Posted on Mar 7, 2022
How Vaccine Fanatics Fueled Vaccine Skepticism
496
16
7
6
6
0
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 4
Thank you my friend MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D. for posting the perspective from theepochtimes.com commentary authors Jay and Martin Kulldorf
Dr. Robert Malone: CDC Got Caught Hiding Data, Vaccination Might Increase Risk of Omicron Infection
https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-cdc-got-caught-hiding-data-vaccination-might-increase-risk-of-omicron-infection-dr-robert-malone_4318005.html
Background from {[theepochtimes.com/how-vaccine-fanatics-fueled-vaccine-skepticism_4319309.html]]
The development of COVID-19 vaccines is one of the few successes during a pandemic that saw major failures in public health strategy and treatments. While the vaccines can’t prevent transmission, they have reduced mortality. Before the pandemic, there was almost universal trust in vaccines, and vaccine skeptics were a small but vocal minority.
With a life-saving vaccine during a major pandemic, one would expect more vaccine enthusiasm, but instead, it collapsed. What happened?
Ironically, the problem is vaccine fanaticism, which has caused vaccine skepticism, with problematic consequences extending beyond COVID-19 to trust in other vaccines. Vaccine fanaticism comes in many forms.
In their drive to increase uptake, the vaccine fanatics denied basic scientific facts, such as immunity provided by COVID recovery. This, despite numerous careful studies that showed that COVID-recovery provides better protection versus both infection and severe disease than the vaccine. Nevertheless, vaccine fanatics insisted that natural immunity shouldn’t “count” in the vaccine mandate schemes. By denying science, the vaccine fanatics created further public skepticism about the vaccines.
“If they’re lying about natural immunity, maybe they’re lying about vaccine efficacy,” many may have reasoned.
Despite lack of evidence that the COVID-19 vaccines could prevent transmission and mounting evidence in spring and summer 2021 that they couldn’t stop the spread of the disease, Dr. Anthony Fauci and others convinced themselves that COVID-19 could be conquered only if 70 percent, 80 percent, 90 percent, or more of the population was vaccinated. And when the vaccines didn’t live up to scientifically unproven promises, people’s trust in those who over-promised naturally collapsed.
In its pursuit of the impossible goal of COVID suppression by vaccines alone, public health vaccine fanatics induced many people to become skeptical of the COVID-19 vaccine’s benefits.
Public authorities espoused psychological manipulation to induce vaccine uptake. For example, in its April 2021 guidance on mask-wearing, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) gave permission only to the vaccinated to doff the mask. Their reasoning was based on a mistaken belief that vaccinated individuals can’t spread the disease, but also as an inducement to get people vaccinated since mask-wearing is unpleasant.
Encouraged by public health officials, Krispy Kreme offered free donuts to the vaccinated. Some people may have wondered: “If they understood public health, they wouldn’t try to fatten people with donuts. Maybe vaccines are also bad for my health?”
When these tactics failed, the public health establishment embraced vaccine coercion. They instituted vaccine passports to exclude the unvaccinated from participation in civil life, including access to libraries, museums, and restaurants. The federal government went further, using its vast regulatory powers to mandate vaccines as a condition of employment. These coercive actions effectively cast the unvaccinated into second-class citizenship. As they watched the vaccinated and unvaccinated alike contract COVID-19, they undoubtedly began to wonder whether public health truly had their best interests at heart.
Some vaccine fanatics have adopted the repellant tactic of falsely labeling people they disagree with as anti-vaccine. For instance, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) published a tabloid-style slander that epidemiologists and vaccine experts at Oxford, Harvard, and Stanford are opposed to “mass vaccination.” How might readers interpret that statement? “Well, if Harvard, Stanford, and Oxford professors are against the vaccines, maybe I should be too.”
Such false claims fuel vaccine hesitancy by putting the BMJ imprimatur on the lie that medicine and epidemiology professors are anti-vaxxers, when they aren’t. This damages vaccine confidence.
Vaccine fanatics have politicized the vaccine, using it to paint political opponents as science-denying troglodytes by falsely claiming that they’re against vaccines. If a person trusts a particular politician that’s falsely accused of being against vaccines, that person may only hear the false accusation and therefore reject the vaccine. In a public health crisis, such political gameplay has devastating consequences. What should have been a bipartisan achievement of a vaccine being developed and deployed in record time during a pandemic turned into just another tool for a political food fight, fueling vaccine skepticism.
Like all medical interventions, vaccines have some risks, which must be acknowledged in risk-benefit analyses for different population groups. For example, when there were reports of an increased risk of blood clots in young women receiving the J&J vaccine, it made sense to give them a different vaccine while the reports were investigated. Instead, the CDC “paused” J&J vaccinations in all age groups, including older people, for whom it was clear that there was no excess risk and for whom the benefit of the vaccine was the largest. (The CDC fired one of us for opposing that pause in older people.)
FYI MAJ Byron Oyler Kim Bolen RN CCM ACM Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. SMSgt Lawrence McCarter SPC Michael Oles SRSFC Boots Attaway 1SG Dan CapriLTC (Join to see) CSM Charles Hayden SFC William Farrell SSG Donald H "Don" Bates1LT Voyle Smith Lt Col Charlie Brown ] MSG Greg Kelly Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth CSM Bob Stanek SSG Michael Noll PO1 Sam Deel PO3 Edward Riddle
Dr. Robert Malone: CDC Got Caught Hiding Data, Vaccination Might Increase Risk of Omicron Infection
https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-cdc-got-caught-hiding-data-vaccination-might-increase-risk-of-omicron-infection-dr-robert-malone_4318005.html
Background from {[theepochtimes.com/how-vaccine-fanatics-fueled-vaccine-skepticism_4319309.html]]
The development of COVID-19 vaccines is one of the few successes during a pandemic that saw major failures in public health strategy and treatments. While the vaccines can’t prevent transmission, they have reduced mortality. Before the pandemic, there was almost universal trust in vaccines, and vaccine skeptics were a small but vocal minority.
With a life-saving vaccine during a major pandemic, one would expect more vaccine enthusiasm, but instead, it collapsed. What happened?
Ironically, the problem is vaccine fanaticism, which has caused vaccine skepticism, with problematic consequences extending beyond COVID-19 to trust in other vaccines. Vaccine fanaticism comes in many forms.
In their drive to increase uptake, the vaccine fanatics denied basic scientific facts, such as immunity provided by COVID recovery. This, despite numerous careful studies that showed that COVID-recovery provides better protection versus both infection and severe disease than the vaccine. Nevertheless, vaccine fanatics insisted that natural immunity shouldn’t “count” in the vaccine mandate schemes. By denying science, the vaccine fanatics created further public skepticism about the vaccines.
“If they’re lying about natural immunity, maybe they’re lying about vaccine efficacy,” many may have reasoned.
Despite lack of evidence that the COVID-19 vaccines could prevent transmission and mounting evidence in spring and summer 2021 that they couldn’t stop the spread of the disease, Dr. Anthony Fauci and others convinced themselves that COVID-19 could be conquered only if 70 percent, 80 percent, 90 percent, or more of the population was vaccinated. And when the vaccines didn’t live up to scientifically unproven promises, people’s trust in those who over-promised naturally collapsed.
In its pursuit of the impossible goal of COVID suppression by vaccines alone, public health vaccine fanatics induced many people to become skeptical of the COVID-19 vaccine’s benefits.
Public authorities espoused psychological manipulation to induce vaccine uptake. For example, in its April 2021 guidance on mask-wearing, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) gave permission only to the vaccinated to doff the mask. Their reasoning was based on a mistaken belief that vaccinated individuals can’t spread the disease, but also as an inducement to get people vaccinated since mask-wearing is unpleasant.
Encouraged by public health officials, Krispy Kreme offered free donuts to the vaccinated. Some people may have wondered: “If they understood public health, they wouldn’t try to fatten people with donuts. Maybe vaccines are also bad for my health?”
When these tactics failed, the public health establishment embraced vaccine coercion. They instituted vaccine passports to exclude the unvaccinated from participation in civil life, including access to libraries, museums, and restaurants. The federal government went further, using its vast regulatory powers to mandate vaccines as a condition of employment. These coercive actions effectively cast the unvaccinated into second-class citizenship. As they watched the vaccinated and unvaccinated alike contract COVID-19, they undoubtedly began to wonder whether public health truly had their best interests at heart.
Some vaccine fanatics have adopted the repellant tactic of falsely labeling people they disagree with as anti-vaccine. For instance, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) published a tabloid-style slander that epidemiologists and vaccine experts at Oxford, Harvard, and Stanford are opposed to “mass vaccination.” How might readers interpret that statement? “Well, if Harvard, Stanford, and Oxford professors are against the vaccines, maybe I should be too.”
Such false claims fuel vaccine hesitancy by putting the BMJ imprimatur on the lie that medicine and epidemiology professors are anti-vaxxers, when they aren’t. This damages vaccine confidence.
Vaccine fanatics have politicized the vaccine, using it to paint political opponents as science-denying troglodytes by falsely claiming that they’re against vaccines. If a person trusts a particular politician that’s falsely accused of being against vaccines, that person may only hear the false accusation and therefore reject the vaccine. In a public health crisis, such political gameplay has devastating consequences. What should have been a bipartisan achievement of a vaccine being developed and deployed in record time during a pandemic turned into just another tool for a political food fight, fueling vaccine skepticism.
Like all medical interventions, vaccines have some risks, which must be acknowledged in risk-benefit analyses for different population groups. For example, when there were reports of an increased risk of blood clots in young women receiving the J&J vaccine, it made sense to give them a different vaccine while the reports were investigated. Instead, the CDC “paused” J&J vaccinations in all age groups, including older people, for whom it was clear that there was no excess risk and for whom the benefit of the vaccine was the largest. (The CDC fired one of us for opposing that pause in older people.)
FYI MAJ Byron Oyler Kim Bolen RN CCM ACM Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. SMSgt Lawrence McCarter SPC Michael Oles SRSFC Boots Attaway 1SG Dan CapriLTC (Join to see) CSM Charles Hayden SFC William Farrell SSG Donald H "Don" Bates1LT Voyle Smith Lt Col Charlie Brown ] MSG Greg Kelly Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth CSM Bob Stanek SSG Michael Noll PO1 Sam Deel PO3 Edward Riddle
Dr. Robert Malone: CDC Got Caught Hiding Data, Vaccination Might Increase Risk of Omicron...
While in Florida, we sat down with Dr. Robert Malone—who is a vaccine expert, and holds several patents ...
(4)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
VP Harris Pushed COVID Vaccine Skepticism Under Trump
VP Harris pushed vaccine skepticism when she thought it was politically advantageous. Now she and the rest of the left wants to censor everyone who expresses the same skepticism today.
https://rumble.com/vke2fv-flashback-vp-harris-pushed-covid-vaccine-skepticism-under-trump.html
FYI Sgt (Join to see) SMSgt Tom Burns CDR Andrew McMenamin, PhDSFC (Join to see)CMSgt Marcus FalleafPO1 Jeff ChandlerSPC Steven DepuyPO3 Myles PostPVT Mark WhitcombSSG (Join to see)PO3 Edward RiddleA1C Mike AllenSPC John BryantSPC Paul C.CWO4 Terrence ClarkCPL Ronald Keyes Jr SGT Denny Espinosa Sgt (Join to see) SPC Michael Duricko, Ph.D SPC Woody Bullard
VP Harris pushed vaccine skepticism when she thought it was politically advantageous. Now she and the rest of the left wants to censor everyone who expresses the same skepticism today.
https://rumble.com/vke2fv-flashback-vp-harris-pushed-covid-vaccine-skepticism-under-trump.html
FYI Sgt (Join to see) SMSgt Tom Burns CDR Andrew McMenamin, PhDSFC (Join to see)CMSgt Marcus FalleafPO1 Jeff ChandlerSPC Steven DepuyPO3 Myles PostPVT Mark WhitcombSSG (Join to see)PO3 Edward RiddleA1C Mike AllenSPC John BryantSPC Paul C.CWO4 Terrence ClarkCPL Ronald Keyes Jr SGT Denny Espinosa Sgt (Join to see) SPC Michael Duricko, Ph.D SPC Woody Bullard
FLASHBACK: VP Harris Pushed COVID Vaccine Skepticism Under Trump
VP Harris pushed vaccine skepticism when she thought it was politically advantageous. Now she and the rest of the left wants to censor everyone who expresses the same skepticism today.
(1)
(0)
(1)
(0)
Its politics as usual. Before 45 left, the left was all "don't take his vaccine", after he left, "if you don't take it, we will make your life hell". When 45 was in, the right was "way to fast track it Donald", after he left, the right is "don't take it". I am pro vaccine, anti mandates, I have no current political home it seems, lol
(1)
(0)
Good read, funny the article didn’t mention our President, Joe Biden, pushing false narratives.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next