Is peak Covid Panic starting to wane? Or is the ban on thinking losing its efficacy--a bit like the gene therapy injections losing their efficacy over time? It seems beyond coincidence that these "breakthrough articles" are coming out at the same time as the rising tide of reports concerning the loss of efficacy and the rapid increase in breakthrough Covid cases.
Three developments in recent reporting point in that direction. The significance of the developments really lies in where they come from--mainstream media outlets and institutions. My summaries are from Zerohedge.
The first article relates to two articles--one by the BBC and one by Bloomberg--which came out last week. Neither article is great, but the fact that they appeared at all in MSM outlets raised eyebrows. And there have been a few other similar articles hinting at questions slowly fermenting in woke skulls. These are questions that were strictly verboten for wokesters--until now? Excerpt:
Former Congressman Ron Paul has highlighted this week that a handful of mainstream media articles have actually begun to break ranks in terms of questioning key aspects of vaccine effectiveness and mandates, particularly when it comes to the controversial boosters now being widely proposed.
"Even mainstream media is now asking big questions about the vaccines" Wednesday's Liberty Report featured. A couple of recent headlines in Bloomberg and BBC were unexpected in terms the criticism reflected and somewhat skeptical pushback against the 'consensus narrative'.
Even Mainstream Media Is Now Asking Big Questions About The Vaccines pic.twitter.com/CMRxiphMKT— Ron Paul (@RonPaul) August 23, 2021
The first news article that Congressman Paul and co-host Daniel McAdams highlight is from Bloomberg.
Here's how the very unexpected Bloomberg article, which was published this past weekend, began:
Anecdotes tell us what the data can’t: Vaccinated people appear to be getting the coronavirus at a surprisingly high rate. But exactly how often isn’t clear, nor is it certain how likely they are to spread the virus to others.
Though it is evident vaccination still provides powerful protection against the virus, there’s growing concern that vaccinated people may be more vulnerable to serious illness than previously thought.
There’s growing concern that vaccinated people may be more vulnerable to serious illness from the Covid delta variant than previously thought https://t.co/R6HsDJu9p0— Bloomberg (@business) August 21, 2021
And the same day as the BBG headline, there was this from UK government-funded BBC...
"Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?"
The story began:
It is now a serious question that has implications for whether children should ever be vaccinated. And whether we use the virus or booster shots to top up immunity in adults. Both have become contentious issues.
"We could be digging ourselves into a hole, for a very long time, where we think we can only keep Covid away by boosting every year," Prof Eleanor Riley, an immunologist from the University of Edinburgh, told me.
Surprising...— Anna Brees (@BreesAnna) August 21, 2021
Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine? - BBC News https://t.co/cKvoscmcuO
A mere month or more ago such statements found in these couple of mainstream media articles would get a person possibly suspended from Facebook or Twitter.
Now, even more recently, from ultra-liberal Politico--excerpts:
A growing number of public health officials working at the state level are worried that the federal government isn't collecting enough accurate data about "breakthrough" infections, yet the Biden Administration has pushed ahead with plans to dole out booster shots, as well as other COVID policies.
According to Politico, 49 states are now regularly sending CDC information on hospitalized breakthrough patients. But more than a dozen have told Politico that they do not have the capacity to match hospital admission data with patients' immunization records, forcing states to rely on hospital administrators to report breakthrough infections.
The result is data that is often aggregated, inaccurate and missing critical details like which vaccine the consumer received . Instead, those states rely on hospital administrators to report breakthrough infections. The resulting data is often aggregated, inaccurate and omits critical details for teasing out trends, such as which vaccine a person received and whether they have been fully vaccinated, a dozen state officials said.
The fact that the CDC and public health departments across the country are still struggling to collect data on breakthrough infections is almost embarrassing, considering we're more than 18 months into the pandemic at this point, and scientists have repeatedly warned about the necessity of being prepared for the Omega Death Variant which is right around the corner, according to Dr. Fauci's latest fearmongering blitz.
Formulating public health policy without adequate data--what could go wrong with that? Hey, we've been doing that for the better part of two years, and look where we are.
Granted, this is all very complicated--you can read about it at the link. Still, yes, it is embarrassing that our response has been so inadequate.
Finally, another development that was reported earlier. It's significant because Spain is a significant European country and one would have expected them to remain in lockstep with its neighbor, France. The article, republished from Naked Capitalism, goes into considerable detail regarding the complicated territory of Spanish politics. Still, the bottom line remains:
It’s the first time a high court of a European Member State has challenged the use of vaccine passports domestically.
In its August 18 ruling, against using the Digital Covid Certificate to grant or deny access to nightlife venues, the Supreme Court said there wasn’t enough “substantial justification” for the requirement of a health pass in bars and nightclubs across the entire region of Andalusia, seeing it more as a “preventative measure” rather than a necessary action. Instead, it said the measure “restrictively affects basic elements of freedom of movement and the right of assembly.”
Interestingly, the Supreme Court also said that using vaccine passports to control access to public spaces and services may not even help prevent infections. In fact, it may exacerbate them, given that recent research has shown that people who have been vaccinated or previously infected with Covid-19 can still catch and spread the virus. As such, implementing a vaccine passport system does not protect others from infection, including those who gain access to a public space by presenting a negative result of a PCR test. Such a document, the court said, “only proves that at the time of the test these people were not carrying the active virus”.
By now it is clear, as Yves laid out meticulously on Friday, that the vaccines are not what they were cracked up to be. Their efficacy fades quickly and is particularly depleted against the Delta variant. Research has also shown that the virus loads of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated are almost identical with regard to the Delta variant. As such, if a vaccinated person and an unvaccinated person have roughly the same capacity to carry, shed and transmit the virus, particularly in its Delta form, what difference does implementing a vaccination passport, certificate or ID actually make to the spread of the virus?
That's refreshing! A Supreme Court openly weighing the risk/benefit calculus and relying on what appears to have been very up-to-date data. Could this start a trend?
Who did this? pic.twitter.com/ShNbu3u3Pl— Leslie McAdoo Gordon (@McAdooGordon) August 25, 2021