful — accomplishing much more than I ever expected — but it has still fallen short of many of its key goals. Much of this stems from continual fracturing and infighting that has prevented MAHA from presenting a unified front to lobby for systematic policy changes. Partly because of this, RFK Jr. (who is still accomplishing a lot) has been unable to implement many of the most contested MAHA health policies the federal apparatus is doing everything it can to undermine.

As a result, many commentators have convinced their audiences that MAHA’s leadership sold out, while others are convinced the pharmaceutical industry has intentionally planted divisive voices to accelerate fractures — along with a smaller minority who believe pharma is using tools like bots to amplify divisive voices, incentivizing them through internet engagement rather than direct payments.

While I recognize it’s possible there are “controlled opposition” figures in the movement — particularly since both I and associates have periodically seen obvious plants inserted into much smaller movements we worked with — I believe the natural emergence hypothesis (likely amplified by bots and mainstream media) is far more probable because:

• I’ve seen the exact same dynamics in many smaller groups I’ve been involved with — disruptive members trying to defame or “controlled opposition” a leader I knew with certainty was completely committed to the cause. Ultimately, much of this resembles the gossip and reputational violence I dealt with from mean girls in high school, which I was then shocked to encounter again as a medical student and resident at multiple hospitals.
• In any movement, there will always be a spectrum from people deeply committed to the cause to those who join out of convenience or self-interest and are motivated to prioritize themselves over the group. No one is perfect, so even the most committed people, once put under a microscope, have potentially questionable traits. And individuals who have been marginalized their entire lives — who learned they can’t trust people when opposing the system — will be prone to traumatic, overreactive responses that can easily be misinterpreted as sinister.

Because of all this, my fear from the start was that the same fractures I’d seen everywhere else would appear in the COVID-19 health freedom movement. My goal has been to serve as a positive counterweight: promoting people with integrity who I felt were doing good work, working to create a standard others would be incentivized to replicate (e.g., factual, clear positions strongly supported by evidence), advocating for unity and compassion, and — when it was necessary to speak out, regardless of my frustration — attacking ideas rather than people.

The Nature of Government

In virtually every era, a large portion of the population concludes their government is evil, and in many cases, political schools emerge arguing that government itself, rather than who specifically occupies it, is inherently evil. The COVID-19 VACCINES ... Thorp MD, James A. Check Amazon for Pricing.

I personally consider this a dynamic subject. Strong arguments exist for the “evil” perspective: bad leaders routinely emerge who poison entire governmental systems, and governments frequently adopt the same tyrannical behaviors. But at the same time, my own experience interacting with government workers is that while there are some manipulative sociopaths in the hierarchy, many members of government genuinely want to do the right thing and try hard to do it.

My essential conclusion has been that the nature of government’s role (being responsible for solving problems, having only imperfect solutions available, and then having to force the population into accepting policies with downsides many don’t want) inevitably leads to increasing overreach. This is compounded by the fact that humans never want to admit they or their institutions are wrong, so there is always a tendency to double down on bad policies rather than admit fault and correct them.

This problem gets worse as governments grow. Larger and larger factions emerge that prioritize their own interests over the populace. And humans have a finite number of people they can be present to and hold real empathy toward, so once officials become responsible for thousands or millions of distant people, those they serve transform from being people into intellectual constructs. At that point, it becomes possible to mentally rationalize enacting abhorrent policies upon them that you would never inflict on your neighbor.

Since the sociopathic minority of society will always be drawn to positions of power, and then be favored for ascending the hierarchy, because they will do far more ruthless things to get ahead, I believe one of the best solutions humanity has developed for governance is the American Constitution’s emphasis on absolute individual rights and a system of checks and balances, where different parties are forced to compete against each other and hence not stray too far from policies the public can stomach, as otherwise they lose power to another group.

Governments and Vaccines

Much in the same way people act the same way in every era, governments do as well, and as such, if you can observe how a previous situation similar to the one at hand was handled, you can reasonably predict what will happen in the present.

In the case of vaccines, ever since the first ones in the days of smallpox, a very similar pattern has repeatedly emerged:

1. Governments will enthusiastically embrace an imperfect or rushed vaccine to address a public health issue or crisis.
2. The unproven vaccine will initially be met with great fanfare and promise.
3. The vaccine will have safety and efficacy issues which make the public resistant to it.
4. The government (and often medical profession) will gaslight the public by trying to cover up those objections and continue holding to the rosy picture they initially promised despite having extensive evidence the vaccine actually has serious safety issues (or does not work).
5. The public will grow increasingly opposed to the vaccines.
6. The government will eventually begin blaming the failures of the vaccine on not enough people vaccinating (or boosting) and institute a series of increasingly aggressive mandates.
7. If the vaccine is harmful enough, public protest will eventually shift the government and overturn the mandates. If this happens, the incident will then be erased from public memory and very few will ever realize there was a serious issue with some of the previous vaccines.

So, starting with smallpox, a key goal with this newsletter has been to show how again and again that happens in the hope we can break this dysfunctional cycle. Sports Researchu00ae O... Check Amazon for Pricing.

Note: presently I believe the government’s irrational obsession with vaccines results from the fact mass distributing vaccines and forcing people to take them is something that governments (wishing to exercise their power) can easily do, whereas addressing the actual causes of disease is much more challenging with a top-down approach (especially if powerful interests are poisoning the population for profit). Alternatively, a good case can be made that a malignant religion has formed around vaccines and infected large segments of the professional and ruling class.

Because of all of this, when the COVID vaccines came out, especially given that the marketing and propaganda push for them was much more aggressive than anything I’d seen in my lifetime I assumed:

• The benefits of the vaccines were being overstated, the harms understated, and there was likely significant fraud in the clinical trials that produced the “95% effective” claim (much of which was apparent if you read Pfizer’s December 2020 clinical trial report with a careful eye and was later proven by numerous trial whistleblowers).

• Serious issues with the vaccine, particularly long-term autoimmune, fertility and cancer ones would emerge (as leaked regulatory documents in December 2020 showed Pfizer was exempted for testing for these despite them being the greatest concerns with the vaccine), but by the time these issues were partially acknowledged, it would be too late to do anything.

• Rather than admit these issues, the government would cover them up, and at most would make a few token admissions of vaccine harm to make the public believe the core products were safe (e.g., after the FDA briefly paused the non-mRNA vaccine because it was linked to six cases of a very rare blood clot, many doctors were convinced vaccine safety monitoring was excessively strict and hence that the government not acknowledging any safety issues with the mRNA vaccines proved none existed).

• A series of increasingly aggressive policies would be taken to get as many people as possible to vaccinate, with a more aggressive approach being taken once the maximum uptake from the previous approach had been reached (as more extreme mandates could only be enacted once a sufficient portion of the population was vaccinated). This is essentially why they went from a scarcity model to increasingly sleazy financial incentives to soft mandates to hard mandates (e.g., being fired if you didn’t vaccinate).

Nonetheless, I was still astounded at how high the injury rate was once the vaccine came out (every day I had multiple patients who came in for reactions to the vaccine) and within a month, I had people I knew from around the country contacting me to ask if the vaccine could cause heart attacks, blood clots or strokes (as this had just happened to someone they knew). Given this, I was a bit surprised the government still committed to completely covering it up (as the scale of it was beyond what the government could cover up, so committing to doing so would be guaranteed to break public’s trust in the government).

Nonetheless, they did, and to this day still continue to lie.

Did the Government Lie?

NatureWise Vitamin D3 ... Buy New $14.99 ($0.04 / Count) (as of 11:50 UTC - Details) One of the major reasons why pernicious gossip and reputational violence often sticks is because when people do not fully understand a situation, they will default to filling in the blanks by assuming they know someone else’s intentions and then using that assumption to explain everything which has happened. Sometimes those assumptions are correct, but in many other cases they are not (e.g., some of the caricatures I’ve seen made of people in this movement I know quite well have almost nothing to do with who these people actually are).

In law, a much higher standard applies: in civil defamation cases involving public figures or matters of public concern, it is quite difficult to hold someone liable unless there is strong evidence that they knew their statement was false at the time or acted with reckless disregard for the truth (which must be shown by clear and convincing evidence, which often requires near ironclad proof of the speaker’s state of mind). Likewise, for criminal perjury, prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person knowingly and willfully made a false statement under oath about a material matter (rather than just being careless or not knowing their statement was false).

Remarkably however, we have gradually met that (nearly impossible) standard with the COVID vaccines. For example, Anthony Fauci, to dispel the notion COVID-19 leaked from a lab (which he funded), at the start of the pandemic repeatedly cited an expert paper that stated COVID-19 could have only emerged naturally. Documents provided by the House Oversight Committee subsequently revealed Fauci pushed for that study, was heavily involved in its drafting, and that he worked with the NIH director to quash “lab leak rumors” once the initial paper failed to. Likewise, documents and Slack leaks showed that the authors of the paper seriously doubted the natural origin hypothesis they published.^1,2,3

Note: while it is not possible to read minds, my experience has been that “past actions are the best predictor of future behavior,” so much in the same way governments or societies tend to repeatedly act the same way, if an individual has a history of acting in a specific dishonest or unscrupulous manner (e.g., Fauci always lies), you can reasonably assume they will continue to do so, and I cannot count how many times this has saved me (e.g., if someone I just met did something sketchy out of the blue, I immediately distanced myself from them and in a few cases, learned of them subsequently harming someone else when they were alone together in private or financially in some type of business arrangement).

With the COVID vaccines, while the focus was typically on the figurehead Anthony Fauci, when I went through everything, the issues kept on coming back to Peter Marks, the director of the FDA’s center for biologics (which oversees the vaccine division).

Briefly:
•Within the FDA Peter Marks continually pushed for expediting COVID vaccine approvals (that were necessary for White House political goals), even as the FDA’s top vaccine experts (who strongly supported vaccination) said the timeline was too fast and too many corners were being cut—eventually resulting in Marks pushing them out and the approvals occurring. Sports Researchu00ae V... Check Amazon for Pricing.

•Throughout the COVID vaccine process, Marks insisted the vaccines were rigorously tested, no corners were being cut, and there was no evidence the vaccines had any safety issues.

•In private, he continually met with vaccine injured patients over vaccine safety concerns but would always find some type of way to deflect the validity of the evidence presented (e.g., refuse to discuss it, say the FDA needed more time to conduct an analysis to find a signal, blame the injuries on something else) and most importantly, despite many requests, would never define what would constitute acceptable proof of vaccine harm.

•As he stonewalled the vaccine injured patients he continually insisted he cared about them and was deeply empathetic for their suffering (a common manipulative tactic dishonest people use). Remarkably, as he was doing this, he attended a vaccine conference where he publicly stated “It’s crazy that they don’t get how great vaccines are…I am past trying to argue with people who think that vaccines are not safe.”

All of this, in turn, is summarized in much more detail here.

Read the Whole Article

WEEM Hair Skin and Nai... Check Amazon for Pricing. Physician’s CHOI... Check Amazon for Pricing. BIOptimizers Magnesium... Check Amazon for Pricing. Garden of Life Once Da... Check Amazon for Pricing.