Vaccine Bullying may ALSO be Scientism (and I strongly agree it is), but it is CERTAINLY still Bullying… and as such completely wrong and totally unacceptable.
The whole vaccine industry and accompanying “accepted wisdom” is a pack of lies built on a foundation of lies told by professional liars and repeated by the uninformed. Which makes Vaccine Bullying all the worse offense.
Thanks, yet again, for boldly telling the truth through the lens of real science.
One day an insurance company sent me an insulting and threatening letter, on the basis I had failed to do something they really wanted me to do (settle a claim). I had already done, many months previously, what they wanted me to do.
But anyway I called the 0800 number, figuring what the hell it's their dime. The guy who answered explained to me that the company has a policy, they send two reminder letters (they had not arrived at this point) and if the target doesn't do what they want then the computer sends out the insulting and threatening letter. "It's just company policy" he said, word for word, as if this justified their threats and insults.
"Oh" says I, "well, I have a policy too. When you insult and threaten me for no reason but your possession of false information about me, then I get fucking pissed off and I burn down your office buildings!"
All this is to say that it's not only the scientismists that live by some principle or other they consider beneficial.
It’s funny how the “it’s policy” argument only ever goes one way. If they say “our policy is X” they simply can’t cope when you retort “my policy is ‘not X’”. It’s as though they believe their “policy” has some binding force over 3rd parties.
Or maybe the “it’s policy” assertion is made by the schlub in the call center who is implying “I agree with you but I want to keep my job”.
I liken it to this anecdote: “Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.” - General Napier
Just another form of bullying, and as so often happens the call centre schlub tries to bully you with corporate policy because he's been bullied with it beforehand.
Do you really believe that was an "insurance company" you were dealing with? Because that behavior matches up really closely to how a mafia runs a protection racket.
It was a lawfully registered corporation in the jurisdiction, yes. But I'm open to the idea that a lot of corporate law is effectively baptised banditry.
For those parents out there who are pro-vaccine and want to load their kids with multiple vaccines (especially with the new mRNA technology), all I can say to that is, "You play with fire, eventually you will get burned," or "You play with snakes, you will get bit". I always hate to say I told you so. This also goes for the Bio-weapon C19 shot.
Funnily enough if you read Wikipedia's "List of Fatal Snakebites in the United States" many many of them are religious handlers. Given that scientism and vaccinism are religions, it seems appropriate.
I step back from people who display certainty that must not be questioned, it does not reassure me no matter what the circumstances are. In 2020 this was rampant we were told to just follow the "experts" and do not question, which most people agreed with. When our "life saving" vaccines were trundled out with the "experts" telling us how completely certain they were of their safety and efficacy I took a giant step back. There was that word "certain" and it had reared its ugly head again.
I do not know the author of the article you cite, but suspect—even with that journal publication—she is no “scientist”. In that I mean that she has never researched into disease causes, nor invented treatment outcomes, and published such discovery in peer reviewed journals.
Most doctors—and she is described as a pediatrician who is seeing/treating patients in a practice—are not “scientists” but “technicians”. My car mechanic is a technician. He has no experience in the design of the components of my car which he repairs. He reads diagnostic codes and follows the “suggested/required” procedure for removal and repair from the manufacturer. Likewise, this “doctor” follows a “standard of care” handed down from her betters who populate Boards and/or other such “authoritative” agencies. She is little better than a faith healer in that perspective.
I had the same problem with my physician and the Covid scamdemic. In my case, I caught the disease before my cohort became eligible for the vex. I recovered with a bit less than the experience of a typical common cold. Upon seeing my physician after the 10 day isolation period, he still encouraged me to get the vex. I explained my hesitation now that I had “innate immunity” (university bio 101). He was insistent and responded “It can’t hurt!”. Such is the “science” as practiced by the run of the mill family physician.
I have a PhD with my minor area is in stat’s. Thankfully, my undergraduate education contain some biology so this 70+ yo was not buying into his “professional advice” despite the purported risk for my cohort. I feel sorry for those not as fortunate as to be unable to understand their risk factor and and basic concepts of cost/benefit. How many now suffer from their physician’s “authoritative ignorance”.
Lamentation is a very old literary tradition/genre...though seeing it in a "peer reviewed" "journal" of "medical science" is a first for me.
Appears this writer is undergoing, and literary-outpouring, her grief, disbelief, and anger (partly but not fully concealed) over losing her former easy certainty that everyone worships her degrees, her institutions (Penn and Harvard!!), her certifications, her white coat, and her expert priestessly pronouncements (fluent in English AND Spanish!!) received by the ill and their families with awestruck credulity, confidence in her superiority, and unquestioning compliance.
Yeah, that's gotta sting. Sucks to lose a massive, easily held or captive consumer base and audience. Ask Bud Light and CNN.
I mean, hurting, suffering, desperate people and families come to you because you promise HEALING, which to begin with isn't YOURS to dispense no matter how many inspirational quotes and art prints and comfy color schemes the hospitals' interior decorators deploy.
And now people are starting to figure out that healing isn't what Pharma and "health" "care" deliver, but, instead, lucrative managed experimentation, decline, and death.
> With U.S. politics threatening to erase the gains of science,
> erase the gains of science
Mhm. We've seen some of the vax-program incentives from Pharma to physicians.
Those Speed of Science Moon Shots were pretty darn gainy.
Not for the people they were stabbed into. For SCIENCE (TM).
Let's see. Pfizer revenues.
2020, $49 bn.
2021, $81 bn.
2022, a record $100 bn.
Now they're crying the blues:
> For the full year 2023, we reported revenues of $58.5 billion, reflecting an operational decrease of 41% year over year, primarily due to a significant decline in revenues for our COVID-19 products.
That's from Pfizer's annual report, whose track-ya link I tiny-fied:
Still, William, I must admit, that abstract was quite slippery-clever: deftly redefining any challenge to the "health" "care" temple as "politics."
They aren't wrong...and I guess you have to admire them for coming right out and admitting that YOU, peon, are not to have a say in how power is apportioned and used, including power over your own and your family's biological existence.
THEY are the priests and priestesses. If you were a worthwhile human, you wouldn't be hurting, suffering, desperate, and in need of help in the first place! (The Erewhon principle.) With 1 in 5 dollars of US GDP coming from "health" "care," the least you can do is live long enough, and comply to treatment algorithms, to yield a good return for investors and sustain the high regard of the likes of DOCTOR Menzin!
FWIW, here's the authoress of this literary screed:
"A general State education is a mere contrivance for molding people to be exactly like one another: and the mould in which it casts them is that which pleases the predominant power in the government or the majority of the existing generation; in proportion as it is efficient and successful, it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by natural tendency to one over the body."
Re: "Most want and/or need to be told what to do". Can we go deeper into this? I've just recently been exposed to the ideas of Quantum and Circadian Biology. Given my present position operating as Registered Nurse working within centralized medicine, I find myself waking up most mornings wondering how the fuck am I going to get out of this situation?
Well shit! I realize now that it's been at least four years now waking up. Damn I need to go outside. Just my luck this would happen to be the coldest day in years where I am.
The Rockefellers support this idiot woman, she makes money for them...As someone who has studied both biological and physical sciences, I apply the scientific method to everything...There is exactly zero evidence, which would require blinded longitudinal groups, to support claims that any vaccine is safe or effective, or that it's a net benefit to society....What we know is negative...e.g. 20 kids/yr die from the measles vaccine, but no kids die from measles...The mRNA vaccine, of course, has killed millions, and Pfizer's secret research found that people taking it were more likely to get Covid...
The interesting bit is how many of those recommended vaccines cease to be recommended once the child gets older. About half the recommended vaccines are for bugs that spread in daycare centers.
(I learned this through spacing out the vaccines for my child.)
What are you to do? Offer working medical treatment to those who come asking you for it. And if none do find some other way to spend your time. That’s all you were ever meant to do.
Bullying is a way of diminishing another person. Bullying has all kinds of motivations and preconditions. For one thing, most bullies have been abused or bullied themselves. Many “bullies” are counter-phobic, acting out their fear of being bullied themselves. When children bully other children, this type of “acting out” can be seen as re-enacting their own abuse AND as a cry for attention and help. This is so OFTEN the case that the word “often” crudely diminishes the ubiquity of this dynamic. But ubiquity is not universality. There is no ONE way to “comprehend” or “define” bullying, partly because bullying has so many various manifestations and aspects.
Vaccine “bullying” can also be motivated by what might as well be called “scientism” if “scientism” is to claim (or somehow “believe”) that “the best of our knowledge” about what is sensible and measurable is “complete” or “unerring” somehow. This kind of thoughtlessness can be a form of escape or despair. Since it is a form of thoughtlessness (often escapist), it does not survive much of any serious scrutiny. But yes, it can offer a glib way of “bullying” someone into silence or self doubt. It can offer a cheap way to make someone appear ridiculous in the eyes of others or even in him or herself. (This kind of “bullying” is usually employed by people who, themselves, really don’t know that much about science, the history of science, and who have not tried to confront the limits of empiricism and reason (logos. But that makes perfect sense when one considers the notion that “scientism” is a form of thoughtlessness - or escape from responsibility.) Science cannot answer every question. And “the best of our knowledge “ includes the knowledge that it is faulty and incomplete.
The history of vaccines, vaccine development, and vaccination controversies is a serious one. People who investigate it should be very mindful of who or what they turn to as “sources” or “authorities”. What are the sources for your sources? What authorities do these “authorities” rely on. How are vaccines considered as part of a larger consideration about public health policy — and social mores.
In the 80s there was a huge legal and social transformation regarding smoking in public places. When I was a kid in the sixties and 70s, cigarettes were ubiquitous. People who didn’t smoke kept ashtrays for guests - and it would be very rude not to (unless it was clear to everybody you could only survive by being surrounded by towering oxygen tanks - or something).
In the 80s it was possible to see (or at least remember) external brick walls with the faded remnants of COMMANDS like “No Spitting.” And there REMAIN laws about spitting in public on the books of many municipalities. But there was a time, before “No Spitting” was painted to prevent spitting on streets and alleyways, when businesses felt the need (or legal obligation) to post signs about not spitting on the floor INSIDE bars, restaurants(?) and even grocery stores. That’s because there was a time when bars and grocery stores routinely strew their floors with hay or straw, perhaps before someone got the “enlightened” idea to provide patrons with spittoons.
What changed? It was probably the worldwide pandemic of (c)1919-1920 when influenza killed millions of the previously young and healthy. It wasn’t as grotesque as the medieval “Black Death” but it was so traumatic that it was quickly pushed down the memory hole… until Covid. But in the wake of the First World War the acrimony over public masking was remarkably similar to the Covid controversies.
Laws and regulations are also intrusions and protections. Elon Musk wants to use Twitter(X) to be a payment processor (like Apple Pay and PayPal) but under current law that would subject his company to regulation by some Consumer Protection agency which might explain why he invested millions in electing Trump so he could run “DOGE” and destroy the agency. Billionaires (like bullies, bratty children, and even non bratty children) don’t want to be regulated. But oligarchs know that they are often not very sympathetic figures in the public imagination. But they also know how to whip up fears and outrage over the intrusions and protections involved with laws and regulations.
Laws and regulations (like science) are not perfect. They CANNOT perfectly address every individual circumstance. That’s why laws and regulations are subject to judicial review and why so much of “the law” is actually “case law” based on balancing the overarching nature of law with specific circumstances (cases) and on balancing the needs (for protection) of individuals versus the needs (for protection) of the collective with “the state” becoming a formidable entity in that process (although other dynamics also fuel the development and character of “the state” as a generalization and of specific states as individual cases.)
Vaccine Bullying may ALSO be Scientism (and I strongly agree it is), but it is CERTAINLY still Bullying… and as such completely wrong and totally unacceptable.
The whole vaccine industry and accompanying “accepted wisdom” is a pack of lies built on a foundation of lies told by professional liars and repeated by the uninformed. Which makes Vaccine Bullying all the worse offense.
Thanks, yet again, for boldly telling the truth through the lens of real science.
One day an insurance company sent me an insulting and threatening letter, on the basis I had failed to do something they really wanted me to do (settle a claim). I had already done, many months previously, what they wanted me to do.
But anyway I called the 0800 number, figuring what the hell it's their dime. The guy who answered explained to me that the company has a policy, they send two reminder letters (they had not arrived at this point) and if the target doesn't do what they want then the computer sends out the insulting and threatening letter. "It's just company policy" he said, word for word, as if this justified their threats and insults.
"Oh" says I, "well, I have a policy too. When you insult and threaten me for no reason but your possession of false information about me, then I get fucking pissed off and I burn down your office buildings!"
All this is to say that it's not only the scientismists that live by some principle or other they consider beneficial.
It’s funny how the “it’s policy” argument only ever goes one way. If they say “our policy is X” they simply can’t cope when you retort “my policy is ‘not X’”. It’s as though they believe their “policy” has some binding force over 3rd parties.
Or maybe the “it’s policy” assertion is made by the schlub in the call center who is implying “I agree with you but I want to keep my job”.
I liken it to this anecdote: “Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.” - General Napier
Just another form of bullying, and as so often happens the call centre schlub tries to bully you with corporate policy because he's been bullied with it beforehand.
Do you really believe that was an "insurance company" you were dealing with? Because that behavior matches up really closely to how a mafia runs a protection racket.
It was a lawfully registered corporation in the jurisdiction, yes. But I'm open to the idea that a lot of corporate law is effectively baptised banditry.
I’d tell them all, go buy the book “Dr Mary’s Monkey” and read it, then read it again. Then go to confession.
For those parents out there who are pro-vaccine and want to load their kids with multiple vaccines (especially with the new mRNA technology), all I can say to that is, "You play with fire, eventually you will get burned," or "You play with snakes, you will get bit". I always hate to say I told you so. This also goes for the Bio-weapon C19 shot.
Funnily enough if you read Wikipedia's "List of Fatal Snakebites in the United States" many many of them are religious handlers. Given that scientism and vaccinism are religions, it seems appropriate.
I step back from people who display certainty that must not be questioned, it does not reassure me no matter what the circumstances are. In 2020 this was rampant we were told to just follow the "experts" and do not question, which most people agreed with. When our "life saving" vaccines were trundled out with the "experts" telling us how completely certain they were of their safety and efficacy I took a giant step back. There was that word "certain" and it had reared its ugly head again.
I do not know the author of the article you cite, but suspect—even with that journal publication—she is no “scientist”. In that I mean that she has never researched into disease causes, nor invented treatment outcomes, and published such discovery in peer reviewed journals.
Most doctors—and she is described as a pediatrician who is seeing/treating patients in a practice—are not “scientists” but “technicians”. My car mechanic is a technician. He has no experience in the design of the components of my car which he repairs. He reads diagnostic codes and follows the “suggested/required” procedure for removal and repair from the manufacturer. Likewise, this “doctor” follows a “standard of care” handed down from her betters who populate Boards and/or other such “authoritative” agencies. She is little better than a faith healer in that perspective.
I had the same problem with my physician and the Covid scamdemic. In my case, I caught the disease before my cohort became eligible for the vex. I recovered with a bit less than the experience of a typical common cold. Upon seeing my physician after the 10 day isolation period, he still encouraged me to get the vex. I explained my hesitation now that I had “innate immunity” (university bio 101). He was insistent and responded “It can’t hurt!”. Such is the “science” as practiced by the run of the mill family physician.
I have a PhD with my minor area is in stat’s. Thankfully, my undergraduate education contain some biology so this 70+ yo was not buying into his “professional advice” despite the purported risk for my cohort. I feel sorry for those not as fortunate as to be unable to understand their risk factor and and basic concepts of cost/benefit. How many now suffer from their physician’s “authoritative ignorance”.
> Pediatrician's lament
Lamentation is a very old literary tradition/genre...though seeing it in a "peer reviewed" "journal" of "medical science" is a first for me.
Appears this writer is undergoing, and literary-outpouring, her grief, disbelief, and anger (partly but not fully concealed) over losing her former easy certainty that everyone worships her degrees, her institutions (Penn and Harvard!!), her certifications, her white coat, and her expert priestessly pronouncements (fluent in English AND Spanish!!) received by the ill and their families with awestruck credulity, confidence in her superiority, and unquestioning compliance.
Yeah, that's gotta sting. Sucks to lose a massive, easily held or captive consumer base and audience. Ask Bud Light and CNN.
I mean, hurting, suffering, desperate people and families come to you because you promise HEALING, which to begin with isn't YOURS to dispense no matter how many inspirational quotes and art prints and comfy color schemes the hospitals' interior decorators deploy.
And now people are starting to figure out that healing isn't what Pharma and "health" "care" deliver, but, instead, lucrative managed experimentation, decline, and death.
> With U.S. politics threatening to erase the gains of science,
> erase the gains of science
Mhm. We've seen some of the vax-program incentives from Pharma to physicians.
Those Speed of Science Moon Shots were pretty darn gainy.
Not for the people they were stabbed into. For SCIENCE (TM).
Let's see. Pfizer revenues.
2020, $49 bn.
2021, $81 bn.
2022, a record $100 bn.
Now they're crying the blues:
> For the full year 2023, we reported revenues of $58.5 billion, reflecting an operational decrease of 41% year over year, primarily due to a significant decline in revenues for our COVID-19 products.
That's from Pfizer's annual report, whose track-ya link I tiny-fied:
https://tinyurl.com/bdemhmbw
Still, William, I must admit, that abstract was quite slippery-clever: deftly redefining any challenge to the "health" "care" temple as "politics."
They aren't wrong...and I guess you have to admire them for coming right out and admitting that YOU, peon, are not to have a say in how power is apportioned and used, including power over your own and your family's biological existence.
THEY are the priests and priestesses. If you were a worthwhile human, you wouldn't be hurting, suffering, desperate, and in need of help in the first place! (The Erewhon principle.) With 1 in 5 dollars of US GDP coming from "health" "care," the least you can do is live long enough, and comply to treatment algorithms, to yield a good return for investors and sustain the high regard of the likes of DOCTOR Menzin!
FWIW, here's the authoress of this literary screed:
https://www.childrenshospital.org/directory/eleanor-menzin
Among her "conditions treated" list at WebMD are Bell's Palsy and phobias.
And now we've got Project "Stargate" to push AI-differentiated 'cancer vaccines' in under 48 hours... https://eccentrik.substack.com/p/trump-introduces-500-billion-ai-infrastructure
how lovely
"A general State education is a mere contrivance for molding people to be exactly like one another: and the mould in which it casts them is that which pleases the predominant power in the government or the majority of the existing generation; in proportion as it is efficient and successful, it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by natural tendency to one over the body."
- John Stuart Mill
Re: "Most want and/or need to be told what to do". Can we go deeper into this? I've just recently been exposed to the ideas of Quantum and Circadian Biology. Given my present position operating as Registered Nurse working within centralized medicine, I find myself waking up most mornings wondering how the fuck am I going to get out of this situation?
Well shit! I realize now that it's been at least four years now waking up. Damn I need to go outside. Just my luck this would happen to be the coldest day in years where I am.
Here varicella is mandatory. Our government is sooo worried for our kids...
The Rockefellers support this idiot woman, she makes money for them...As someone who has studied both biological and physical sciences, I apply the scientific method to everything...There is exactly zero evidence, which would require blinded longitudinal groups, to support claims that any vaccine is safe or effective, or that it's a net benefit to society....What we know is negative...e.g. 20 kids/yr die from the measles vaccine, but no kids die from measles...The mRNA vaccine, of course, has killed millions, and Pfizer's secret research found that people taking it were more likely to get Covid...
The interesting bit is how many of those recommended vaccines cease to be recommended once the child gets older. About half the recommended vaccines are for bugs that spread in daycare centers.
(I learned this through spacing out the vaccines for my child.)
What are you to do? Offer working medical treatment to those who come asking you for it. And if none do find some other way to spend your time. That’s all you were ever meant to do.
Vaccine “bullying” is bullying.
Bullying is a way of diminishing another person. Bullying has all kinds of motivations and preconditions. For one thing, most bullies have been abused or bullied themselves. Many “bullies” are counter-phobic, acting out their fear of being bullied themselves. When children bully other children, this type of “acting out” can be seen as re-enacting their own abuse AND as a cry for attention and help. This is so OFTEN the case that the word “often” crudely diminishes the ubiquity of this dynamic. But ubiquity is not universality. There is no ONE way to “comprehend” or “define” bullying, partly because bullying has so many various manifestations and aspects.
Vaccine “bullying” can also be motivated by what might as well be called “scientism” if “scientism” is to claim (or somehow “believe”) that “the best of our knowledge” about what is sensible and measurable is “complete” or “unerring” somehow. This kind of thoughtlessness can be a form of escape or despair. Since it is a form of thoughtlessness (often escapist), it does not survive much of any serious scrutiny. But yes, it can offer a glib way of “bullying” someone into silence or self doubt. It can offer a cheap way to make someone appear ridiculous in the eyes of others or even in him or herself. (This kind of “bullying” is usually employed by people who, themselves, really don’t know that much about science, the history of science, and who have not tried to confront the limits of empiricism and reason (logos. But that makes perfect sense when one considers the notion that “scientism” is a form of thoughtlessness - or escape from responsibility.) Science cannot answer every question. And “the best of our knowledge “ includes the knowledge that it is faulty and incomplete.
The history of vaccines, vaccine development, and vaccination controversies is a serious one. People who investigate it should be very mindful of who or what they turn to as “sources” or “authorities”. What are the sources for your sources? What authorities do these “authorities” rely on. How are vaccines considered as part of a larger consideration about public health policy — and social mores.
In the 80s there was a huge legal and social transformation regarding smoking in public places. When I was a kid in the sixties and 70s, cigarettes were ubiquitous. People who didn’t smoke kept ashtrays for guests - and it would be very rude not to (unless it was clear to everybody you could only survive by being surrounded by towering oxygen tanks - or something).
In the 80s it was possible to see (or at least remember) external brick walls with the faded remnants of COMMANDS like “No Spitting.” And there REMAIN laws about spitting in public on the books of many municipalities. But there was a time, before “No Spitting” was painted to prevent spitting on streets and alleyways, when businesses felt the need (or legal obligation) to post signs about not spitting on the floor INSIDE bars, restaurants(?) and even grocery stores. That’s because there was a time when bars and grocery stores routinely strew their floors with hay or straw, perhaps before someone got the “enlightened” idea to provide patrons with spittoons.
What changed? It was probably the worldwide pandemic of (c)1919-1920 when influenza killed millions of the previously young and healthy. It wasn’t as grotesque as the medieval “Black Death” but it was so traumatic that it was quickly pushed down the memory hole… until Covid. But in the wake of the First World War the acrimony over public masking was remarkably similar to the Covid controversies.
Laws and regulations are also intrusions and protections. Elon Musk wants to use Twitter(X) to be a payment processor (like Apple Pay and PayPal) but under current law that would subject his company to regulation by some Consumer Protection agency which might explain why he invested millions in electing Trump so he could run “DOGE” and destroy the agency. Billionaires (like bullies, bratty children, and even non bratty children) don’t want to be regulated. But oligarchs know that they are often not very sympathetic figures in the public imagination. But they also know how to whip up fears and outrage over the intrusions and protections involved with laws and regulations.
Laws and regulations (like science) are not perfect. They CANNOT perfectly address every individual circumstance. That’s why laws and regulations are subject to judicial review and why so much of “the law” is actually “case law” based on balancing the overarching nature of law with specific circumstances (cases) and on balancing the needs (for protection) of individuals versus the needs (for protection) of the collective with “the state” becoming a formidable entity in that process (although other dynamics also fuel the development and character of “the state” as a generalization and of specific states as individual cases.)