I appreciate that everyone likes to know the correct answer, but life doesn’t work like that. Success relies on the accumulation of effects from many decisions. Some of the decisions are barely conscious.
If you are not, it shows, and people buy less. People want answers, not guesses. Politicians know that, and since they are always selling ideas, they often overstate how sure they are.
We should be more well-rounded.
With the virus, there is a strong bias for politicians to oversell certainty. They need to be the saviour. At a minimum, they must be doing something.
They cannot tolerate ambiguity because that makes the message they sell less clear.
Is their answer the best or the only solution? It must be so.
How do they know? They don’t, but cannot confess to that.
Is the vaccine the answer to some problem? Undoubtedly yes.
Is it the answer to wiping out Covid-19? Undoubtedly No.
The “vaccine” is reasonably describable as a useful therapeutic. It is not a sterilizing vaccine, but it seems to prevent most of the seriously adverse results if you become infected. That’s worth some trouble, but it is not as complete an answer as they would have us believe.
Certain implies complete. There are two ways to get perceived completeness.
Suppression of objective information is never the correct answer. Most of the other things affecting outcomes with Covid-19 are fuzzy. There is no certainty, and the proponents of vaccines emphasize that and demand certainty for those.
Have you thought about why no therapeutic is known? There may be some—ivermectin, for example. The alternatives are not discussable or permitted. Hide options because they could not issue an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the vaccine if any work. The law assumes emergency only when a disease is severe and there is nothing else available.
It would have been more intelligent to waive the rule and permit any possible thing to be used. Safely, of course. Most of the terror around alternatives is to keep the vaccine as the only thing. We will eventually learn it is not.
Question: The FDA approved the Pfizer vaccine. Why are all the other vaccines used under an EUA still permitted? You’d think they can no longer satisfy the nothing-else-available rule.
Another question: Did the FDA in The US approve teh Pfizer vaccine and eventually the others so they could mandate its use? The government may not mandate an emergency use authorization.
A third question: The vaccines used under an EUA have conditions in their agreements that exempt the manufacturers and the government from liability for any harm they may cause. Does that mean that deaths and injuries resulting from use can now be subject to lawsuits? More likely a class-action lawsuit. I am a little surprised no tort attorneys are organizing such a thing already.
Torts seem to exist. Do the media suppress them? My wife spoke to a woman yesterday whose husband died days after receiving the vaccine. Less than age 50, good health, not overweight, fit. The rule on coincidence applies. Once is an accident, twice is a coincidence, more than twice is a pattern. I respectively suggest there are more than two such cases.
Cause and effect are a difficult challenge, but lawyers know how to process the claim.
I like tendencies – especially large collections of them. They don’t always work, but if they don’t harm me, why not try them. Most times, they’re cheap.
Being individually and collectively inconclusive, you cannot rely on them as an answer. If the collection leads you to think you are certainly safe, you have misled yourself. Certainty is an illusion for simple minds, children, and politics. Balance of probability is all you get in life. Proof and certainty are time wasters, but fortunately, you don’t often need certainty. It is a little like tax law. You can get an 80% correct answer in 10 minutes. You can get a 98% right answer for $30,000. There is no 100% answer.
Certainty usually indicates ideological thinking. While possibly true, you should evaluate it. Look for the quality of the supporting evidence. Repetition is not evidence. Expert opinion is not evidence. Denial of other things is not evidence. The course of evaluation should require a single demand of the presenters. SHOW YOUR WORK. Absent evidence, the factor presented is, at best, maybe genuine.
Acting to move the balance in your favour is a sound course of action but requires some work and some thought. Be conscious of the idea of “directionally accurate.” You should expect adjustments to direction and changes in velocity as you learn more.
Use your best judgment and move on with enjoying life.
I help people have more retirement income and larger, more liquid estates.
Call in Canada 705-927-4770, or email firstname.lastname@example.org