Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Roald Dahl’s Message to Anti-vaccination Groups
“Olivia, my eldest daughter, caught measles when she was seven years old. As the illness took its usual course I can remember reading to her often in bed and not feeling particularly alarmed about it. Then one morning, when she was well on the road to recovery, I was sitting on her bed showing her how to fashion little animals out of coloured pipe-cleaners, and when it came to her turn to make one herself, I noticed that her fingers and her mind were not working together and she couldn’t do anything.
‘Are you feeling all right?’ I asked her.
‘I feel all sleepy,’ she said.
In an hour, she was unconscious. In twelve hours she was dead.
The measles had turned into a terrible thing called measles encephalitis and there was nothing the doctors could do to save her. That was…in 1962, but even now, if a child with measles happens to develop the same deadly reaction from measles as Olivia did, there would still be nothing the doctors could do to help her. On the other hand, there is today something that parents can do to make sure that this sort of tragedy does not happen to a child of theirs. They can insist that their child is immunised against measles.
…I dedicated two of my books to Olivia, the first was ‘James and the Giant Peach’. That was when she was still alive. The second was ‘The BFG’, dedicated to her memory after she had died from measles. You will see her name at the beginning of each of these books. And I know how happy she would be if only she could know that her death had helped to save a good deal of illness and death among other children.”
– Roald Dahl, 1986
Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.
I can’t like the bolded comment enough. I started to write a post this am, wrote about four paragraphs. But the point was: there is no credibility.
I’ve dealt as many docs and pediatricians as you’d expect for someone with four kids. There’s one OB/Gyn about whom I still speak with respect; when labor with #4 was going nowhere fast, he came to JY and me and said: I got nothing. I have no idea why this is happening, and I don’t know what’s wrong. But I think something’s wrong. His willingness to admit he didn’t know earned him mad respect from me and JY and we agreed to an immediate C Section.
I’ve always had a healthy scepticism towards healthcare. Some of the advice given was ridiculous on its face, like don’t let your healthy baby sleep too long. Other recommendations, like the deadly food pyramid, took years before its destructiveness was spoken about.
I need to be careful, as my healthy scepticism can easily turn into knee-jerk disbelief. But there’s no one in power who has been honest in this entire debacle.
And those people without cars should wear seat belts, even if they never step inside a vehicle.
Malone shows wisdom in pointing out that the negative reactions to these experimental jabs are unknown. It could be 3 to 7 years from now before we realize what effect the “vaxxes” will have overall on human reproduction. The mounting statistics relating to women getting jabbed and then miscarrying their babies does not bode well.
If the jabs do diminish the ability of Americans to reproduce, China will definitely emerge the winner on this silent war against humanity.
Plus Dr Robert Malone is joined in his critical thinking about the experimental jabs by none other than former Pfizer executive Dr Michael Yeadon.
From his interview with Robert F Kennedy Jr:
Because COVID vaccines use experimental technology that may pose serious side effects such as blood clots, Dr Yeadon said, “we should absolutely not be offering them to young, healthy people who are not at risk from the virus.”
He also said: “I have two healthy adult girls, 25 and 29 years-old, and I would be really upset if they ended up being coerced into taking these products because they’re healthy and young, and there are not any measurable risks from COVID-19.”
Listen to the full interview to hear Yeadon and RFK, Jr. discuss the totalitarian nature of vaccine passports and why the push for COVID vaccine booster shots is clouded in deception.
The full article can be read and the full filmed interview can be viewed here:
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/dr-mike-yeadon-rfk-jr-the-defender-podcast-safety-mrna-vaccine-technology/
And apparently no matter how many times this is stated, the wisdom the statement contains seems to go right over some people’s heads:
The COVID vaccines would never, ever have been given emergency authorization without the murderous withholding of remedies like HCQ and ivermectin, due to language in some very sensible vaccine authorization rules and regs, which the rule makers utilized as they were aware that far too often, vaccines are more dangerous than available remedies.
Are you aware of Tom Renz, who is suing the US government for preventing and/or eliminating 45,000 deaths from the VAERS data base relating to fatalities from the COVID vaccine programs?
And these are all – each and everyone of them unnecessary deaths – because we in the know, including President Trump, realized how HCQ protocols, ivermectin, high dose D and C and zinc are all effective at combatting COVID.
Whatever the death toll from COVID actually is – and I am rather sure the half million deaths plus we kept being told about is inflated – that fatality count would have been 83 to 85% lower had HCQ or ivermectin been used in the first 3 to 4 days of a person realizing they had symptoms.
As far as “long term negative reactions to COVID – again had the remedies been offered to COVID patients rather than being withheld, there would not be long term COVID problems. Plus many of those long term problems arose due to the patients having up to 18 drugs slamming their systems, including rocephin, which should never be used in respiratory infections.
As far as some similar mRNA treatment being developed for cancer patients, the relatively small number of cancer patients who would under go those treatments means if if it is then revealed they need to avoid people contact due to what will happen to them if exposed to other cold and flu viruses – well, our society can handle those people isolating themselves from the world.
But as has been stated numerous times, trials for mRNA vaccines for corona viruses going back all the way to 2012 show that the test animals handled the jabs okay, but when in contact with other corona viruses, were slammed with serious infections, then their bodies went into enhanced immune response, and each and every test animal died! Of course, if everyone submitting to the mRNA jab are willing and able to become “bubble people” perhaps they will escape that fate.
I don’t think this analogy works. Driver A’s failure to wear a seatbelt imposes no additional risk on Driver B. Whereas someone catching and retransmitting Covid may transmit it to someone else who:
–cannot be vaccinated because of some genuine medical condition, or
–has indeed been vaccinated, but has the bad luck to contract a ‘breakthrough’ infection, which will occur in some % of cases
How often these situations occur is a quantitative question that needs data and analysis, but structurally a disease involves more coupling between individual decisions and outcomes affecting other people than does seatbelt-wearing.
Same voices making the same noise which then reach your ears.
There is long term data. We are living it.
Or is your argument that no drug should be taken until it is in used fornyears?
What exactly is long term data? You have no idea what you are talking about.
Yep
Bryan – take a chill pill.
Long term data is certainly longer than our current 8 months – isn’t it typically 5 years? We are not living the long term data – we are asked to become the long term data. Sorry, not sorry, that I do not want to become part of a long term trial for a shot that will possibly prevent me from getting a disease; a disease which poses no threat to me or mine.
We have absolutely no idea what the long term effects of the Covid shots will be.
I absolutely do NOT believe that drugs should not be available until they’ve been taken for years. Having lived through the AIDS years, it is unforgivable that treatments were withheld from patients who had a death sentence hanging over their heads. Similarly, I find it unforgivable that treatments have been withheld, and continue to be withheld, from patients who have become seriously ill from Covid.
Treatments are being withheld from very ill and dying Covid patients with the argument that there’s “no long term data” to support the use of readily available treatments. There’s no long term data on the Covid shots, yet everyone, regardless of the the threat that Covid poses, young and old, sick and healthy, fat and thin, are being expected to get it.
Makes no sense to me.
This is what I don’t understand about @arizonapatriot‘s conclusion expressed in an earlier comment and others who push the case that those who don’t get the vaccine are hurting those who favor getting the vaccine. What are the specifics of the case for supporting their position?
No one who is either deliberately ignoring that the many COVID remedies that have been withheld from us are 10,000 times safer than any vaccine, or else, no one who is simply ignorant of the many COVID remedies that have been withheld from us could have anything worthwhile to share about whether or not these “vaccines” are experimental.
Please explain it to me: who are these mysterious people who “cannot be vaccinated because of some genuine medical condition.”
I know so many parents who try to keep their children – already injured from prior vaccines – from having to submit to further vaccinations because of mandates in states like California and New York.
I myself had been told for years to never ever have any flu vaccine, due to my developing Guillan Barre after the swine flu jab in 1976. When i tell the local clinic staff who calls me repeated ly as a “reminder” that I can arrange to be innoculated with this mRNA experiment, I mention my previous injury and how Fed vax regulations forbade me from having a flu shot for decades iof my life as a way to protect me. They ignore my statements and then tell me to be sure and do “the sensible thing” and come in and get injected.
it used to be that cancer patients were not to get vaccinated – but now they too are told their condition merits it. Same thing is told to MS patients, Parkinson’s patients, Alzheimer’s patients, people with chronic fatigue and others.
So just who it it that has the “get out of further injury for free” card? As I would really like to know who these mysterious people are.
Okay let’s start with the fact that during the Golden Age of vaccines in the USA, children were put through trials for the polio vaccine beginning in the late 1940’s. And then again right up to the year before the vaccines were released for the public in the 1950’s.
How many children were in the last clinical trial for the polio vaccine before it was released?
One point one million children, that is how many. They were American, Canadian and Finnish schoolchildren.
I doubt you could find even 20K children being in clinical trials for the COVID jabs! And one poor teenager, she is now in a wheelchair and although she had been screened before being admitted to the trial, and found to be healthy so all systems were go, the vax promoters now state “This is a genetic condition that has befallen the young lady and has nothing to do with her getting the shot, and a mere coincidence the symptoms appeared right after the jab.”
Possible – barely – but not plausible.
I don’t understand that line of reasoning either.
I guess that their position has to do with a newly formulated concept that to be successful, a vaccine program must encompass some huge percentage of all human beings in a society. That once this percentage has been reached, then herd immunity descends on the populace and the society will be immune to the disease.
And that if this percentage is not reached, then we can expect the vax program to fail.
It is absolutely posititootedly made up. It flies in the face of everything people were told about vaccines from 1948 to 1970.
First of all, a vaccine is an item that once injected in a person helps the body of that individual recognize the bacterial or viral particles of the infection for which the vaccine was created. Then the person’s newly treated anti bodies from the vax process kick in & then the person is spared having the disease.
When we were in the Golden Age of vaccines, during the 1950’s and 60’s, vaccines actually did this. If an individual got a vaccine for an illness, they could go off as missionaries to some third world place on the globe knowing it didn’t matter if no one else around them had ever gotten their polio or smallpox vax. In fact, a representative of a vaccine company told me circa 2008 that the smallpox injection I had in the mid 1950’s had a 50% chance of working if a wild version of smallpox hit Calif were I lived. Vaxxes were made according to very decent standards.
Now it’s clear that many times the vax actually makes the recipients as sick with the disease or even sicker than the disease. In fact, numerous accounts over the last 4 years show how incredibly lax standards are for vaccine production. Example: naval ship had every single person aboard vaxxed for the mumps. Not too long afterwards, every single person aboard had the mumps, some in such a manner as they were incapacitated.
Anyway when someone says that for their vax to work, I need to get mine, I think it is their brain that will not work, as they are proving that point already!
My point is that any individual concerned about the possibility of getting the virus is free to get the vaccine. What reason could they then have to worry about those who choose not to get the vaccine since they got the vaccine and are protected. It just doesn’t compute.
All age groups except those aged 4 and under are equally likely to get COVID. Of those infected under age 40 about 3 to 4 percent get hospitalized.
According to the CDC, about 15% of those hospitalized for COVID are under age 40. Of those hospitalized 20% are having long term effects of infection like trouble breathing and thinking. In England 20% of infected kids get long haul COVID and in Italy the figure is 40%.
So, for those under 40 the risk of getting a bad outcome if infected is 3 to 4% times 20%, or 0.6 to 0.8%. The risk of vaccination is orders of magnitude smaller than that.
What’s the risk if you remove those with comorbidities? As I’ve mentioned, both my wife and I have worked on getting our Vitamin D levels up to acceptable levels. We’re active so we don’t have the obesity problem with COVID. Safe treatments such as HCG and Ivermectin have been withheld from people. Why aren’t the authorities emphasizing these safe ways of making COVID less serious. One might get the same result as the vaccine without its risks which I believe are understated. Certainly the proposal to use different PCR testing standards for the vaccinated than for the unvaccinated leads one to wonder.
Very few kids die from COVID and we don’t know what the long-term effects of the vaccines are. There are troubling stories about post menopausal women getting periods. In a sane world, these problems would have been studied before the vaccines were released. Do we want kids to have to get booster shots? The immunity you get from having COVID is better than what the vaccines provide. And the lockdowns have led many people to have more fragile immune systems. We setting ourselves up for big problems in the future. A better approach would have been to lock down vulnerable people and let those at little risk build up herd immunity. Even with your statistics, seasonal flu is much more dangerous for younger age groups than COVID.
If, for example, the (experimental mRNA therapy) vaccine failed 5% of the time and the Covid survivor has a 5/7% = less than 1% chance of contracting a second case. Both of which seem plausible. Five percent to less than 1 percent, that’s a pretty impressive difference.
I think one of the biggest problems is we still don’t know real numbers. Are we talking cases or numbers? Are the tests reliable? Cases went up by 100%!! (Does that mean that cases went from 1 to 2??) There’s been too much obfuscation by too many. And as an aside – why the lies?
There’s a total of 15 kids in my family (my four and 11 cousins) At least half of them have gotten Covid. Oldest is 33. They all walked it off. And now they have immunity.
But most of them are being pressured by their school or workplace to get the Covid shot. Why?
My family is big. Between us we all have a lot of friends and acquaintances. We’ve all been to funerals this year – not one of them was a Covid death. But I’m pretty sure there’s a few deaths because of Covid – suicide and undiagnosed cancers.
Best case scenario this whole farce has been due to incompetence. And I don’t believe for a minute a system that has been so incompetent to date suddenly got its act together for the Covid shot.
This is a really important point which is being completely ignored. The repeat-Covid rate is essentially zero, something we have known since July 2020 in the short term from a study of 15,000 hospital workers published in a British journal (look at the time stamp, I”m too tired to seek the citation). Wu Flu survivors, like Mrs Doc Robert, my daughter and me, get no credit and are expected to vax up like everyone else. But we have better immunity than those who take the experimental gene therapy–yes Bryan, it’s still experimental–and we have concerns about long term effects on our immune systems from said therapy, at say the 5-10 year window, given that our immune systems are already heavily primed against Wu Flu. There’s no need for survivors to be treated. Unlike a novel therapy which to date has been used only in patients with a rapidly progressive, generally lethal cancer, we have centuries of experience knowing how people do after viral syndromes.
I’m a Wu Flu survivor, dammitall. https://ricochet.com/845187/we-got-covid/I was sick as someone can be without requiring hospitalization for over a week, and I’m fit as a fiddle now.
(this one’s by Antonio Stradivari. I’m more of a John Alfred Gould myself).
I’d like society to recognize that survivors should not be exposed to the unknown long term risks of this experimental gene therapy. And I’d like well-meaning but overly naive Ricochetti to stop making absurd claims about the long term safety of therapies which have not existed for a long term.
Plz- you are very wrong- the vast majority of cases of vaccine associated myocarditis are followed by recovery(at this point at least 79%- the number will probably rise with more time) and the rate of myocarditis is low (Millions of doses of COVID-19 vaccine have been given, and there have only been 1,000 cases of heart inflammation. Doing the math, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) notes that for every million doses given, there have been 67 cases of heart inflammation in boys 12 to 17 (nine in girls of that age group), 56 in those aged 18 to 24 (six in girls), and 20 in males 25 to 29 (three in girls). That means the risk is quite low.). The base line rate of myocarditis (pre-COVID)is on the order of 20 per million (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5721735/) and many viral infections can cause myocarditis- particularly COVID itself. It is likely some of the increase is due to heightened scrutiny b/c many cases of myocarditis are quite mild and would not be noted- the same problem we have with really knowing the COVID infection rate.
the constant fear mongering by many anti-vaxxers only discredits their arguments.
There are no good treatments for COVID at this point other than dexamethasone. We lack any specific anti-viral med for it at this point. HCQ is bunk & ivermectin doesn’t look promising but I would hold off any definitive opinion until the PRINCIPLE study ivermectin arm has reported. The better quality studies do not support ivermectin to date but even those aren’t large.
The COVID vaccine is an order of magnitude more effective than any anti-depressant especially when compared vs placebo.
If you believe he invented the vaccine I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you- a real bargain.
Why are you addressing effectiveness when the comment you are responding to is concerned about possibly unknown side-effects especially when the vaccine is given to those who don’t need it – that would be, for example, those who had Covid-19 and now would be immune?
Children’s Health Defense is a Robert F Kennedy anti- vaxx website- why don’t you quote other health experts like Jenny McCarthy? At least she looks attractive spewing nonsense.
https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-19-health-pseudoscience/anti-vaccine-propaganda-robert-f-kennedy-jr
The risk from covid is also very low for most people. The constant fearmongering of covid hysterics discredits their arguments.
What we have is a difference of opinion about tradeoffs and risks, and some are trying to impose one opinion on others when there’s very little justification to do so.
This isn’t exactly an appeal to authority fallacy. More like an appeal to anti-supposed-crazy.
Also appeal to emotion. Diversion too. You’re like a one stop logical fallacy shop.
both effectiveness AND side effects are part of the risk benefit analysis-we regularly use anti-depressants, despite their low efficacy b/c we have little better. The benefits of the vaccine are enormous and the known risks few-so the risk benefit analysis is greatly tilted in favor of their use. Might some unforeseen problem turn up years from now? Sure but not only is the likelihood very small, but that concern/claim is always present with many things we use- maybe your bluetooth & wifi system will give you cancer- can you PROVE that isn’t true?. Constantly harping about “possible unknown risks” isn’t very effective when virtually none of the purported risks ever show up after millions and millions of vaccinations-infertility, menorrhagia, cytotoxicity etc. We have better data on the COVID vaccines then we do in many, many medical interventions.