A recent Reason article on New York’s new vaccination passport informs that “there’s a case to be made …” yet neglects to mention that the opposite case can also be made.
What case is it?
Well, the Mayor Bill de Blasio-sanctified case is that “these [totalitarian] measures are important for getting as much of the population vaccinated as possible in order to reduce virus mutation and prevent more harmful variants from taking root.”
Yet the inverse is perhaps more persuasive. Several important figures in the medical and scientific community have been crying Cassandra* for some time, arguing that an ineffective vaccine, like the mRNA treatments sponsored by Pfizer and Moderna, may, according to epidemiological principles long understood, pressure the spreading viruses into the thing we don’t want: more deadly variants.
The normal course for a new contagion is for it to mutate into easier-to-spread but less deadly variants. Killing a host isn’t good for the virus, so it changes over time. Oddly, I rarely hear this mentioned.
Herd immunity, which is the prevalence in a community of enough people who can fend off the virus preventing transmission to weaker people, can only be helped by vaccination when the vaccines increase hosts’ immunity to obtaining it and spreading it — neither of which clearly applies to the current vaccines.
“From their very first conceptualization,” claims Geert Vanden Bossche, one of the biggest names in the industry to object to the vaccination campaign, “it should have been very clear that these ‘S‑based’ Covid-19 vaccines are completely inadequate for generating herd immunity in a population, regardless of … the rate of vaccine coverage.”
Sans herd immunity but with universal vaccination, he says, deadlier variants could arise.
Is he right? I don’t know.
But the case against vaccine passports might reference epidemiology and virology from sources outside establishment-approved “scientific” opinion.
Totalitarians rarely have “the science” on their side.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
* Ineffective because suppressed on major social media, in part. You can find their discussion on Rumble, Brighteon, Bitchute and other upstart sites.
—
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
2 replies on “Ceding “Science” to Totalitarians?”
With the left, it’s not about science. It’s about control.
The vaccines we were given this year were developed to combat the original COVID virus. A public health official has said these vaccines may already be obsolete, in the face of the new variants. They weren’t meant to combat the virus, only to stimulate the immune system to recognize the virus. If our RNA doesn’t recognize the new variants, the vaccines we were given may ultimately be pointless, regardless of how many boosters we are given.
It looks more and more like we have to adjust our tactics. This virus is here to stay. We have to learn to live with it. We would be better served if we focused on treating the illness rather than trying to vanquish the virus.