Expect the media to sensationalize minor adverse reactions to the vaccine.

American science is making terrific progress on a COVID vaccine. This is great news for America, which of course makes it bad news for Democrats.

First, the great news. A company named Moderna has released data on further clinical trials of its promising vaccine. The results were published after peer review in the most prestigious medical journal in the history of the world, the New England Journal of Medicine.

There were 45 test volunteers. Every single one of the 45 developed a “robust” antibody response. There were “no serious adverse events” in any of the 45 patients.

That’s not to say there were no adverse effects at all. A significant number of patients developed side effects. But “side effects” were defined broadly to include such things as “pain at the site of the injection.”

The vaccine is entering Phase 3 clinical trials this month where it will be tested on up to 30,000 volunteers. If everything stays on track, it will be approved for widespread use this fall. Meanwhile, over 200 other vaccines are under consideration and at least 19 are in clinical testing.

Big Pharma is awful, isn’t it, except when you need a medicine to save the world.

Which brings us to the media and other Democrats. They have bigger fish to fry than saving the world, namely regaining the presidency.

Recall that in the early weeks of the pandemic the Democrats criticized Trump of “xenophobia” and “racism” for banning travel with infected regions. To contrast themselves with Trump, the Dems themselves encouraged people to get together for parties.

As the pandemic worsened, the Dems realized they could get more political mileage by adopting the opposite strategy. So, of course, that’s what they did.

They accused Trump of manslaughter for doing too little only weeks after he was accused of xenophobia and racism for doing too much. The pandemic would kill millions of Americans, they warned and hoped.

Spurious recounts, rogue Electoral College voters, invented Russian collusion, fake pee-pee dossiers and groundless impeachment had failed to derail Trump’s presidency, but millions of deaths in a pandemic surely would do the job.

When Trump spoke optimistically about treatments, he was judged dangerously foolish. When the treatments later proved sometimes effective, the earlier bad judgment was never acknowledged; the critics simply moved on to another ill-informed condemnation. Meanwhile, they themselves injected the virus into nursing homes.

Alas, even with the aid of their clever nursing home strategy, the virus disappointed the Dems by failing to kill millions.

The Dems’ fallback plan is to keep the country shut down until after the November election. The catastrophic economic and social ramifications to the country and her citizens would surely defeat Trump, they hope.

The people catastrophized are the poor, who are most vulnerable to an economic shutdown. But the Dems don’t actually care about such people as much as they care about power.

So in opposing the re-opening of the country, the media and other Democrats warned in late April that re-openings would spike the death toll to 3,000/day by June 1.

But the virus again failed to be as deadly as the Dems hoped. The death toll at the start of June was less than a third of the 3,000 that the Dems promised.

Naturally, the media never mentioned that their dire promise had proved false. News is deemed not newsworthy when it runs contrary to the Dem narrative.

Finally, it became obvious even to foot-dragging Dem governors that they had to re-open their states.

The media seized on the re-opening of the country to re-open the hysteria. The re-opening did not coincide with an increase in the virus death toll, but did coincide with increases in “new cases.” The media naturally focused on the increased new cases – which are partly a result of increased testing – and ignored the decreased deaths.

Now we’re on the verge of a vaccine that could send the COVID virus to the ash heap of history along with the polio virus. To the Democrats, this COVID vaccine is a serious adverse event. It could cost them the election.

The media and other Dems will resort to what they’re good at – deceit. They will focus on the minor side effects produced by the vaccine, and sensationalize them into a major health risk.

The Dems have anti-science on their side. An odd alliance of mostly far-left and a few far-right theorists united only by their scientific ignorance thinks that vaccines are a conspiracy by the likes of Bill Gates to implant microchips in all of us, or something.

Really, the richest and most generous philanthropist in the history of the world wants to spy on me?

Building on their anti-vaxxer base, the Dems will demonize the vaccine. Biotech companies with brilliant scientists working day and night to develop new vaccines at an amazing pace under peer review and rigorous testing to save thousands of lives will be called profiteering murderers.

(And anyway, I demand to know how many of these scientists are LGBTQ or POC. Are we supposed to use medicine developed by teams that don’t look like America merely because it saves lives?)

It’s all a lie by the Dems. This lie will smear good men and women of science, and kill fearful people who would have been immune if the Dems hadn’t told them not to take the vaccine.

To the Dems, the terrible consequences of their fear-mongering is just collateral damage in their justifiable war for power. To me, it’s despicable.

13 thoughts on “Expect the media to sensationalize minor adverse reactions to the vaccine.

  1. This is quite interesting, Glenn. Your column has been posted for roughly twelve hours, and I see not a single comment, which is a first for as long as I’ve been reading you. So what to make of this?

    Could it be that your audience cannot quite conceive of such enormous evil as you allege on the part of such a large portion of our population, and of one of the major two political parties that have authored our national discourse for well over a century?

    For my part, everything you predict is not only plausible, but almost self-evident. We are, indeed, dealing with evil on a massive scale. My only criticism is that you go too light on Bill Gates. At your age you probably don’t care if you find yourself sterilized, or worse, by a Gates-funded vaccine, but
    millions of Third Worlders in Africa and elsewhere might not be so unconcerned.

    As Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has written to President Trump, we are dealing with “the children of darkness” in a spiritual theater of war as vast and old as Creation itself. Indeed, they have infiltrated the Catholic Church itself to a shocking degree. We need to expect the worst and gird our loins.

    So good column, my friend!

    • Chad, I can explain my post, which is late, regarding this column: It went into my spam and I was busy changing diapers and did not check all of the quirks that are in these mysterious machines, that have made humans their slaves.
      As to any other posters who have hesitated, if they are not changing diapers, then I propose that this column discusses a subject they would rather avoid, but it is not that they “cannot quite conceive of such enormous evil, but rather that, conservative or not, they prefer not to have to think about “such enormous evil,” do not want to imagine that humans are capable of “such enormous evil,” and so are maybe a little ambivalent about how to comment. It takes a Thomist to be able to relate Holy Hope and Jesus Christ.
      But not me, who responds, agreeing completely with your last two paragraphs and adding, I especially admire the accento grave on Viganò’s name, not to mention the force of his letter to Trump.
      Finally, we presume to admonish those not changing diapers, those looking for excuses to avoid the subject of “enormous evil” working in this sickness–take that word as broadly as you can: Be careful of the importance, and work, that you provide this subject, because the children who still need their diapers changed at this stage, will need to know how to reject the lib/lefty/:progressive”/moral relativist/subjectivist/humanist/secularist/Democrat regimes who will force them into the slavery that libism/leftyism/”progressivism”/moral relativism/subjectivism/humanism/secularism requires for the success of their lies.

  2. On the subject of Bill (and Melinda) Gates, without sounding too tin-foil hat, it is clear that they are globalists, who view human beings as numbers on a chart that must be massaged (ie., reduced) for the sake of the planet. The implicit, inherent evil in their utilitarian thinking, which values the greatest good for the greatest number, was laid bare brilliantly in Swift’s “A Modest Proposal.” They do not merit the title of “philanthropists” since their “love of mankind” is twisted, their promotion of vaccines notwithstanding.

    Needless to say, they view Trump’s voters as the last great barrier to folding America into The New World Order.

  3. I don’t write as well as Glenn, Chad or Luis, all of whom I agree with. However, back when shut downs started I boiled this disaster down to the following … the cure is worse than the disease, and the democrats love the cure.

  4. a major assumption you make is that the vaccine would be effective. I’m sure you think all of medical interventions are just restricted by some anal bureaucrats bent on control and effectiveness is always a given. Personally I wouldn’t go near it as the virus has less risk to me than the long list of side effects
    most vaccines produce

    • I don’t “assume” the vaccine will be effective. That’s a data point that is established in the clinical tests.

      In the latest test of Moderna’s vaccine, it produced a “robust” antibody response (something like 4x the response produced by actually contracting the disease) in every one of 45 patients. Next up is a Phase 3 trial that will test it in as many as 3,000 patients.

      You are correct that there will be minor side effects, including “pain at the injection site” which somewhat comically has been classified as a side effect. I’ll endure those side effects for the knowledge that I’ve been immunized against COVID, but I recognize that others may weigh the pros and cons differently.

  5. One of the side effects of the regular flu vaccine is DEATH.
    Now wanna ask me if I am going to not get this vaccine too?

  6. Being “anti-vax” is not a Republican or Democrat issue, although from what I have read, Republicans seem to be less likely to implement new mandatory vaccination policies than Democrats– e.g., recent events in California, New York, and Colorado. There are many on both sides of the political spectrum who are concerned with the safety and/or morality of vaccinations. For example, many conservatives oppose the use of human diploid cells, sourced from aborted fetuses, in many vaccines, including the COVID-19 vaccines being developed (see: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/06/abortion-opponents-protest-covid-19-vaccines-use-fetal-cells). There are other reasoned concerns with the “Warp Speed” aspect of what is currently happening, not the least of which is the lack of animal trials (the SARS animal trials killed all the mice: see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3335060/).

  7. I will not be accepting the vaccine no matter who develops it ( Moderna – funded by Gates foundation) or my neighbors form
    Also working on one. It will be rolled out without any long term evidence of its effectiveness or safety.

    • So, just how long do you think that people (other than volunteers) should refuse to be vaccinated until the possible “long term effects” have been established with 100% certainty? And in the meantime, how many people will either have to die from the disease or to have their livelihoods destroyed by mandatory closures of businesses and schools?

      The way out of this pandemic is a rational balance between personal protective measures such as wearing masks in public places, avoiding mass gatherings, and eventually (hopefully) becoming vaccinated according to standard practice in public health, which involves extensive testing of vaccines for effectiveness and safety but, no, doesn’t guarantee 100% safety and effectiveness, because there is no such thing in any human activity.

      • An argument could be made that lockdowns were never needed as the case numbers were and continue to be inflated considering the majority of COVID-19 deaths are associated with multiple comorbidities and the majority of the new cases involve younger asymptomatic people. In addition, reports of new cases being added to the new case column associated with people who test positive many times before they finally test negative–each positive test for a single individual being added to the new case column. Many other odd reporting irregularities have been documented. These reports lower public trust. Furthermore, vaccine manufacturers are not liable for adverse events–they can’t be sued. Pharmaceutical companies enjoy all the benefits and assume none of the risks. The government has assumed the liability and has paid out over 4 billion dollars to date, but good luck getting compensated today, as the number of adverse events being reported continues to increase beyond what the government can afford to pay. Pharmaceutical companies enjoy all the benefits and assume none of the risks. Therefore, should reports of the efficacy of a COVID-19 vaccine be trusted, considering the many conflicts of interest involving billions of dollars? Should people have to assume all the risk for a potentially deadly vaccine? One other note, the implications of which speaks for itself: Dr. Fauci and colleagues lied to the public about mask wearing–first claiming they were not necessary, and more recently, when death rates began to decline, asserting that they are essential.

  8. “All 45 subjects developed robust antibodies.” The same thing that happens when someone gets the disease. Some months later those antibodies will have disappeared, which is the same thing that happens to antibodies developed by people who get the disease. “Experts” will then say the vaccine doesn’t work, just as they claim that having the disease doesn’t confer immunity. Fact: if having the disease doesn’t confer immunity, then a vaccine is impossible.

    Quick lesson in how immunity works. It is not important that antibodies remain. Think about it. That would mean that your blood had to carry at all times antibodies for tens of thousands of infectious agents. Nature would not create such a ridiculous system, one which would make your blood too thick to flow in your veins.

    What a vaccine (or the disease) does is TEACH YOUR BODY HOW TO MAKE ANTIBODIES so that it can do so very rapidly when the need to do so arises. Without the vaccine the virus can kill you before your body manages to develop the antibody to cope with it. With the vaccine, or after having the disease, your body produces antibodies immediately, so while you will still get sick, it will only be very mild so and it will pass quickly.

Leave a Reply to Bill Heffner Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s