![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 102
As we near the end of the second year of these open posts, it's pretty clear that the official narrative is cracking as the toll of deaths and injuries from the Covid vaccines rises steadily and the vaccines themselves demonstrate their total uselessness at preventing Covid infection or transmission. It's still important to keep watch over the mis-, mal- and nonfeasance of our self-proclaimed health gruppenfuehrers, and the disastrous results of the Covid mania, but I think it's also time to begin thinking about what might be possible as the existing medical industry reels under the impact of its own self-inflicted injuries. So it's time for another open post. The rules are the same as before:
1. If you plan on parroting the party line of the medical industry and its paid shills, please go away. This is a place for people to talk openly, honestly, and freely about their concerns that the party line in question is dangerously flawed and that actions being pushed by the medical industry et al. are causing injury and death. It is not a place for you to dismiss those concerns. Anyone who wants to hear the official story and the arguments in favor of it can find those on hundreds of thousands of websites.
2. If you plan on insisting that the current situation is the result of a deliberate plot by some villainous group of people or other, please go away. There are tens of thousands of websites currently rehashing various conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 outbreak and the vaccines. This is not one of them. What we're exploring is the likelihood that what's going on is the product of the same arrogance, incompetence, and corruption that the medical industry and its tame politicians have displayed so abundantly in recent decades. That possibility deserves a space of its own for discussion, and that's what we're doing here.
3. If you plan on using rent-a-troll derailing or disruption tactics, please go away. I'm quite familiar with the standard tactics used by troll farms to disrupt online forums, and am ready, willing, and able -- and in fact quite eager -- to ban people permanently for engaging in them here. Oh, and I also lurk on other Covid-19 vaccine skeptic blogs, so I'm likely to notice when the same posts are showing up on more than one venue.
4. If you don't believe in treating people with common courtesy, please go away. I have, and enforce, a strict courtesy policy on my blogs and online forums, and this is no exception. The sort of schoolyard bullying that takes place on so many other internet forums will get you deleted and banned here. Also, please don't drag in current quarrels about sex, race, religions, etc. No, I don't care if you disagree with that: my journal, my rules.
With that said, the floor is open for discussion.
Re: The Epiphany (A reflection thread on pandemic choices)
The basic formula is: A<BxC If this statement is true, then it is worthwhile to do the thing, because the benefit is greater than the cost. Here, A is the cost of mitigating a risk (in this case, that's mostly the side effects of the shots). B is the risk that you are trying to mitigate (the danger posed by "covid"). C is the degree to which risk B will be reduced by the proposed mitigation strategy. At the time when the experimental gene therapy was becoming available, the cost A was pretty much unknown. The long-term risks were, of course, completely unknown. Even the phony trials had found enough problems to suggest that the short-term risks were not trivial. Effectiveness C was advertised as close to 100%, although a close reading of the trial data suggested it was quite a bit lower than that. The one factor that was pretty well established by that point was the danger of covid B. Based on what I knew at the time, it looked like for an otherwise healthy person under 60 or so the risk was pretty dang close to zero. If factor B in the equation is zero, then it doesn't matter what the other two factors are. There is no scenario where it makes sense to pursue a mitigation strategy because the cost will always be greater than the benefit. In 2020, it still looked like there might be some people for whom risk B was great enough that the formula might resolve to TRUE and thus recommend getting the shot. With what I know now, I'm not convinced that it ever makes sense for anyone. However, if I had been part of a "vulnerable population" I might have gone for it based on what I thought I knew in 2020. I certainly don't fault my parents for their decision to get it.