Why I Said No to the Covid Shots
To those of you who were vaccinated with the Covid shots, if you want to know why we refused, this is why.
*The following is an essay based on material that will be part of a small book that will be only available in full to those with a full-subscription. Some tasters of the book will be available to those with free subscriptions.
I am unvaccinated. In that, what I mean is that I refused the medical experiment that, and still is, the SARS-Cov2 mRNA shots. I write this to those of you who were vaccinated with the mRNA shots, but especially to those who disliked or continue to dislike people like myself, but nevertheless hold some genuine curiosity as to why we took the stand that we did. Bless you for having this curiosity. And equally, I write to those who hated and cursed people like me, treating us like the National Socialists treated Jews, demanding papers of us, creating in effect an internal passport system; accusing us of being disease-spreaders who needed to be barred from public baths, clinics and other venues; attempting to bar us from positions of prestige within organizations essentially for wrongthink, and, in general, blamable for myriad social ills. How do so many of you delight in tossing around the word discrimination without once throwing it our way?
I’ll be upfront. You provided my brethren and I an amazing opportunity to be part of history and prove ourselves. Jesus tells Judas for a reason “what you must do, do it now”. Without Judas’ actions, the act of rebirth would not have happened. You have shown my fellows and I what we are really made of, and allowed us to demonstrate to those of you we disagreed with why we said what we did. Many of you wished to use the force of the state to make us succumb. Many did. I write this to explain to those interested enough to desire to know why we, The Unvaxxed, said no. I wish to stress from the outset that I respect your decision to take those shots. I cannot stress this enough. I didn’t wish to employ force against you to stop you from taking them. I ask why many of you as such felt the necessity to employ the force of the State to do so to us? Necessity? It’s the same argument that the Nazis and any socialist government has ever made. Apartheid was enforced under the same argument. If you have trouble understanding why I might respect your decision to have taken those shots, even if I would have recommended and tried all the powers of my persuasion to prevent you from deciding to take them, then you probably have trouble imagining how differences can be solved without violence, or the threat of it.
We have gone a long way from “two weeks to stem the curve” to yearly booster shots. Do you remember the former? I remember telling people that that would be the first lie. It was much longer than that, wasn’t it? But I’m digressing.
The manner of our refusals was the roughly the same, but overall, we all threw suspicion on the Covid shots for our own reasons: some had a dislike of overmedication; others a distrust of the way the situation was being handled; some had suspicion of vaccines in general, largely from personal experiences that feel like they are deliberately dismissed rather than addressed respectfully; others had respect for and support of vaccines to the extent that they felt including these mRNA shots within that label would have been to have spat in the face of such a term; for most of us we felt general scientific caution; many had a huge distrust of most things associated with the government; for some it was distrust of particular ‘leaders’; many of us had a lot of distrust of the mainstream media; some had generally disagreeable personalities that tend to contrarianism; others had initial support and enthusiasm for the shots that waned suddenly after seeing acquaintances or loved ones suffer side-effects at a rate that just couldn’t have been, given that these side-effects were officially ‘rare’. The list could be as long as this essay, if I were to drag it out. In short, although we each had different reasons, the base of our reasons could be trifurcated into the proper process of science and the available evidence at the time; general distrust of those entities in society we have become, or think we should be, skeptical towards, such as government and mainstream media; and concerns over the way the shots were being used to erode liberty and employed as a threat.
For me, I am a maverick scholar, and I have seen behind the curtain of both mainstream and non-mainstream journalism. As a scholar, I look at evidence. When 99% of people were surviving their Covid infection, and it looked to mainly be a concern for people over the age of 65, this gave me pause. When I learned about ivermectin being employed in around 25% of countries in the world as an effective treatment, this gave me pause. The fact that I learned about the latter, in contrast to the mainstream and the narrative in the West being so far against ivermectin, gave me more pause. I ended up taking some ivermectin myself later as a prophylactic, after discovering that medical workers in Northern India had been doing the same thing, reducing infections by over 90%. When I see the ability to disagree and engage in debate being crushed, wherever or whenever it is, I naturally become suspicious and cold to whatever narrative is pushed under such circumstances.
One of the first reasons we resisted was that those who were critical of The Panic right from the outset were people who don’t lurk in the mainstream at all. A lot of these people were middle-aged or in their Golden Years, old and wise enough to know that a lot of what society pushes are lies. These are people who have had a lifetime of experiences of false panics and hysterias drummed up by the media that fizzled out to an ember, but the imprints of the fear of which did not fizzle out, but rather remained burned in their memories. A lot of these people had backgrounds in alternative medicine, and you can find them commenting in threads on various websites that are by-and-large unknown to most average people. These people were not just against the vaccines, but were skeptical of the origins of the virus in the first place. They have worked in journalism, or in the military, or in the medical industry, or other fields where they saw corruption and things that most people don’t see, things that go against official narratives or are known only as ‘conspiracies’. You can’t undo a lifetime of such experiences, and this is why many of these people refused to take those shots. When they were being told by the government that the shots were extremely effective, or that it was deeply important for them to do so, you have to understand that their trust in such sources or claims had already been eroded to grains. Many more people have joined this group as a result of their experiences over the last few years.
This is because, for all of we unvaccinated, one of the other main reasons we took the stand that we did was the censorship on the issue. Right from the outset of The Panic, social media giants started ‘fact-checking’ claims and material posted online, and the mainstream media and governments pushed their particular perspective. The evidence, claims and questions that were pushed out and silenced during all of this could fill volumes, but they included the repetition and promotion of certain doctors at the expense of other doctors, such as the official embrace of Neil Ferguson and Imperial College London’s claims about the necessity of lockdowns and vaccine-development, at the expense of doctors such as America’s Frontline Doctors, who were trying different treatments, and The Great Barrington Declaration, which proposed limited lockdowns only for those most at risk. Despite the fear at the start of 2020, those who came to resist the Covid shots got to know people who tested positive and after a period of illness, recovered, and learned that apart from the elderly, adults and children who were in good-to-fairly good health survived. Regardless, stating this publicly was a taboo.
When it came to the vaccines themselves, the main issues for all of us were twofold. First, the definition of ‘a vaccine’ was amended by health agencies to not only be an injection of a medicine which would produce an immune response that would successfully prevent infection from a particular virus, but to now also be an injection of a medicine that would not produce an immune response that would successfully prevent infection from a particular virus, but might only help reduce symptoms. Secondly, the infamous data claiming that the vaccines “were 95% effective”, parroted on media outlets the world over, if one read a little deeper, referred to something in medical parlance called RRR, Relative Risk Reduction, as opposed to ARR, Absolute Risk Reduction. These terms are elemental in vaccine production, and refer to reduction of symptoms as opposed to reduction in infection. Pfizer’s data from their initial tests showed a 1% ARR. That primary claim as the shots were being rolled out was thus misunderstood by many people. As most of us had learned about this, this further entrenched our stance. This has been added to ever since as those injected with the shots have had higher infection rates than we unvaxxed, and it is being slowly accepted by doctors that those of us who now have natural immunity are less likely to be infected. Can I add to that that, even though most of us needed no other reasons to be so resistant, no coronavirus vaccine, be it for any form of coronavirus, has ever been developed successfully to prevent infection from a coronavirus. Coronaviruses seem to mutate too quickly for an effective vaccine to be producible.
One of the other chief apprehensions that many people who took the shots don’t seem, even now, to know is that their technology is completely different from standard vaccines, which inject a dead version of the virus into the person. The Covid mRNA shots only inject a synthetically-created spike protein into the body. Upon learning this, many of us have asked how being injected with only one-fifth of the virus’s material can somehow make us immune to the whole virus. But additionally, despite being a technology with thirty years of history, mRNA shots had never been passed from cell and animal trials to human trials before 2020. Yes, they were tested on humans, but only for two months prior to their worldwide rollout.
These chronicles could fill many pages, and you can read about them elsewhere. But this is what we feared. Ultimately, those who just wanted to ask questions, such as what the risks were by age, if this could be quantified by numbers, or if they could wait more months to get more information before taking the injections, were either shut down or made to feel the need to keep quiet. It has happened innumerable times and will always happen again, but when debate is shut down, livelihoods are threatened and people feel bullied into a position rather than being persuaded by reason and logic, or free to disagree without being harangued or forced into silent vigilance, people are going to become more entrenched against whatever position you are trying to get them to take. All my personal experiences and studies have led me to the sad, but I believe correct, conclusion that the average person doesn’t really care about free speech because they don’t need it – they don’t have anything to say that will ever ruffle any feathers; depending on the memetic background, they will say that free speech is important, or not, but in practice, when push comes to shove, they won’t defend it.
If you’ve read this far, you are either a fellow traveller, or have a curiosity that I hope has been rewarded with my candor, and what I hope good writing. Either that, or like Eichmann, who learned Hebrew and was somewhat well-versed in Jewish culture, your curiosity is not benign. This is just a short essay for those of you with whom we have disagreed, and it doesn’t mention many other things. There are those of us who might have taken the stance out of anger at all that was done to them during The Panic. According to various sources, there are now one million extra alcoholics in the UK. Paul Alexander has been compiling personal stories of the damage that the lockdowns and The Panic did. I have encountered respect from quite a few people who, during The Panic, didn’t see eye to eye with me on the shots.
I will repeat again that, even if many of you might think it incredulous, nearly of we dissenters did not wish to force you to not take the shots, and most believed that, if you really wish to take them of your own volition, this is your choice. We just didn’t wish that to be forced on us, and most of us didn’t think that you should have taken them. As I have said, if I turn out to be wrong, we’ll see soon enough. And likewise, if you are wrong. Overall, my years of studying socialism and authoritarianism, resulting in viewpoints and adherence to what I believe to be moral, made me leave journalism, given what it is like, and to not rub shoulders easily within journalistic and literary circles, where capitalistic, limited-state or no-state views are unpopular, to say the least. But all these studies gave me what I needed for what I believe was the most important decision of my life. I said no. And for similar such reasons, that is why my fellow dissenters said no.
Good stuff my friend… In My Case, All I Had to Hear was Untested, DNA Altering thru Gene Deletion, (and on Moderna’s front Webpage, it says) a Biological Operating System…. I Took the time to Read up- And the more the coercion increased, the more sinister I was sure it was…