If you want to see yet another example of crazy COVID hysteria in action, you only have to look as far as Utah’s largest newspaper, the increasingly out of control Salt Lake Tribune. There, we find an editorial with this paragraph:
Were Utah a truly civilized place, the governor’s next move would be to find a way to mandate the kind of mass vaccination campaign we should have launched a year ago, going as far as to deploy the National Guard to ensure that people without proof of vaccination would not be allowed, well, anywhere.
Civilized? Only if you consider Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and Cambodia under Pol Pot civilized.
To be clear: the newspaper is saying that unvaccinated people should literally starve to death. If they can’t go “anywhere,” they can’t go to the grocery store or the corner 7-11 or a restaurant. You can’t go to your doctor’s office for a checkup or to work. In the Tribune’s view, you should be confined at home until you submit yourself to the health decisions that the newspaper believes are worthwhile.
How, exactly, would such a measure be enforced? We have seen the institution of vaccine passports in some limited locales like New York City and central Los Angeles. But the Tribune is calling for the National Guard to enforce this. In effect, they are calling for road blocks where you must show your “vaccine passport” at every corner. All this for a virus with a 99.8 percent survival rate, a virus that is becoming endemic and is now less deadly than the flu or the common cold. Are they really that unhinged?
But there is some good news, if you want to see it that way. For 22 months now many of us have been warning that the COVID hysteria could only go in one direction: toward complete and total government control over every aspect of citizens’ lives, using public health as an excuse. We were called every name in the book, with “conspiracy theorist” being one of the nicest. Can you rubes now see why we were worried?
Many readers may have already had the revelation I am going to describe in this post, and for some of you this may be an obvious point, but this experience was new to me. We were discussing the scriptures as part of “Come Follow Me” this week and I finally began to understand the story of Adam and Eve.
This revelation came after more than 200 endowment sessions and dozens of times reading Genesis and the Book of Moses. My wife, in comments during “Come Follow Me” and in talks she has since sent me, was the one who created the spark that helped me comprehend a bit more.
Here is the issue. As most readers know, Adam and Eve are in the Garden of Eden and are given two commandments: 1)be fruitful and multiply and 2)don’t eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Note that the tree is in the “midst” (or exact center) of the Garden of Eden, so the tree is central to the story. Satan “beguiles” Eve, and she figures out that Adam and Eve cannot do 1) without doing 2). So, she eats of the tree, explains it to Adam and Adam agrees and they both eat of the tree. Eve is the heroine of the story because she figures it out and tells Adam: “Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.” (Moses 5:11).
Bottom line: without eating of the tree, Adam and Eve would still be in the Garden of Eden and would never have been able to keep the first commandment, which was to be fruitful and multiply.
I had always seen this story as showing that the Lord gave Adam and Eve a puzzle of sorts. What I did not understand until literally this week is *why* the Lord did things this way. I was always confused by the question: why?
It always seemed to me a very strange way of doing things. Wasn’t the Lord tricking Adam and Eve? Why give them one commandment that they cannot fulfill without breaking the second commandment? Why not give them the second commandment first and then once they broke that commandment introduce the first commandment? Why did the Lord not say: “Adam and Eve, now that you have transgressed my law, I give you another law, which is to be fruitful and multiply.”
I started my career paying attention as a researcher to medical side-effects – but in a different way than you might usually think. Most researchers try to count any of a range of effects associated with a particular treatment. My own approach was trying to understand different ways the same antidepressant side-effects were interpreted or “narrated” differently.
One story from my interviewing study epitomizes why this became so personally interesting to me. After a woman experienced a panic attack for the first time after starting Zoloft, she recounted telling her friend Emily that this medication is “making me have panic attacks!” However, her friend responded, “It’s not the medication, it’s your anxiety that you want this to work so bad.” Only partially satisfied by this answer, the woman continued to ask her friend, “are you sure? Are you sure, Emily!?” After checking with her doctor later, this woman was likewise told that her underlying anxiety, not the drug, was the problem. Instead of tapering her off the first drug, then, she was prescribed a second drug to address this “newly uncovered problem” of anxiety.
A strong, unquestioned bias. Why did this doctor focus on her underlying condition as the most likely condition for her panic attacks – rather than the antidepressant itself? It’s certainly not because the evidence compelled such an interpretation. It’s well known among physicians that medical treatments can induce a wide range of surprising effects. And, in this case, a 2014 study confirmed that after taking antidepressants for a short time, approximately 7% of participants developed antidepressant-induced jitteriness/anxiety syndrome (up to and including panic attacks).
Despite that kind of evidence, a clear bias exists in official pronouncements and medical interpretations about unpleasant effects following treatment. Dr. Peter Breggin, a well-known psychiatrist I interviewed several years ago, was one of the first to point out that when a treatment has positive effects, it gets the credit. But when any untoward effects arise, the strong bias is to attribute them to the underlying condition.
At many hospitals, the number of patients reported to have post-vaccine injuries rose fivefold or more after Covid vaccines were introduced in December 2020, medical records databases show.
For example, one database including 100 institutions included more than 8900 reports in 2021, compared to fewer than 2000 in 2019 and 2020. A different system reported an increase from 162 in 2019 to more than 1100 in 2021.
Several people with access to different databases provided the figures, on the condition that they remain anonymous, as the databases are proprietary and confidential. All the databases showed a similar increase, ranging from four-fold to more than 10-fold.
The rise parallels the massive increase in vaccine injuries and deaths reported to VAERS – the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System – in 2021. Over 740,000 VAERS reports were submitted last year, compared to 50,000 in 2020. Of the 2021 reports, 700,000 were Covid related.
Vaccine advocates insist that VAERS reports are unreliable and do not prove causation because anyone can submit a VAERS report. The figures in these databases cannot be similarly dismissed. Access to them is strictly limited – and represents the clinical judgment of the physicians treating patients.
The author of the above post is a former science writer for the NY Times who has been covering these topics for many years.
As I warned in this post, there will be more and more information being released in the coming weeks and months on side effects from the COVID vaccines. Please also read that post to understand that you can support the Brethren and the Church, as I do, while also recognizing that the vaccines are increasingly problematic, especially for younger people and pregnant women.
The historical comparisons to this period in history are myriad. We can look back at the 17th century witch hunts or the imprisonment of hundreds of thousands of Japanese-Americans during World War II, 1950s McCarthyism or even 1930s Germany. What is happening to our society has been described as Mass Formation Psychosis, but the easiest way to think of it is a mass cult phenomenon where people lose their ability to think critically because of fear. Remember, germaphobia is still an illness — our society has turned it into an art form.