i'm going to copy the comment i left on the original substack.
gee, wonder why?
i've listened to the TWIV virologists ponder why anyone would question the benefit of vaccines- they voted for Trump? they're stupid? they didn't graduate high school? they're red neck hillbillies? they're Republicans? they listen to Joe Rogan? they're paid Ru…
i'm going to copy the comment i left on the original substack.
gee, wonder why?
i've listened to the TWIV virologists ponder why anyone would question the benefit of vaccines- they voted for Trump? they're stupid? they didn't graduate high school? they're red neck hillbillies? they're Republicans? they listen to Joe Rogan? they're paid Russian operatives who are trying to destroy the country?
all of which, as a listener who is none of those things (well, except for Joe Rogan) but still skeptical of vaccines in general and this one in particular, i found highly offensive.
the government and the FDA/CDC/NIH could reduce (but not eliminate) vaccine hesitancy tomorrow by adopting a few common sense measures: A) eliminate the liability shield; if you want me to be as sure as you are of your product, then man up and accept responsibility for any resulting harms B) the approval process should be completely transparent; even seasoned FDA advisory committee members were stunned by the rubber stamping of these vaccines. Paul Offit, who never met a vaccine he didn't like, said he only voted "no" on the last go around because "hell no" wasn't an option C) fully disclose- and maybe forbid- all conflicts of interest. if you take money from a drug company, you're off the panel D) the "approval" of the pfizer shot- Comirnaty vs Pfizer BioNTech as "functionally equivalent" but "legally distinct" is enough to set any conspiracy theorist's hair on fire; it's almost like they wanted to inspire doubt E) if you're going to use "relative" statistics to exaggerate the benefits, then use relative statistics to show the harms. comparing relative benefit with absolute adverse effects is gas lighting and speaking of gas lighting F) acknowledge and take care of vaccine injured people; you've made billions while these damaged people can't even get their insurance to cover their new found expenses because they "took an experimental drug." sell one of your private jets and pay their medical expenses for life.
in 1976, my cousin's wife took the infamous swine flu vaccine and spent a year in a wheelchair with GBS. no amount of reassurance, advertising, peer pressure or threats can get me to unsee that.
and yes, my initial decision to "wait and see" about this vaccine has hardened into fanatical, if you will, resistance. this is the hill i will die on and i have gone from an apolitical person who never voted to a one issue voter. and i don't even have children!
i'm going to copy the comment i left on the original substack.
gee, wonder why?
i've listened to the TWIV virologists ponder why anyone would question the benefit of vaccines- they voted for Trump? they're stupid? they didn't graduate high school? they're red neck hillbillies? they're Republicans? they listen to Joe Rogan? they're paid Russian operatives who are trying to destroy the country?
all of which, as a listener who is none of those things (well, except for Joe Rogan) but still skeptical of vaccines in general and this one in particular, i found highly offensive.
the government and the FDA/CDC/NIH could reduce (but not eliminate) vaccine hesitancy tomorrow by adopting a few common sense measures: A) eliminate the liability shield; if you want me to be as sure as you are of your product, then man up and accept responsibility for any resulting harms B) the approval process should be completely transparent; even seasoned FDA advisory committee members were stunned by the rubber stamping of these vaccines. Paul Offit, who never met a vaccine he didn't like, said he only voted "no" on the last go around because "hell no" wasn't an option C) fully disclose- and maybe forbid- all conflicts of interest. if you take money from a drug company, you're off the panel D) the "approval" of the pfizer shot- Comirnaty vs Pfizer BioNTech as "functionally equivalent" but "legally distinct" is enough to set any conspiracy theorist's hair on fire; it's almost like they wanted to inspire doubt E) if you're going to use "relative" statistics to exaggerate the benefits, then use relative statistics to show the harms. comparing relative benefit with absolute adverse effects is gas lighting and speaking of gas lighting F) acknowledge and take care of vaccine injured people; you've made billions while these damaged people can't even get their insurance to cover their new found expenses because they "took an experimental drug." sell one of your private jets and pay their medical expenses for life.
in 1976, my cousin's wife took the infamous swine flu vaccine and spent a year in a wheelchair with GBS. no amount of reassurance, advertising, peer pressure or threats can get me to unsee that.
and yes, my initial decision to "wait and see" about this vaccine has hardened into fanatical, if you will, resistance. this is the hill i will die on and i have gone from an apolitical person who never voted to a one issue voter. and i don't even have children!
I love this comment so much - thank you!