When the New York Times publishes something, it is a sign to the coastal elites that it is okay to discuss it. Here are some guidelines, what you are to believe and disbelieve, none of which should be mistaken for reporting. These are instructions. They expand the narrative bubble to control the messaging.
Especially if the content substantiates something previously labeled by the Left as a right-wing conspiracy, like people harmed by the COVID injections, but here we are, three years and some months into a massive experiment, and the Paper of Record (at least for progressives) is opening the door just enough to allow its readers to broach the subject at the water cooler.
People of the Left. Vaccine injuries are real, with conditions.
Provisos, Restrictions, Limitations…
You are officially permitted to acknowledge COVID vaccine injuries (including yours) on the following terms. They exist. People suffer. Some of those people are progressives (more than average, given the uptake demographics). And they’ve been suffering in silence. Serious side effects are rare. Death from a COVID vaccine is still tied up in the stall. We’re not discussing it. I also saw no mention of mRNA, not that it matters. This story is not about how the Public Health Industrial Complex fast-talked a gazillion people into rolling up their sleeves for something that was neither safe nor effective. It is about how when harm happens, as rare as that is, the system isn’t very good at helping.
It is a “yes, vaccine injuries are real” smokescreen for a “government should do more” screed.
The Times thinks that corporate immunity (PREP) protections are the problem – which they are – but in this admission, the relationship is little more than an abused spouse who refuses to tell the police anything but how clumsy she is. I fell down the stairs. Again.
She has two left feet.
The NYT remedy for that “problem” is the same system that didn’t listen during the Pandemic and isn’t listening after it. As Jeff Childers notes, the cure is more of what didn’t work to fix what’s not working.
How could all this anti-progressive gaslighting and illiberal lack of sympathy have possibly happened? How can the Times reconcile this long period of denial and deception? Because it’s just so darn difficult to track vaccine injuries, and because we need even bigger government, that’s how:
The nation’s fragmented health care system complicates detection of very rare side effects, a process that depends on an analysis of huge amounts of data. That’s a difficult task when a patient may be tested for Covid at Walgreens, get vaccinated at CVS, go to a local clinic for minor ailments and seek care at a hospital for serious conditions. Each place may rely on different health record systems.
There is no central repository of vaccine recipients, nor of medical records, and no easy to way to pool these data. Reports to the largest federal database of so-called adverse events can be made by anyone, about anything. It’s not even clear what officials should be looking for.
Remember that time during the Pandemic when everyone who hates privacy and freedom insisted we should all have to carry around passports to move about in public? They thought paperwork to ensure you were inoculated with the government-approved serum that did not stop the infection from spreading would stop the spreading. More of them are the cure for this.
Yes, please, may I have another (the government punches Liberty in the face).
Hard Pass
Times readers might be doe-eyed by it all. A lover softly whispering I’m sorry, let’s work this out, along with a soft-sell story about people like them suffering from their blind embrace of everything wrong with what went wrong. We weren’t all in this together, but some of us are in this together, so let’s dust off the wife beater and grab the largest bottle of Knob Creek we can find and see how long it takes for me to “fall down” the stairs again?
But what about the revelation? COVID “vaccines” did cause injuries. That has to mean something!
You see, covid vaccine injuries are brand new types of injuries, so what can you expect from busy, hardworking scientists? Dr. Woodcock explained, “I mean, you’re not going to find ‘brain fog’ in the medical record or claims data, because it doesn’t have a good research definition.” The former FDA Commissioner insisted, “It isn’t, like, malevolence on their part.”
It’s not like malevolence. It is malevolence. It’s like deliberate institutional neglect. But they meant well. “Federal officials,” the Times explained, “worry that even a whisper of possible side effects feeds into misinformation spread by a vitriolic anti-vaccine movement.” But health agencies’ duty is to pursue the truth, even when it’s complex or inconvenient, not to curate a simplified narrative for their perverse perception of an infantilized general public.
They should be more concerned with letting the government do stuff (any stuff), but maybe that’s just me. And perhaps that has something to do with the Times spoon-feeding its audience a taste of reality. It’s a sampler narrative. Take a sip or a bite, and if you know someone with inexplicable post-Jab complications or someone who knows someone, it’s okay to say that out loud to someone other than your therapist. But don’t get too carried away.
The issue isn’t how the government lied to you and hurt you and how the media helped cover it up to prevent people from avoiding the potential for harm; it is how the government is going to help us next! It’s risky.
This snowball at the top of the Matterhorn could gain both size and momentum, but maybe that’s a good thing for them. An out-of-control problem of that scope can only ever be handled by the government, right? So let’s agree on that (hopes, the Times).
Hard Pass (Again)
Let’s agree that the response to the Pandemic was Pandemic in scope and so poorly handled that it created this problem with the help of the New York Times.
That if you let people go about their business and take Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin if they wanted to instead of engaging in medical witch trials, a lot of people might still be alive and healthy, and this Times article never gets written.
You’d (of course) have had no excuse for vote-by-mail, and Biden wouldn’t be president. No war in Ukraine. Peace in the Middle East. Russia, China, and Iran would still likely be cowed. Our economy would be stronger, gas cheaper, and there would be no Federal EV mandates or rapid transgendirification of the military. Neither the Taliban nor China would have many billions of dollars worth of US military hardware (abandoned in Afghanistan). The National Debt would be lower, still too high, but not like it’s risen under Uncle Joe. The Blue States and cities would not be underwater with the swarms of invaders because the border would have stayed secure, and immigration laws would have been enforced. The drug overdose and drug gang problem that had receded under Trump would not have reemerged, so more friends and loved ones would be alive. Crime would likely be lower, wages higher, and we’d have real job growth instead of the fake-Biden- government jobs-growth-Potemkin-village.
And the number of vaccine-injured would be a lot lower.
But that’s not what we got, nor what they want. Democrats vote for decline, even when faced with it, then vote for more of it, dragging everyone else along for a ride whose only allowable response or cure is more of what made things worse.
But they did admit there were vaccine injuries.
