I was fascinated to see that even the critical and detailed response by A Midwestern Doctor to the Newsweek opinion piece "It's Time for the Scientific Community to Admit We Were Wrong About COVID and It Cost Lives | Opinion" by Kevin Bass missed some of the most fundamental arguments against the attempt to revise (shape) the narrative of why they were wrong.
Please read A Midwestern Doctor's analysis and then note:
- Kevin states that this was "the largest public health crisis of our lives," thereby giving some rationale for the dramatic actions taken. Maybe for a moment it appeared that way, but very quickly it became apparent this was not the case to those who were reading and watching carefully. This shaping of the decisions is, in itself, an indicator for me not to trust the article. In the same way that I immediately question an author who addresses a complex and unresolved issue by not-so-casually calling the other side's position "the discredited conspiracy theory of xyz" when no such real discrediting has been made, and no attempt is given to state with clarity what the other side's position is and why they do not find the traditional explanation credible.
- The required long-term testing normally required for such an injection was not close to being completed when the shot was being mandated. What a huge red flag for anyone who was thinking clearly.
- The breaking of the control group, for the flimsiest of reasons, SHOCKED those of us who were paying attention, and should have SHOCKED anyone in the medical field.
- The abdication of the medical field to the principles of informed consent and bodily autonomy was obvious and were and is downright SCARY.
- The hiding of negative information about the side effects, including the FDA stating that it would take 75 years to provide the freedom of information act Pfizer data.
- The vilification of actual safe alternatives seemed clearly designed to allow the continued emergency use authorization, and again, anyone who cared and was paying attention should have noticed this as a huge red flag.
- Kevin states that "the government conspired with Big Tech to aggressively suppress it, erasing the valid political concerns of the government's opponents." This is such a misdirection to frame these as political concerns. THEY WERE ABSOLUTELY SCIENTIFIC AND VALID. This was not about politics for most of us, and framing it as not being sensitive to others' political views--and bringing in class and race to his arguments--is deceptive... enough for me to think that they are intentional.
- This is just total crap: "we have witnessed a massive and ongoing loss of life in America due to distrust of vaccines and the healthcare system..." What Kevin is saying is that the problem here is that by not being politically, racially, and class sensitive that this caused people to be vaccine-hesitant, and that cost lives. NO, what's costing lives is the administration of an untested, seriously problematic, ingredient-secret shot into a huge percentage of the world's population.
I understand that there are some deep psychological issues associated with people going along with the mandates and restrictions. But to claim now that you should have known better--but without actually stating the really important medical reasons why you should have known better, and pretending they were political and privilege-oriented, does appear to make this particular opinion piece seem like part of an attempt to re-shape the narrative now that so much damning evidence is becoming clear.
No, you hurt people and tread on sacred personal rights, so SHAME ON YOU. And double shame on you for now trying to reframe what the problem actually is.
