COVID Vaccine Injuries: Is Permission Space Growing To Discuss It In The Mainstream?

The New York Times takes a stab at discussing COVID vaccine injuries.

Set Your Pulse: Take a breath. Turn your attention to your body and release any tension. Breathe slowly into the area of your heart for 60 seconds, focusing on feeling a sense of ease. Stay connected to your body as you read. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

---

My friend and colleague Dr. Madhava Setty recently wrote a piece critiquing and analyzing a recent New York Times article about thousands of people who believe they are vaccine injured.

The title goes: “Thousands Believe the Covid Vaccine Harmed Them. Is Anyone Listening?” and is written by Apoorva Mandavilli.

The article’s subtitle reads:

“Apoorva Mandavilli spent more than a year talking to dozens of experts in vaccine science, policymakers and people who said they had experienced serious side effects after receiving a Covid-19 vaccine.”

Madhava offered some wise critiques in his piece. I’m going to summarize a few, and then add another thought of my own.

Firstly, some of Madhava’s critiques are:

1. Where did the number “1000’s” come from when speaking of the vaccine injured? Shouldn’t there be a source? What about the millions of VAERS reports? “Thousands” seems like a random and arbitrary number that minimizes the issue.

2. The NYT suddenly acknowledges that there is a subset of people who are credible and believe they have been vaccine injured. Doctors for example. Madhava points out that the examples covered by The Times focus on people their average reader cannot relate to because they are about vaccines taken off the market. Further, some of the people injured side step the vaccine as the cause even though their injuries occurred right after vaccination. Some even believe it wasn’t the vaccine itself but contamination that may be the cause. All casting doubt in the mind of the reader.

3. Madhava points out that the NYT believes vaccine misinformation and the patently false claims coming from ‘anti-vaxxers’ out there are the cause for how difficult it is to gain clarity on COVID vaccines. As if the CDC, government and the NYT aren’t to blame themselves. The NYT never points out what is false from antivaxxers, just that things are false. The NYT continues to play confused about why there is hesitancy after millions of injury reports and years of credible people pointing this fact out while being ignored by mainstream circles. Simply put, the NYT is living in a fantasy land that does not comply with objective reality.

We can see here that the New York Times piece was addressing the subject while also minimizing it. But why did the New York Times write this piece? What was the author thinking? Do they truly think the number of vaccine injured is just “thousands?” or is this what the NYT chose to write because they know they’d get crushed if they wrote “hundreds of thousands” or “millions?”

My Thoughts

Being in media for such a long time you begin to understand how the business works on many levels.

Recall that over the last 3 years, questioning vaccine safety and vaccine injuries was like questioning the Holocaust… within mainstream thought circles. The degree of public shame and the amount of smear pieces written regarding this subject was astronomical. No one could miss it.

As a result, a delusion was built for many people. The extreme mainstream position was that these products were safe and effective, and injuries were nonsensical to consider. Think something different and you were bullied into a corner. To be fair, a similar delusion was built in extreme views on the alternative side. They claimed that everyone was going to die from these “death shots” within two or three years. But we’ll leave that for now.

Straight up, audiences were misled in mainstream circles. But, there are smart people in MSM whether you think it or not. As time went on, I could sense that some were really beginning to realize just how much the facts didn’t match the delusion.

I’ve heard from various colleagues who work in or know people in mainstream media throughout COVID. Larger chunks of people in those organizations were questioning government narratives than many realize, there was simply no permission space to write about it or even talk about it in the office.

One example I recall came out of the CBC in Canada where one executive stated something to the effect of “Many of us know no real journalism is happening here right now, but that’s all we can do.” I’m not telling you this to give them a free pass on their foolish work over the last 3 years, I’m simply making a point that these people aren’t as stupid as some think they are.

We often imagine perspectives fall in one camp or another. The vaccine is safe vs. the vaccine is not safe. But humans are complex, and people’s perspectives were, and are, much more complicated than that.

While it doesn’t make it OK that the mainstream media misled people for years and smeared large portions of the population who were right to question things, what was effectively built was a culture of unconscious foolishness within the organizations and their readership. It was built out of hysteria, tribal thinking, and an unwillingness to truly make sense of what was going on.

As Madhava pointed out, we’re still seeing this foolishness in mainstream circles, but I sense that light is making its way in, and many want to break out of the box.

The New York Times may be minimizing things with their piece, but they may also be lightly testing the waters to find out what they can talk about at this stage.

There’s no way to know for sure, but given there are large chunks of people in mainstream media who know the COVID era was poorly handled by government and media, their perspective will eventually come out.

I say this because all organizations evolve and change over time. That’s what humans do, that’s what consciousness does.

I sense a greater coming together will occur soon as I don’t think any ‘side’ got it all right or wrong.

Take for example the discussion of excess deaths. On one hand many blame it all on COVID, long COVID and lockdown blowback like missed screenings. In the mainstream view, the vaccine is not possibly part of excess deaths.

Yet others see the vaccine as the primary cause of all excess deaths.

But the truth is it’s all of it combined. And we need to be able to talk about that. We need to drop the sides and simply look at what happened. I know the incentive isn’t there for government and Big Pharma to have that conversation, but as people, we certainly can have it. In the process, we can make the perspectives of government and Big Pharma obsolete.

To back up that last point have a look at this piece by Kim Iverson. Dr. Martin Kulldorf states Sweden’s data points to something that can bring people together.

Sweden has one of the lowest excess mortality of any country during COVID and after. Sweden being a population that did things right in terms of no lockdowns and no forced measures, and as a result they faired very well.

But their population also got vaccinated at a high rate with 77% of the total (all ages) population being vaccinated. So we see here that if excess deaths aren’t overly high in Sweden, it’s reasonable to think that excess deaths can be linked to lockdowns, stress, missed screenings etc. But as we’ve exhaustively covered, we must consider vaccines as well due to the obvious signals of a lack of safety.

It is not wise to obsess over one cause or the other while dismissing others.

That said, irresponsibility still lies with government policy and the delusion perpetuated by mainstream media.

Final Thoughts

In the end, it will be the governments and government organizations that will ultimately look foolish over time. And mainstream media will catch onto this.

Take a look at Canada’s claims around COVID vaccine injuries:

These numbers suggest that Canada is doing a poor job of collecting and approving reports. The Pfizer trial itself showed an injury rate of about 1.2%. Why would we expect it to be so much lower once it enters a less healthy population than the trial participants?

It doesn’t make sense. These numbers should shock people as they are foolishly low. This is bad sensemaking on the part of policy officials and government. Soon, media organizations will have the permission space to point out facts like this to their readers.

I’ve seen permission space be a big factor many times over. There was a time when you couldn’t talk about vaccines at all. When dairy being generally unhealthy was a crazy position to take. When talking about consciousness was “pseudoscience”. Or when UFOs were an insanely fringe topic to discuss. You wouldn’t see many serious articles in the mainstream media about UFOs as a result.

But slowly, all this has changed. Why? Permission space was created and those who were intellectually curious are now able to express their ideas on all of these topics.

Funny enough, some in the alternative sphere are paranoid that the mainstream is discussing UFOs, allowing their perspective to be dictated by what the mainstream talks about.

The irony here is that this reflexive thinking gives ultimate power to mainstream media. All the mainstream would have to do is talk about something and they could control what a certain subset of the alternative sphere thinks and believes.

This is being asleep in a different way. This is being stuck in black and white thinking - something that will become more and more uncomfortable as our consciousness continues to collectively expand.

The confines of mainstream media will become more tiresome and difficult for many. They will either leave or evolve organizations from the inside.

As I’ve focused my work for the last 15 years, I truly believe we are in a process of a deep shift in collective consciousness. And while it may seem chaotic at times, there’s something deeper going on to be inspired by and anchor in.