The COVID Shot: Further Thoughts & Clarifications
This is an addendum to my post about the COVID shot.
Differential Experiences/Perceptions
What accounts for some of us knowing a lot of people who’ve experienced COVID shot harms (including death), while others (like me) don’t know many - or any?
Some have wider professional and social circles and networks than others, with age differences in age and vaccine uptake rates among the people in those networks.
If you are known for your anti-COVID shot or vaccine-skeptical stances, are a medical professional, or have a personality that invites disclosure, it could increase the number of people who have shared their adverse experiences with you.
Though I have not investigated the issue or analyzed related data, I support the assertion that differential batches are at play. Expeditious, large-scale production of anything is always imperfect and there’s every reason to believe those issues would be magnified with the rushed and massive deployment of the mRNA products. I also suspect differential batches and "experimenting" had been done with the flu shot for years, without real oversight.
Added post publication: Another factor may be a perceptual difference involving stories from social media users who may, in fact, be AI, military or intelligence agency accounts, bot armies, and/or (what I call) 'mockingbird accounts’. It is foolish to believe such operations only exist on one side or regarding one narrative. As I’ve contended regarding the Early Treatment regime, there were and are sophisticated efforts to control and direct both/multiple sides. The anecdotes you read on X, Substack, Facebook, etc may not be from real people and/or may not be authentic tales.1 If we can admit as much was true with stories about “COVID deaths,”, there’s no reason to think it isn’t the case with COVID-shot deaths.
Harmful to Millions but Not a Primary Driver of Excess Deaths
Reader
asked about how I can say the shot is “injurious or fatal to millions of children & adults around the world and inherently risky to the mental and/or physical well-being of all who were injected with it” and be “unpersuaded that the COVID shot is a primary driver of excess death”.I intentionally gave myself a wide berth by using “or” as the operator in “injurious or fatal,” saying millions - i.e., 2 million or more worldwide - and stating primary driver, which doesn’t exclude the possibility that it is a moderate contributor to excess in some places or with certain populations. By “injurious,” I mean any temporal or ongoing adverse psychological or physical effect, including immunosuppression.
If the COVID shot contributed to the deaths of people who were already statistically-scheduled to die, those deaths might be wrongful but would not be “additive” or contribute substantively to excess. In many cases, there is no way to divorce the receipt of the COVID shot from other factors.
Misplaced Attribution of Cause & Nocebo Effects
As I said in the comments here, I have concerns about the impact of various social-psychological forces on the propensity to attribute adverse effects & deaths to the COVID shot or to the COVID shot alone.
There could be a tendency for individuals or medical professionals to formally or informally report harm because they believe an illness, condition, or event is due to the shot, even when other and/or better explanations exist. For example, a ‘vaccinated’ woman in her mid 40s having several miscarriages is heartbreaking and difficult but not aberrational given her age. If a man in his 60s who’s been out of work for months and is drinking far too much alcohol dies in his sleep, blaming his COVID booster might be tempting but an autopsy should trump an assumption.
A potential ‘nocebo effect’ of the COVID shot has not been widely acknowledged or discussed. From 2023 onward especially, the chorus of voices on social and independent media/platforms talking about the shots as deadly, poisonous, etc. has been loud and unmistakable. It’s very possible that constantly hearing about how dangerous the shot was can make people sick or worried enough to have an adverse health effect.
When raising the possibility of nocebo effects in a conversation this week, I was made aware that
recently made a comment along those lines. My view is more critical than his, perhaps, in the sense that I think shot-harms dialogue & reporting in some circles became quite hyperbolic & alarmist in 2024 — to the point of drifting into diversionary-tactics territory, however unintentionally.I have not analyzed records or data from VAERS but a bias toward reporting adverse events in the COVID Era should be studied (if someone has not been studying it already). To what extent did reporting events become a kind of prosocial behavior?
Also, I defer to those who have spent time with the database - and people who have been against vaccines since before 2020 - but my guess is decades of harms from other shots were probably underreported and should be kept in mind when citing historic comparisons.
Shot Harm Discussion Fatigue
I can’t be the only one who is feeling like we’ve gone from hearing that every death & health effect is due to COVID/Long COVID to every death & health effect being about the COVID shot/Long Vax.2 It’s exhausting.
I imagine many Joe/Jane Average “go along to get along” folks who got the shot - some for good reasons - have experienced no strange effects or increased propensity to get ill and are tired of hearing that they or their kids are going to experience some awful consequence in the future. I can’t say I blame them. What’s done is done, it can’t be reversed, and they probably don’t want to feel shamed or guilted or have their kids say they were bad Moms or Dads for the rest of everyone’s lives.
In my opinion, a myopic focus on COVID shot harms divorced from probing & challenging the government’s story about a pandemic involving a sudden-spreading deadly coronavirus diverts Joe’s or Jane’s attention away from the initial crimes of 2020 that convinced them and others a shot was needed at all. The number of serious analysts and “influencers” in the COVID Dissident arena who acknowledge & are troubled by shot harms and want to confront whether there was a pandemic is disturbingly low.
Of course I hope massive lawsuits are filed, victims compensated, and lies about the COVID shot - and all vaccines - fully exposed.
Burden of Proof
No matter what, the COVID shot didn't "perform" as officials and experts promised or claimed. This was clear from the trials and obvious to anyone who was tracking the convoluted data. Safety signals in VAERS were minimized and ignored.
The case against the perpetrators regarding the shot is stronger, not weaker, if there was no pandemic threat in the first place. Can the government prove a threat existed and anyone needed an injection for it?
I say no.
Everything that follows is necessarily criminal.
Please post any comments in the original COVID Shot article. Happy New Year to All Readers!
As I told an extended family member not long ago, the “threat” of AI isn’t in the future. It’s in the past. We are told AI is going to take over the world, etc. - which is false - but in reality, AI has already been used to direct and shape perception for years, including in 2020+.
Added post-publication: Pierre Kory told me early this year that all four are a threat. My reaction to his claims can be found in this letter.