Another interpretation is that we are seeing a predictable backlash against 2+ years of authoritarian covid policy overreach which broke the social contract. The way back is to embrace the principles of voluntary informed consent and cooperation that have always formed the basis of good medical and public health policy. You will not understand or persuade those who disagree with you by vilifying them.
Please also define “anti-vaccine”. Like you, I have had 3 covid shots and have declined more boosters recommended by the CDC. Are we now “anti-vaxxers” too?
“Antivaxers” may be vaccine specific, and aren’t just those who don’t get vaccinated, but are those who spread misinformation about vaccines and discourage others from getting vaccinated.
"Anti-vaccine" and "anti-vaxxer" have become unhelpful slurs which shut down conversations and "other" people based on disagreement.
"Misinformation" is another loaded term which has lost meaning. The CDC recommends annual covid shots for young healthy people. Dr. Offit and most European countries do not. So which one is "spreading misinformation?"
So let’s see. I assume that your don’t consider yourself antivax. I’d that’s the case, then there must exist one or more vaccines that you consider sufficiently effective and safe to use yourself or have your children take and/or to recommend generally for adults or children for whom they are recommended. Surely you can name these vaccines; that is, if you’re not antivax.
Your definition of "misinformation" seems to be vague. If a difference in scientific approach or strategy exists bewteen people, that doesn't mnean one of them is spreading "misinformation". Misinformation is both clearly incorrect, and also is stated with the express aim of misleading the independemt observer away from the facts.
Which is why my definition of "antivaxer" applies to such individuals.
...You have declined boosters. That's your choice. You may have opinions about them, which I would not necessarily call "mosinformation". I am not calling you an antivaxer.
What people don't get to this day is the greatest reason why that overreach occurred, but Occam's Razor informs us greatly. C-19 kills mostly older and unhealthy males, and this was known long before it reached the US. The people in charge of things at every level of society tend to be older and often unhealthy men. Mostly, they ordered the lock-downs to protect themselves, and did so within the limits of their political authority and support base. And yes, I believe this was Xi Jinping's motive for the extremely severe lockdowns in China. Some politicians grandstanded and tried to parlay C-19 into bids for higher office, but most of them were simply into self-protection.
The reason I am an anti-vaxxer or a more accurate term would be a vaccine heretic is simply due the fact that the safety of child hood vaccines has never been properly established.
All you have to do is look at the vaccine package insert of any childhood vaccine to see how little Of a priority safety was.
First red flag is that none of the child hood vaccines have ever gone through a full toxicology screening. None have been tested for there mutagenic or carcinogenic potential or impairment to male fertility
47 of the 114 fda approved vaccines did test for impairment for females.
The clinical trials used for Licensure were efficacy trials to determine Efficacy not Safety.
It is Scientifically impossible to the determine safety of a new vaccine if the control “placebo” is anything other than a saline solution.
In the trail for Prevnar 7 they used an investigational meningococcal vaccine as their placebo/Control to determine Efficacy but they also used it to determine safety.
How do you determine the safety of a new vaccine that didn’t go through a toxicology screen then use another new vaccine that didn’t go through a toxicology screen as the control/placebo to determine safety?
The Prevnar 7 trial shows that the only potentially
safe ingredient is the target antigen.
Per FOIA requests it is now known that none of the childhood vaccines used a saline placebo tor determine safety for Licensure.
Sure you can point to multi million dollar Observational studies that may or may not show a causal association but that can never prove biologically that a vaccine did or did not cause the adverse event.
There is a very simple solution to your Anti-vaccine problems.
Perfect! A little honest quality control and honest concern about quality of product would go a long way. DNA fragments and plasmids along with endotoxins flotsam and jetsam above standards are not OKAY in any “vaccine” improperly shoved into our muscles and infiltrating to our vascular systems. Also, stop demeaning people hesitant to take these untested “vaccines” with their franken -n-1 methyl pseudouridine, designed to stay in our bodies to cause so far, unrecognized and ignored health disasters..
There are numerous publications attesting to the good safety and effectiveness of the vaccines, but instead of looking for the scientific evidence, you link to an antivax screed on rumble?
BTW, you never got back to me about your ridiculous claim that viruses don’t exist, and how Peter Duesberg supported that claim, did you?
You must have had time by now to appraise his submissions to the Perth Group and for the Continuum award where he lays out the proofs that HIV exists and has been isolated… so why no comeback on your mistake?
Duesbergs book and quote were in 1996. I judge them relative to that period and what was known.
He did support the existence of an HIV virus but NEVER the link to AIDS; the symptoms of which are up to 34 opportunistic infections.
Research Scientists on government grants are unlikely to challenge one anothers claims when its outside their realm of expertise.
HIV much like COVID/SARS has NEVER been isolated. Its the existence of antibody and remnant proteins sorrounding cells viewed from flawed high count PCR tests that drives the drama
Sexually transmitted HIV-AIDS is still a myth. A very profitable one (as your paid handlers will tell you) but still a myth
The Left has become more corporate, they've shifted so much, leaving blue collar workers to the Right. That should partly explain why they are more eager now to embrace the products of the big corporates. I'm old enough to remember when me and my fellow lefties were always suspicious of the rich and powerful.
Democrats have sitting members that mimic Hamas’ chant of “from the river to the sea…” As not a single Democrat has condemned them, then every Democrat is a terrorist sympathizer. Biden’s handlers are making him bend over backwards to kiss the derriere of those flying Hamas’ flag. They couldn’t even condemn Ilhan Omar for saying preaching that “some people did something” on 9/11.
you are fool who couldn't distinguish between Hamas and the lice in your pubic hairs, nor terrorists from teenagers loitering in a McDonald's parking lot, I pity your ignorance
I'm going to disagree a bit with Renee DiResta, as much as I respect her, regarding when the rightward shift started. As I've been documenting since at least 2010, the tilt to the right of the antivaccine movement goes back several years before 2015 (2009 at), and, even though in the past the antivax movement had a roughly as strong leftwing component, there nonetheless has long been a right wing/libertarian component to it going back to the 1800s.
In the post above from 2022, I documented this evolution and described how now the antivax movement is now flirting with, even embracing, outright fascism—and why I think that is. Certainly, I will concede that that shift accelerated in 2015 in the wake of the Disneyland measles outbreak California SB 277, the bill that eliminated nonmedical exemptions to school vaccine mandates, and then was turbocharged by COVID-19. However, the rightward shift to the antivax movement goes back at least to the Tea Party movement in 2009. Heck, in 2012, I attended a debate between Steve Novella and antivax quack Julian Whitaker at the right wing/libertarian confab known as Freedomfest, which (I learned) had been promoting antivax propaganda going back a few years before that. In that "debate," Julian Whitaker Gish galloped the familiar antivax tropes, along with portraying vaccine mandates as an assault on "freedom."
Also, let's not forget that the most vocal antivaxxers in Congress in the 1990s were pretty much all Republicans, such as Dan Burton, who used his position as Chair to weaponize the House Oversight Committee to drag CDC scientists for interrogation over the alleged link between vaccines and autism.
I think you need to research what fascism is. It literally means the government controls/mandates what you can and cannot do. Anti vaccine/more properly labeled, anti mandate advocates are exactly the opposite.
I think we all have become less educated from your comment.
Fascism is more than just an generic authoritarian movement like what you describe. It's a specific kind of authoritarian movement with a recognizable set of features that distinguishes it from, for example, authoritarian Communist regimes.
To educate yourself, I suggest that you read Umberto Eco's classic article "Ur-Fascism" or the book "How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them" by Jason Stanley, the Jacob Urowsky Professor of Philosophy at Yale University, both of which I cited and quoted extensively in my post.
Or you can stay ignorant, which is what I predict that you will do.🤷🏻♂️
No its not, its a way in which a government functions. Your trying to tie a philosophy into a description of the way a government governs it citizens. The privatization of the economy vs total ownership of the economy is how you determine communism vs fascism. You can have a fascist democracy, or a fascist dictator, but its not some magical thing that doesn't apply to mandates and taking away freedoms for the betterment of everyone. Your by definition a fascist if your into that.
It’s pointless to argue with someone like you. You clearly don’t even know what fascism actually is and how it’s defined. I refer you again to Prof. Stanley’s book, Umberto Eco’s essay, or any of a number of scholarly works by actual historians and political scientists to learn the basics.
Yes, because he's redefining the common accepted historical definition of fascism, to one of a philosophy. Why a government abuses a class/people within their population to fuel their power isn't what I was even talking about.
Having the power to control peoples lives, but not owning the companies out right is fascism.
Please prove me wrong without some bs philosophical why someone is a fascist, rather than what it is. Drawing on Eco's personal experiences growing up in Mussolini's Italy and his extensive research on fascist movements, the essay offers valuable insights into the nature of fascism and its manifestations.
The last part is the key, its talking about the why, not the what.
I don't need a PH.D to understand having the power to control people = bad. and the more the governments uses that power = facsim.
If you do, then its pointless to argue with you, as you probably need an expert to tell you how do to about everything in your daily life.
Tis was fun, I did read a bit of the book, but honestly didn't think it was worth my time to continue.
Clearly. The arrogance of ignorance is enough for you. Let's just say that I'll accept the evidence- and research-backed discussions of fascism by actual historians and political scientists sooner than some rando showing up on Substack in Dr. Offit's comments bloviating about fascism, complete with a clear lack of understanding of what fascism actually is. I will give you credit, though, for at least not quoting Jonah Goldberg's bullshit. That's something, at least, that Phil (below) couldn't resist doing, even if he didn't actually name Goldberg.
“Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.” — Benito Mussolini
Imagine pretending to be so educated in political theory that you completely miss (or worse, supporting and facilitating) the true emerging fascists. Fascism has ALWAYS come from the Left. Mussolini was a Socialist, Hitler was a Socialist, the fascist CCP is Socialist.
As a follower of SBM and Respectful Insolence, I was also made aware of the right wing links going back by at least 5 years, coincident with the shift to libertarian/freedom-based attempts to force repeals of the school mandates that spread post Disney measles.
I’m also aware of some who used to vote Democrat and were previously invested in the naturalistic antivax fallacy switching over to vote Republican when Trump seemed to endorse antivaxers like Wakefield and championed personal freedoms.
Not surprising you would uncritically quote DiResta.
You tend to pander to a certain political flank, after your quasi-legitimate work in debunking pseudoscience (sort of dunking on a 6ft hoop) transformed into a full-throated defense of radical NPI's and Pharma products to mitigate the effects of the COVID Pandemic. Along the way you have attempted to blow up some of the most prestigious researchers alive today.
As I noted in other comments DiResta is a CIA political hack, who should never be quoted without acknowledging her own misdeeds. She is a censorship queen and at the time she wrote the study quoted (2015), Twitter deemed her lacking credibility.
Anyone uncritically quoting DiResta is naive or worse. In the context of 'vaccine misinformation' you agree to her conclusions and so you have 'respect' for her. Yet, if you have any concerns about the accuracy of her reporting and whether you too might be a pawn in her counter disinformation enterprise, you probably should read her research closely and disclaim any attempt to make her seem credible.
Please don't invoke Gorski's law as your response!
I don't consider myself on the right at all but I'm certainly getting more and more concerned about how these vaccines are tested. I firmly believe that many vaccines are core to public health and they work; the worry I have is that we've unleashed a pandora's box.
I have fought the vaccine fanatics for years on their claims of autism, but now I see rates of autism of 1 out of 36 children. I hear the reason is "the rates are higher because we're better at diagnosing autism", but that's disingenuous - I am 57 years old and don't recall one child in my entire youth who had autism or acted as if they had autism. Now, it's everywhere.
Is it the vaccines? Or is it glyphosate or any one of a number of other exogenous factors? The vaccines are suspect. But we'll likely never know the truth, because there is a major fear of admitting that some vaccines may cause more harm than good, against the backdrop of endangering all of public health.
If this topic interests you, I refer you to Del Bigtree's weekly show 'The Highwire' where he and his investigative organization are exclusively devoted to vaccine safety and corruption, as well as other Human health topics.
The current “autism” rate is inflated through inclusion of anyone on the autistic spectrum, whereas previously it was limited to those with classic autism only. Also there has been a large increase in both awareness and diagnostic screening which has caused numbers to rise.
While conspiracy theorists and anti-vaccine people have always been around (the 2 groups are highly overlapping but perhaps not completely), I think there are numerous contributors, including personality factors (link #1 below). The "need for chaos" explains the election of Trump, and the growing political divide based on education explains why some feel the need to exert their superiority, although there are plenty of educated folks promoting conspiracy theories, some of which is based on simple self-promotion exacerbated by social media. Certainly the sins of Big Pharma (2nd link) and the revolving door between the FDA and Big Pharma made it very easy to sow distrust about a new vaccine, even among some with no history of vaccine hesitancy. Research on Terror Management Theory has demonstrated that existential anxiety increases tribal behavior (link #3), and a pandemic will certainly increase existential anxiety. As our modern world becomes ever more threatening and filled with mortality salience, expect tribal-influenced conspiracy theories to only increase.
The 2020 so called election was definitely rigged by many actors who planned the chaos on Jan 6. Just like Covid was a bioweapon, you need your look beyond the obvious. Do the research. Know the actors and their motivations and intentions.
As sited in your article, What was the average age in the heavily red communities and the heavily blue communities? If you compare like age groups in those communities is there still a 60 fold difference in death rates?
Are you suggesting that Blue counties are much "younger" than Red ones? Do you think that is really a credible explanation for the difference? The political affiliation provided the strongest correlation for both vaccine uptake and compliance with restrictions against Covid deaths. It's not hard to see why. Where is Occam's razor when you need it?
What you don't consider is how many of those who question vaccine safety and efficacy used to be Democrats but have become disillusioned with their party and moved away from it! I think if you looed at those numbers they would be much more partisan!
The major causative factor in the "anti vaccine" movement is deaths and injuries in temporal proximity to vaccination (after).
The Vaccine Injury Act of 1988 removes liability from vaccine makers.
Thus, schools kids are mandated to take a liability free product.
The vaccine schedule ballooned from about five doses to age 18 prior to 1990 to the current 110 doses by age 18. Dr. Offit himself published in NEJM that he would not recommend covid vaccine boosters to young people. Thus, he meets the Merriam Webster definition of "anti vaxxer." As do Drs. Gruber and Krause- the two top FDA vaccine officals who resigned in protest over the recommendation to push covid vaccine boosters into young adults.
Every vaccine injury adverse event system is pinned red- VAERS, DAEN, Yellow Card, DMED, V-Safe- all of them.
US and Brazil are the only two countries on the planet recommending covid shots to six month olds.
Excess deaths are above trend.
Dr. Offit disingenuously links vaccine hesitancy to January 6. I link it to the dwindling credibility of his peers.
Dr. Ouffit, you seem to uncritically quote a then-hobbyist (in 2015 she had no research affiliations) in the misinformation research filed, Renee DiResta. Even Twitters own Y Roth steered colleagues away from working with her. She was disparaged by many on Twitter's trust and safety team. see here for more details:
Her past background of CIA work, and sleezy defense of her own misinformation spreading as well as lying on the record, mark a serious question whether DiResta's work is indicating the facts or itself creating a narrative she would like to spread.
Dr, Ouffit, you are certainly aware of how to draw the conclusions and set the research agenda to match it, many academics shoot their arrows, drawing the bulls-eye target afterwards. Any quote of DiResta without some disclaimer of her nefarious tactics and questionable behavior; Makes me wonder, Are you too drawing the targets after you have shot your arrows?
Mr. Offit , if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for US and the humanity, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate. Mr. Offit, open this gate of medical records.
Mr. Offit tear down this wall of silence. Let's compare health results of vaxed and un-vaxed, rate of death, cancer medical visits and so on. Let dissident scientist like Jay Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff to analyze the data.
Another interpretation is that we are seeing a predictable backlash against 2+ years of authoritarian covid policy overreach which broke the social contract. The way back is to embrace the principles of voluntary informed consent and cooperation that have always formed the basis of good medical and public health policy. You will not understand or persuade those who disagree with you by vilifying them.
Please also define “anti-vaccine”. Like you, I have had 3 covid shots and have declined more boosters recommended by the CDC. Are we now “anti-vaxxers” too?
Spot on. Force someone to do something, rather an educate is always a bad thing.
“Antivaxers” may be vaccine specific, and aren’t just those who don’t get vaccinated, but are those who spread misinformation about vaccines and discourage others from getting vaccinated.
"Anti-vaccine" and "anti-vaxxer" have become unhelpful slurs which shut down conversations and "other" people based on disagreement.
"Misinformation" is another loaded term which has lost meaning. The CDC recommends annual covid shots for young healthy people. Dr. Offit and most European countries do not. So which one is "spreading misinformation?"
So let’s see. I assume that your don’t consider yourself antivax. I’d that’s the case, then there must exist one or more vaccines that you consider sufficiently effective and safe to use yourself or have your children take and/or to recommend generally for adults or children for whom they are recommended. Surely you can name these vaccines; that is, if you’re not antivax.
Do you know what makes people "anti vax" ? Being called anti-vax. It's a hateful, derogatory term you should be ashamed of using.
None of us were born anti-vaxxers David. It's mostly thanks to people like you that have driven the masses to lose trust💰
Your definition of "misinformation" seems to be vague. If a difference in scientific approach or strategy exists bewteen people, that doesn't mnean one of them is spreading "misinformation". Misinformation is both clearly incorrect, and also is stated with the express aim of misleading the independemt observer away from the facts.
Which is why my definition of "antivaxer" applies to such individuals.
...You have declined boosters. That's your choice. You may have opinions about them, which I would not necessarily call "mosinformation". I am not calling you an antivaxer.
I meant “Disinformation” in the last sentence in my first para above, sorry.
It should read:
“Disinformation is both clearly incorrect, and also is stated with the express aim of misleading the independent observer away from the facts.”
O.k. if the CDC Doesn't recommend the vaccines then Insurance Doesn't have to cover them. Vaccines should be free! Nobody talks about this.
Like this ?
https://vaclib.org/sites/debate/web1.html
What people don't get to this day is the greatest reason why that overreach occurred, but Occam's Razor informs us greatly. C-19 kills mostly older and unhealthy males, and this was known long before it reached the US. The people in charge of things at every level of society tend to be older and often unhealthy men. Mostly, they ordered the lock-downs to protect themselves, and did so within the limits of their political authority and support base. And yes, I believe this was Xi Jinping's motive for the extremely severe lockdowns in China. Some politicians grandstanded and tried to parlay C-19 into bids for higher office, but most of them were simply into self-protection.
The reason I am an anti-vaxxer or a more accurate term would be a vaccine heretic is simply due the fact that the safety of child hood vaccines has never been properly established.
All you have to do is look at the vaccine package insert of any childhood vaccine to see how little Of a priority safety was.
First red flag is that none of the child hood vaccines have ever gone through a full toxicology screening. None have been tested for there mutagenic or carcinogenic potential or impairment to male fertility
47 of the 114 fda approved vaccines did test for impairment for females.
The clinical trials used for Licensure were efficacy trials to determine Efficacy not Safety.
It is Scientifically impossible to the determine safety of a new vaccine if the control “placebo” is anything other than a saline solution.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjIgu6pvJuBAxX3GTQIHe2LB84QFnoECDMQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.drugs.com%2Fpro%2Fprevnar.html&usg=AOvVaw18sWNC_WFzPuWcy_XuQOXW&opi=89978449
In the trail for Prevnar 7 they used an investigational meningococcal vaccine as their placebo/Control to determine Efficacy but they also used it to determine safety.
How do you determine the safety of a new vaccine that didn’t go through a toxicology screen then use another new vaccine that didn’t go through a toxicology screen as the control/placebo to determine safety?
The Prevnar 7 trial shows that the only potentially
safe ingredient is the target antigen.
Per FOIA requests it is now known that none of the childhood vaccines used a saline placebo tor determine safety for Licensure.
Sure you can point to multi million dollar Observational studies that may or may not show a causal association but that can never prove biologically that a vaccine did or did not cause the adverse event.
There is a very simple solution to your Anti-vaccine problems.
Do the safety science.
Perfect! A little honest quality control and honest concern about quality of product would go a long way. DNA fragments and plasmids along with endotoxins flotsam and jetsam above standards are not OKAY in any “vaccine” improperly shoved into our muscles and infiltrating to our vascular systems. Also, stop demeaning people hesitant to take these untested “vaccines” with their franken -n-1 methyl pseudouridine, designed to stay in our bodies to cause so far, unrecognized and ignored health disasters..
Are you concerned about the plant and animal DNA that you eat that ends up in your blood, sometimes complete sequences?
https://vaclib.org/sites/debate/web1.html
For me its as simple as the above
Now compare the inverse that to installation and % of use of indoor sanitation in the US. Simple is as simple does.
I'm just here for the comments. 🍿
The latest science shows the jabs' effectiveness and safety were exaggerated from the beginning. https://okaythennews.substack.com/p/science-summary-covid-19-vaccines . Well? Well? Are you not entertained?!
I’ve asked before if you will stop pimping your own substack. I’ve also debunked your lame claims.
Let’s please not do this all again, ok?
Your own lame claims are debunked every day, yet you're still here.
Hi, troll!
👋👋
I see it’s uncomfortable for you to look in a mirror.
They are a known liar.
https://rumble.com/v20bpjc-safe-and-effective-lie-countdown.html
There are numerous publications attesting to the good safety and effectiveness of the vaccines, but instead of looking for the scientific evidence, you link to an antivax screed on rumble?
😂😂🤣🤣💀
Numerous articles all directed, funded and promoted by pharmaceutical interests.
There is nothing antivax in that video.
Its nothing more than a compilation of news reports from 2020 to 2022 of the decreasing efficasy of the Convid vaccines
From the claims of 100% to zero (ADES)
Imagine being so stupid as to take two jabs then return over and over and over and over then told time to take a bivalent booster
At what point does one realize you are a moron and a lab rat for vested interests who have zero liability?
😆 😏 😥
BTW, you never got back to me about your ridiculous claim that viruses don’t exist, and how Peter Duesberg supported that claim, did you?
You must have had time by now to appraise his submissions to the Perth Group and for the Continuum award where he lays out the proofs that HIV exists and has been isolated… so why no comeback on your mistake?
Duesbergs book and quote were in 1996. I judge them relative to that period and what was known.
He did support the existence of an HIV virus but NEVER the link to AIDS; the symptoms of which are up to 34 opportunistic infections.
Research Scientists on government grants are unlikely to challenge one anothers claims when its outside their realm of expertise.
HIV much like COVID/SARS has NEVER been isolated. Its the existence of antibody and remnant proteins sorrounding cells viewed from flawed high count PCR tests that drives the drama
Sexually transmitted HIV-AIDS is still a myth. A very profitable one (as your paid handlers will tell you) but still a myth
So you were WRONG, and Duesberg stated HIV existed and was isolated.
Glad you admit that. Given your adoration of the man, doesn’t that give you any pause for thought about your claim that “Viruses do not exist”?
Enjoy! I'm thinking of getting some popcorn myself I am so entertained by the contortions and illogical thinking of other commenters.
The Left has become more corporate, they've shifted so much, leaving blue collar workers to the Right. That should partly explain why they are more eager now to embrace the products of the big corporates. I'm old enough to remember when me and my fellow lefties were always suspicious of the rich and powerful.
I think by "The Left" you must mean Democrats - the left is still out there.
Democrats are beholden to their Left wing and the Hamas Caucus that wants to destroy this country.
LOL no, if that were the case things would be a lot different. "Hamas Caucus" says everything about your fantasy universe.
Democrats have sitting members that mimic Hamas’ chant of “from the river to the sea…” As not a single Democrat has condemned them, then every Democrat is a terrorist sympathizer. Biden’s handlers are making him bend over backwards to kiss the derriere of those flying Hamas’ flag. They couldn’t even condemn Ilhan Omar for saying preaching that “some people did something” on 9/11.
you are fool who couldn't distinguish between Hamas and the lice in your pubic hairs, nor terrorists from teenagers loitering in a McDonald's parking lot, I pity your ignorance
You are correct. Hamas (and their Democrat sympathizers) are very much like lice. Vermin that must be exterminated.
I'm going to disagree a bit with Renee DiResta, as much as I respect her, regarding when the rightward shift started. As I've been documenting since at least 2010, the tilt to the right of the antivaccine movement goes back several years before 2015 (2009 at), and, even though in the past the antivax movement had a roughly as strong leftwing component, there nonetheless has long been a right wing/libertarian component to it going back to the 1800s.
https://www.respectfulinsolence.com/2022/01/28/why-is-there-now-such-an-affinity-between-antivaxxers-and-fascism/
In the post above from 2022, I documented this evolution and described how now the antivax movement is now flirting with, even embracing, outright fascism—and why I think that is. Certainly, I will concede that that shift accelerated in 2015 in the wake of the Disneyland measles outbreak California SB 277, the bill that eliminated nonmedical exemptions to school vaccine mandates, and then was turbocharged by COVID-19. However, the rightward shift to the antivax movement goes back at least to the Tea Party movement in 2009. Heck, in 2012, I attended a debate between Steve Novella and antivax quack Julian Whitaker at the right wing/libertarian confab known as Freedomfest, which (I learned) had been promoting antivax propaganda going back a few years before that. In that "debate," Julian Whitaker Gish galloped the familiar antivax tropes, along with portraying vaccine mandates as an assault on "freedom."
Also, let's not forget that the most vocal antivaxxers in Congress in the 1990s were pretty much all Republicans, such as Dan Burton, who used his position as Chair to weaponize the House Oversight Committee to drag CDC scientists for interrogation over the alleged link between vaccines and autism.
I think you need to research what fascism is. It literally means the government controls/mandates what you can and cannot do. Anti vaccine/more properly labeled, anti mandate advocates are exactly the opposite.
I think we all have become less educated from your comment.
Agreed. Offit is a BigPharma pawn and scientific hack. A propogandizing liar.
Del Bigtree, on the other hand, along with every other presenter on Sen. Ron Johnson's hearing, is a hero.
Del Bigtree, on the other hand, along with every other presenter on Sen. Ron Johnson's hearing, is a zero.
.....FTFY.
Del Bigtree? A hero?
😂😂😂🤦🏻♂️
I love contributing to their noble cause. Recently their lawyers reinstituted religious exemptions in a state thats not mine own.
Great victory for freedom and choice
That's really great news! But what about exemption rights in my own state?
What state do you live in?
Can you move ?
Can you home school ?
Contact ICAN and Del Bigtree to see if any cases are in the works. Also donate to their cause. Fighting these laws isn't cheap
Profit. The "Pr" is silent
Fascism is more than just an generic authoritarian movement like what you describe. It's a specific kind of authoritarian movement with a recognizable set of features that distinguishes it from, for example, authoritarian Communist regimes.
To educate yourself, I suggest that you read Umberto Eco's classic article "Ur-Fascism" or the book "How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them" by Jason Stanley, the Jacob Urowsky Professor of Philosophy at Yale University, both of which I cited and quoted extensively in my post.
Or you can stay ignorant, which is what I predict that you will do.🤷🏻♂️
No its not, its a way in which a government functions. Your trying to tie a philosophy into a description of the way a government governs it citizens. The privatization of the economy vs total ownership of the economy is how you determine communism vs fascism. You can have a fascist democracy, or a fascist dictator, but its not some magical thing that doesn't apply to mandates and taking away freedoms for the betterment of everyone. Your by definition a fascist if your into that.
It’s pointless to argue with someone like you. You clearly don’t even know what fascism actually is and how it’s defined. I refer you again to Prof. Stanley’s book, Umberto Eco’s essay, or any of a number of scholarly works by actual historians and political scientists to learn the basics.
Yes, because he's redefining the common accepted historical definition of fascism, to one of a philosophy. Why a government abuses a class/people within their population to fuel their power isn't what I was even talking about.
Having the power to control peoples lives, but not owning the companies out right is fascism.
Please prove me wrong without some bs philosophical why someone is a fascist, rather than what it is. Drawing on Eco's personal experiences growing up in Mussolini's Italy and his extensive research on fascist movements, the essay offers valuable insights into the nature of fascism and its manifestations.
The last part is the key, its talking about the why, not the what.
I don't need a PH.D to understand having the power to control people = bad. and the more the governments uses that power = facsim.
If you do, then its pointless to argue with you, as you probably need an expert to tell you how do to about everything in your daily life.
Tis was fun, I did read a bit of the book, but honestly didn't think it was worth my time to continue.
"I don't need a PhD."
Clearly. The arrogance of ignorance is enough for you. Let's just say that I'll accept the evidence- and research-backed discussions of fascism by actual historians and political scientists sooner than some rando showing up on Substack in Dr. Offit's comments bloviating about fascism, complete with a clear lack of understanding of what fascism actually is. I will give you credit, though, for at least not quoting Jonah Goldberg's bullshit. That's something, at least, that Phil (below) couldn't resist doing, even if he didn't actually name Goldberg.
Nope. Fascism is the boogey man of the Socialist Left. They'll use the threat of fascism to justify their own fascism.
Shorter Phil: “I know you are, but what am I?”🙄
“Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.” — Benito Mussolini
Imagine pretending to be so educated in political theory that you completely miss (or worse, supporting and facilitating) the true emerging fascists. Fascism has ALWAYS come from the Left. Mussolini was a Socialist, Hitler was a Socialist, the fascist CCP is Socialist.
As a follower of SBM and Respectful Insolence, I was also made aware of the right wing links going back by at least 5 years, coincident with the shift to libertarian/freedom-based attempts to force repeals of the school mandates that spread post Disney measles.
I’m also aware of some who used to vote Democrat and were previously invested in the naturalistic antivax fallacy switching over to vote Republican when Trump seemed to endorse antivaxers like Wakefield and championed personal freedoms.
Not surprising you would uncritically quote DiResta.
You tend to pander to a certain political flank, after your quasi-legitimate work in debunking pseudoscience (sort of dunking on a 6ft hoop) transformed into a full-throated defense of radical NPI's and Pharma products to mitigate the effects of the COVID Pandemic. Along the way you have attempted to blow up some of the most prestigious researchers alive today.
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/2/e052891
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-making-of-covid-19-contrarian-doctors/
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/what-the-heck-happened-to-john-ioannidis/
As I noted in other comments DiResta is a CIA political hack, who should never be quoted without acknowledging her own misdeeds. She is a censorship queen and at the time she wrote the study quoted (2015), Twitter deemed her lacking credibility.
https://www.racket.news/p/twitter-files-gec-new-knowledge-and
https://public.substack.com/p/why-renee-diresta-leads-the-censorship
https://disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/twitter-files-yoel-roths-private
Anyone uncritically quoting DiResta is naive or worse. In the context of 'vaccine misinformation' you agree to her conclusions and so you have 'respect' for her. Yet, if you have any concerns about the accuracy of her reporting and whether you too might be a pawn in her counter disinformation enterprise, you probably should read her research closely and disclaim any attempt to make her seem credible.
Please don't invoke Gorski's law as your response!
https://disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/gorskis-law-a-skeptic-ends-discussion
I don't consider myself on the right at all but I'm certainly getting more and more concerned about how these vaccines are tested. I firmly believe that many vaccines are core to public health and they work; the worry I have is that we've unleashed a pandora's box.
I have fought the vaccine fanatics for years on their claims of autism, but now I see rates of autism of 1 out of 36 children. I hear the reason is "the rates are higher because we're better at diagnosing autism", but that's disingenuous - I am 57 years old and don't recall one child in my entire youth who had autism or acted as if they had autism. Now, it's everywhere.
Is it the vaccines? Or is it glyphosate or any one of a number of other exogenous factors? The vaccines are suspect. But we'll likely never know the truth, because there is a major fear of admitting that some vaccines may cause more harm than good, against the backdrop of endangering all of public health.
This worries me.
If this topic interests you, I refer you to Del Bigtree's weekly show 'The Highwire' where he and his investigative organization are exclusively devoted to vaccine safety and corruption, as well as other Human health topics.
The current “autism” rate is inflated through inclusion of anyone on the autistic spectrum, whereas previously it was limited to those with classic autism only. Also there has been a large increase in both awareness and diagnostic screening which has caused numbers to rise.
I think the consensus is that this amount of increase is unrelated to increasing diagnoses.
Bahahah! Do you really think anyone listens to you anymore?!? How much Pfizer and/or Moderna money do you receive...
Well, you seem to be reading what Offit says, so you must be interested in what he has to say...
Mike S., have you taken another booster yet?
I already told you, I get annual boosters. Can’t you read?
The whole "Left vs Right" circus act is about DIVIDE & CONQUER
don't let the forces of the dark-side divide us!
While conspiracy theorists and anti-vaccine people have always been around (the 2 groups are highly overlapping but perhaps not completely), I think there are numerous contributors, including personality factors (link #1 below). The "need for chaos" explains the election of Trump, and the growing political divide based on education explains why some feel the need to exert their superiority, although there are plenty of educated folks promoting conspiracy theories, some of which is based on simple self-promotion exacerbated by social media. Certainly the sins of Big Pharma (2nd link) and the revolving door between the FDA and Big Pharma made it very easy to sow distrust about a new vaccine, even among some with no history of vaccine hesitancy. Research on Terror Management Theory has demonstrated that existential anxiety increases tribal behavior (link #3), and a pandemic will certainly increase existential anxiety. As our modern world becomes ever more threatening and filled with mortality salience, expect tribal-influenced conspiracy theories to only increase.
https://neurosciencenews.com/psychology-conspiracy-theories-23531/
https://angeloslaw.com/legal-blog/2022/01/10-biggest-pharmaceutical-settlements/
http://www.sydneysymposium.unsw.edu.au/2023/chapters/PyszczynskiSSSP2023.pdf
The 2020 so called election was definitely rigged by many actors who planned the chaos on Jan 6. Just like Covid was a bioweapon, you need your look beyond the obvious. Do the research. Know the actors and their motivations and intentions.
That's a funny one Comrade!
Tetraethyllead
Trinitrotoluene.
As sited in your article, What was the average age in the heavily red communities and the heavily blue communities? If you compare like age groups in those communities is there still a 60 fold difference in death rates?
yes, the more vaccinated a population was, the better they fared from the virus.
Science
That's been completely disproven by science (the independent, un captured type). The world knows that is a propoganda lie.
Are you suggesting that Blue counties are much "younger" than Red ones? Do you think that is really a credible explanation for the difference? The political affiliation provided the strongest correlation for both vaccine uptake and compliance with restrictions against Covid deaths. It's not hard to see why. Where is Occam's razor when you need it?
I was not suggesting anything, I was just asking a question.
What you don't consider is how many of those who question vaccine safety and efficacy used to be Democrats but have become disillusioned with their party and moved away from it! I think if you looed at those numbers they would be much more partisan!
Great article!!
The major causative factor in the "anti vaccine" movement is deaths and injuries in temporal proximity to vaccination (after).
The Vaccine Injury Act of 1988 removes liability from vaccine makers.
Thus, schools kids are mandated to take a liability free product.
The vaccine schedule ballooned from about five doses to age 18 prior to 1990 to the current 110 doses by age 18. Dr. Offit himself published in NEJM that he would not recommend covid vaccine boosters to young people. Thus, he meets the Merriam Webster definition of "anti vaxxer." As do Drs. Gruber and Krause- the two top FDA vaccine officals who resigned in protest over the recommendation to push covid vaccine boosters into young adults.
Every vaccine injury adverse event system is pinned red- VAERS, DAEN, Yellow Card, DMED, V-Safe- all of them.
US and Brazil are the only two countries on the planet recommending covid shots to six month olds.
Excess deaths are above trend.
Dr. Offit disingenuously links vaccine hesitancy to January 6. I link it to the dwindling credibility of his peers.
Dr. Ouffit, you seem to uncritically quote a then-hobbyist (in 2015 she had no research affiliations) in the misinformation research filed, Renee DiResta. Even Twitters own Y Roth steered colleagues away from working with her. She was disparaged by many on Twitter's trust and safety team. see here for more details:
https://disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/twitter-files-yoel-roths-private
In her later work at New Knowledge (later Yonder),the CEO was involved in a scandal - while DiResta was working there - with subverting an election:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/us/alabama-senate-roy-jones-russia.html
https://public.substack.com/p/why-renee-diresta-leads-the-censorship
Her past background of CIA work, and sleezy defense of her own misinformation spreading as well as lying on the record, mark a serious question whether DiResta's work is indicating the facts or itself creating a narrative she would like to spread.
Sources:
https://public.substack.com/p/why-renee-diresta-leads-the-censorship
Dr, Ouffit, you are certainly aware of how to draw the conclusions and set the research agenda to match it, many academics shoot their arrows, drawing the bulls-eye target afterwards. Any quote of DiResta without some disclaimer of her nefarious tactics and questionable behavior; Makes me wonder, Are you too drawing the targets after you have shot your arrows?
"The COVID vaccines increased your risk of getting cancer by a whopping 52%." https://kirschsubstack.com/p/pathologist-reports-a-stunning-52
Mr. Offit , if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for US and the humanity, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate. Mr. Offit, open this gate of medical records.
Mr. Offit tear down this wall of silence. Let's compare health results of vaxed and un-vaxed, rate of death, cancer medical visits and so on. Let dissident scientist like Jay Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff to analyze the data.