Mandated vaccine passports for vaccines that do not work very well?

26 August 2021

Today's theme — vaccine passports, a bad idea?

The FDA approved Pfizer's COVID vaccine, despite the fact that it arguably does not meet the agency's own previous standards.

Second, vaccine passports are increasingly being required by business and Government (see below) — despite the fact that the vaccines are not very effective and now appear to require an apparently interminable number of boosters to work over the long run.

On the basis of all that, does mandating COVID vaccination (of the kinds now available) justify the destruction of personal Liberty?

An introductory citation — regarding the FDA's questionable thinking

I provide the following reference for those who have not been following the data (and data-distortions) that have accompanied the COVID pandemic.

The below opinion letter — from a "senior editor" at The BMJ (one of this planet's most prominent medical journals) — points to an obviously corrupted (my words) FDA process that approved Pfizer's mRNA COVID vaccine, before adequate data supported the decision:

Peter Doshi, Does the FDA think these data justify the first full approval of a covid-19 vaccine?, BMJ (23 August 2021)

With Doshi's analysis in mind, let us continue with today's 'mandate' topic.

Vaccine passports

Symbolism for the United States' fall from Freedom's shining light status has now been set in stone by President Biden:

Today, I’m [Biden] calling on more country — more companies, I should say, in the private sector to step up with vaccine requirements that’ll reach millions more people.

If you’re a business leader, a non-profit leader, a state or local leader who has been waiting for full FDA approval to require vaccinations, I call on you now to do that — require it. Do what I did last month and require your employees to get vaccinated or face strict requirements.

Biden's newly announced appeal to exercise Corporate Tyranny's big squashing boots parallels his administration's previous call on Big Tech to censor speech on the Oligarchic Party Line's behalf.

Why stop with censorship, when Double-Speak 1984 can be so happily implemented in the public health arena, as well?

Biden's plea for Big Business assistance . . .

. . . (in dismembering American Liberty) might have been tolerable — if US COVID vaccines were as safe and efficacious as FDA-approved previous vaccines have mostly been. But they're not.

And the difference in efficacy and (arguably) actual public need — between these COVID vaccines and their predecessors for other infections — is noticeably larger than it probably should be, if we are going to (extortionately) crush Liberty in mandating them.

Recall that these 'passports' are going to be necessary to do ordinary human things, like shop and work.

For a sense of proportion, recall also that influenza and lots of other things kills more children and young people than COVID does.

Yet, no one in authority mentions those facts as a way getting us back onto Reality's plane of freedom-affirming common sense.

My objection to most of this planet's COVID response is . . .

. . . that it makes no proportionate sense, when assessed with respect to the larger societal picture.

For instance, most of COVID-vulnerable folk have been morbidly 'comorbid'. Or so elderly that they were statistically likely to fall over anyway. (I'm one of those tottering elderly people myself.)

This has, therefore, not been an existential crisis for humanity, even in spite of the large numbers (not proportions) of diseased and suffering people.

Then, there is the added question of COVID vaccines' efficacy

One might want to wait to crush Liberty until a better vaccine comes along.

Today's available COVID vaccines wane almost immediately in their protective effect. Six months at best, it presently looks to be.

The vaccines do not reliably protect against infection or reinfection.

Nor do they prevent transmission.

However, they do seem to provide significant protection against death and hospitalization.

Yet to accomplish that valuable result, incoming evidence increasingly indicates that booster shots may be required every few months.

This re-injection practice — we should probably suppose — will continue forever in a mandated fashion. Or at least, until we fall over dead and are mercifully thus removed from Raging Big Capitalism's metaphorically imprisoned guinea pig crowd.

If you add all these elements up . . .

. . . you might (and probably should) come to question whether:

(a) mandating a vaccine

that

(b) does not protect against transmission and reinfection

For instance, if I am vaccinated, why would I care if you are not? We both can spread COVID.

And if you chose not to be vaccinated, why would I care, when the risk of croaking falls on you?

Admittedly

There is always the argument that Society should not bear the financial and infrastructure burdens of your vaccine-rejecting stupidity.

But here in America, especially regarding health matters, we usually solve that conundrum in Freedom's favor.

This is why, in my opinion, it makes no sense to squash Liberty to mandate a vaccine that works less well — and whose claimed efficacy apparently lasts less long — than most of its predecessors.

And think of the precedent that mandated COVID vaccination sets . . .

. . . under today's specific circumstances:

Government can mandate you to do things to your body — that you do not agree with — on the basis of little to no evidence that demonstrates the imposed measure's statistically supported personal and societal efficacy.

Is that 1984-ish enough for ya?

An indicative aside about the ACLU's COVID lunacy

Along the lines of the 'what's good for society' vaccine mandate justification — the ACLU recently demonstrated how easy it is for Big Picture-denying people to go off the deep end:

The American Civil Liberties Union, representing disability rights groups and parents of children with disabilities, filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday over a South Carolina law that bans school districts from requiring face masks, arguing the ban excludes vulnerable students from public schools.

The plaintiffs allege that the ban on mask mandates disproportionately affects students with underlying health conditions or disabilities, who are at risk of becoming seriously ill if they contract COVID-19.

Therefore, according to the ACLU, all kids should be masked — and presumably suffer the psychological and physical consequences of doing that — so as to (ostensibly) protect a proportionately tiny group of other suffering kids.

So now, we're going to make the billions suffer, so as to allegedly benefit — and probably not very effectively — the very-very few?

This is Snowflake moron-ism at its most representative.

The optics get worse

First, in May, the CDC opted to stop tracking vaccinated people's 'breakthrough' COVID infections, unless they were hospitalized or sent to the Great Beyond.

This new administrative practice, naturally, made the vaccines look more protective than they actually are. Big Pharma thereby demonstrated its control of the regulatory agency that purportedly keeps it in line.

In essence, the CDC is following the United States' now well-entrenched policy of learning as little about COVID as it possibly can.

Second, by the CDC's own data, COVID predominantly kills comorbid and overly 'fattish' folk. Yet, have you seen any public health appeals aimed at reducing those conditions to more manageable levels?

No.

None at all.

In short — exactly as with the proposed (and reasonably well demonstrated) use of generic-based COVID prophylactics and early infection interventions — corporate-owned America has obliterated those profit-denying and most obvious of public health messages.

The moral? — Corruption's autocratically inclined stink lies on everything . . .

. . . that American Government and Corporatism touch.

Think about that, before you cave to the Oligarchy's vaccine-mandating hysteria.

PeteFree.com

Mandated vaccine passports for vaccines that do not work very well?