On Wednesday, they had a piece urging the FDA to just go ahead and approve the vaccines without completing its full process.
Think of it this way: In the highly unlikely event that the evidence were to change radically — if, say, the vaccines began causing serious side effects about 18 months after people had received a shot — Americans would not react by feeling confident in the F.D.A. and grateful for its caution. They would be outraged that Woodcock and other top officials had urged people to get vaccinated.The combination means that the F.D.A.’s lack of formal approval has few benefits and large costs: The agency has neither protected its reputation for extreme caution nor maximized the number of Americans who have been protected from Covid. “In my mind, it’s the No. 1 issue in American public health,” Topol told me. “If we got F.D.A. approval, we could get another 20 million vaccinated,” he estimated.
Today there is a lengthy argument in favor of just instituting vaccine mandates.
[V]accine mandates cause intense disputes. But when supporters win the argument, public health has often benefited. Guy Nicolette, an administrator at the University of California, Berkeley, pointed out to The Washington Post that colleges have long required other vaccines, like the one for measles. “It’s staggering how well a mandate works on a college campus,” he said.Dr. Aaron Carroll, Indiana University’s chief health officer, has noted that the country’s victories over many diseases — including smallpox, polio, mumps, rubella and diphtheria — have depended on vaccine mandates by states or local governments. “That’s how the country achieves real herd immunity,” Carroll wrote in The Times. (In the U.S., a national mandate may be unconstitutional.)
Nice to hear that last bit raised as a concern, at least for now. I remember President Obama pointing out that it would be unconstitutional for him to just use an executive order to create something like DACA, up until he did in fact do exactly that when it proved the only way to get his way. Perhaps they mean it this time, though.
If you'd like to read an argument actually persuading you that vaccines are mostly safe and a good idea, however, here's Paul Goepfert, M.D., of the University of Alabama at Birmingham. He has what strike me as a very plausible account of why my major remaining concern -- long term side effects -- is probably not worth continuing to carry. I found his account very plausible; whereas I find the NYT's preferences provoke rebellion even as suggestions.
11 comments:
In South East rural Indiana we have a problem with FDA Tyranny
There are not enough local county meat processing plants and wait times are out 2.5 years to get meat processed...
Seems there are way too many federal regulations blocking the opening of new businesses
I wish the Federal Gov't would get the hell out of our way
Has anyone else noticed these sorts of problems?
Greg
I'm not a NYT subscriber (any more) and hence can't read the article. But I don't see how it's possible to argue either for or against regular approval rather than emergency approval unless one goes into all the details of the hoop-jumping required for regular approval, and discusses the merits (or otherwise) of these hoops in the current context.
The reason these vaccines got done so fast is because **Trump pushed them.** If someone else--almost anyone else--had still been president, then the vaccines would be available in maybe 3-5 years. A lot more people would have died, and the economy would be in shreds...but the vaccines would have a nice, standard FDA seal of approval.
I'm not a subscriber either, David Foster; this is from their free newsletter they send out every morning. I wouldn't pay for this content, I'm just willing to read it if they are willing to provide it. :)
To your larger point, I hear the FDA will have final approval of at least one of these by September. The military is issuing WARNOs telling soldiers to prepare to be vaccinated as soon as that happens, and that's the timeline they're being told.
Isn't it interesting how energetic the government can be when it comes to insisting on shortcuts?
Shouldn't there be lots of evidence by now? Better yet, shouldn't there be a reliable way to test and measure antibody strength by now, when we're still relying on a limited, poorly applied lab procedure that is performed to differing specifications in different states, and is prone to returning with false positive results?
It isn't just that they want to short-circuit a rigourous examination of efficacy and safety for the vaccines. It's that they're too lazy to do the work that would go a long ways to supporting the use of the vaccine in the first place.
And that doesn't even consider the successful uses of Ivermectin and hydroxy-choloroquine by other countries to mitigate the severity of infection.
Do The Work.
It is interesting that their first idea was to short-circuit the FDA's process. Even if it worked once, the long-term cost is that the next time around the FDA doesn't have credibility. These guys have torched so many institutions' credibility over the years, maybe they think it doesn't matter; but here is just why it does. When you don't have the power to make people do something, being able to convince them to do it is the only way.
Of course, that leads to the second instinct: seize the power to force everyone.
Shouldn't there be lots of evidence by now?
That was an important part of Dr. Goepfert's point: there actually is a lot of evidence now. The FDA process involves a longer time but many fewer doses. Since we've been giving these things out so widely -- 2.33 billion doses since they started last fall -- we're seeing things that only occur on the one-in-a-million scale and even less often. He thinks we should at this point expect to have seen everything we're going to see, and have enough data to quantify the risks.
"Vaccine" Adverse Effects are showing up now. At a rate that would get any other vaccine taken off the market immediately. And has. And they are pushing this frantically for people who have no risk at all.
And the censorship of any contrary opinions or treatment options is breathtaking- they are all in- the gov, the media, the social platforms.
There is no mainstream info to be trusted. It is lies all the way down.
""...I find the NYT's preferences provoke rebellion even as suggestions."
Perhaps that's their real intent.
I warned humans, including those here in February 28 2020 (I remember the exact one), that these waxxines were going to be a binary bio toxin along with whatever bio weapon they called COrona 19.
I know how they work. Unfortunately better than Jim and other military vets. The Dark State has a long history of keeping the mlitary in the dark, literally like mushrooms.
How many fatalities do humans need before they take this seriously and the Words of God, communicated by this messenger, seriously?
1 billion? 5?
Name it.
We will take your vote under serious consideration, unlike Dominion.
https://www.infowars.com/posts/fda-announces-that-cdcs-pcr-test-failed-review-will-have-emergency-use-authorization-revoked/
Oh forgot I read this today.
The PCR test, the one that distributed the corona bio weapon in the first place, plus chem trails air sprayed.
Class 1 recall.
It has done the job.
THe dark's timeline was lockdowns for 5-10 years, to get people with stockholme syndrome. SO they would be willing to do anything to be released, pleasing their captors.
This low waxination rate, and Donald's warp speed op, messed them up.
But know this, the dark's intent is still and always, the Georgia Guidestone numbers. Depopulation to 500 total million humans. They will never stop. They will try try again.
Post a Comment