The Truth About Government Regulation of Vaccines by - L. Norman.
"The government should not be permitted to regulate anything as crucial as vaccines because government officials do not worry about the consequences of making mistakes." (1) (2)
Summarize this article!
Governments should not be responsible for regulating any issue of vital importance, such as vaccine safety, given that government officials and bureaucrats are not personally affected by their mistakes. We do not want our children's future health and safety left in the hands of people who have no accountability for their errors. Vaccine safety is far too precious to be subject to political pressure or people who do not understand the implications of their decisions. The time has come for us to stop entrusting governments with this critical task since they cannot guarantee they will avoid missteps. We must protect our families and communities by assigning the responsibility of regulating vaccines to the hands of independent, unbiased scientists whose allegiance lies with science only. (3)
This is the main article!
Even though the government and the medical community firmly believe that vaccines are safe and effective, they can't guarantee that they will be regulated correctly. We can't trust their processes as they need more transparency, with organizations like the FDA sometimes taking shortcuts when approving a new vaccine and not adequately checking on any long-term risks or potential side effects. They also look to industry-funded studies to verify vaccine safety, which overlooks any critical, independent review of this information, resulting in a significant flaw in their regulatory system. Consequently, individuals have no choice but to decide whether or not to vaccinate themselves and, if used at all, rely on the best possible information available.
Seeing why vaccine hesitancy is so prevalent in society today is simple when we consider the following thought experiment. Suppose you were an expert employed within the government's healthcare system. Could you ethically ignore incontrovertible evidence that taking the covid vaccine is ultimately fatal for every one in five years? This would pose an impossible moral dilemma, which has created a massive surge of skepticism toward the vaccine and its efficacy. Understandably, many people are concerned about how safe these new treatments are when they could potentially lead to harm. While avoiding vaccines is not advised, we must contemplate our responsibilities as citizens and ask if they have gone too far with such an incredibly high-stakes rollout.
Despite what the so-called "experts" may tell you about the safety of vaccines, there is no conclusive proof that they are entirely risk-free and without side effects. In this experiment set up to favor the government, any evidence collected can't be claimed as definitive since people will naturally die from something else while waiting to succumb to a vaccine if one is genuinely fatal. To further compound the issue, each person has unique life experiences and conditions which may make them more vulnerable to harm from a potentially deadly vaccine, making it even more difficult for these experiments to be said with certainty that outcomes apply across all scenarios.
When we hear about the potential consequences of a specific action, like millions of deaths, we usually immediately want to do something to stop it. But when that action is viewed as acceptable by the powers, how can we fight it? This is especially true regarding vaccinations, a topic that has been making headlines recently due to fake news and misinformation. Government workers may continue to ignore the warnings of those who oppose these pharmaceuticals since their careers are at stake. We cannot depend on officials to risk their jobs to prevent massive fatalities - if they were so inclined, there would be fewer wars today.
As an anti-vaxxer, I understand why many are hesitant to come forward with their fears. When experts have already made known their doubts about specific vaccines, why should my opinion be any more persuasive? Though I know it is a risk worth taking, the reality that experts have been wrong before stands. It's just one of those unfortunate truths about society; the truth doesn't always win out in the end. But even if I'm proven right, and others are saved from harm in the future due to my actions, that doesn't make coming forward any less of a risk. Ultimately, it is a risk worth taking - putting aside personal gain or worry - because saving even one person could be worth all the potential backlash.
It's frightening to think of our society reaching a point where any vaccine-related disaster could be automatically solved by adding more layers of government intervention. The underlying issue is the incentive structure used to develop, approve and monitor these drugs: how little public oversight exists during development and how quick regulators can be at rubber-stamping vaccines. Private companies should not be trusted blindly when it comes to drugs that have the potential to cause so much harm, which means greater independent regulation is necessary - without ballooning into a bloated bureaucracy. Until this basic principle is acknowledged, we risk living in a world with massive uncertainty regarding the safety of these vaccines.
All the new regulations to address the housing crisis were not solutions at all - they only further entangled the private sector with unnecessary red tape. Instead of looking at root causes, it was easier for politicians to perpetuate this big government mentality that has been damaging and detrimental over the years. We need to recognize that the government's irresponsible policies and lack of oversight caused the crisis in the first place. Blaming those same governmental institutions for their mistakes when discussing what led to such economic instability is not delusional: it's just acknowledging reality.
When it comes to pandemics and the market's response, creating a new agency, such as the CFPB, to protect consumers from financial exploitation is not a complete solution. The same holds for present-day vaccine failures - creating a 'Dodd-Frank for Pharma' does nothing to address the real issue underlying these tragedies: millions of people are dead as a direct result of pharmaceutical companies covering up potential risks associated with taking certain drugs or vaccines. We need systemic change that isn't politically motivated - which is why government agencies alone can't be enough - we must look to society as a whole to create genuine change that ensures safer medical options.
It is the same old story: the government comes in with force and proclaims it is here to fix all our problems, but instead of solving anything – it creates new disasters. World wars never end wars, and housing crises are caused by government intervention rather than a lack of regulation. The Great Depression was also caused by central banking, yet more and more government interference is proposed as the solution – ignoring that this magic cure-all has been proven time and time again to fail. It's like giving a child candy for breakfast; rewarding failure does not encourage positive behavior.
The idea that the government should determine whether or not we can protect ourselves from deadly viruses is absurd. We are capable individuals, and with access to the same scientific and medical information as the government, we have more than enough capacity to make informed choices on our health and well-being. If these vaccines cause calamity, it would only expand the power of those in charge and benefit their goals. Instead of allowing for choice and available information about vaccine impacts, this reckless and dangerous experiment places too much trust into a system that has proven time and again over the centuries to put itself first before its citizens' interests.
Governments lack the foresight and resources to regulate vaccination protocols properly and, more importantly, protect public health. A deeper understanding of why they cannot keep up with the requirements of such a complicated issue is required. For government regulations to work, they must be created by those who truly understand the nuances of vaccine safety and efficacy - people who have something to lose if their decisions negatively impact the population. Safeguarding public health should not be managed solely through government intervention or corporate interests - a balance between parties dedicated to transparency and oversight will help ensure modern vaccine distribution practices are practical and safe.
Vaccine manufacturers are already given too much freedom to produce their dangerous products. They have reaped massive profits from sticking the public with the bill for a lifetime of disability or death caused by their vaccinations. If they were held accountable for vaccine injuries and required to obtain insurance to cover such losses, manufacturers and insurance companies would be incentivized to ensure that vaccines are as safe and effective as possible. However, if responsibility is placed on another, non-responsible party, safety will no longer be a priority as there will be no repercussions for any mistakes that may occur.
By analogy, any government is the same as the coach of a football team who cannot be fired - they don't grow or progress; they merely exist with no real purpose. Let me tell you what this means in a broader sense: it's an illustration that governments should not be trusted blindly! They regulate us and our lives daily, yet they can't hold themselves to the same standards because they're unstoppable. We've seen this repeatedly in various situations, whether it's their lack of oversight of pharmaceutical companies giving faulty vaccines or installing intrusive safety policies without consulting citizens. Nobody wants to play on a football team where the coach can't be removed from her job – why should people put up with such a rule in government?
The recent news about Covid vaccines in the media has been making headlines, from very concerning ingredients found in vaccines to issues with manufacturers using low-quality components for production. With all this information regarding safety and efficacy issues, it's natural to worry whether these vaccines are truly safe and genuinely compelling. The answer to that would be an emphatic no, but it indicates that relying on government regulations to ensure public safety is not a viable solution. Rules may help improve certain aspects of product quality through guidelines. However, it depends on luck rather than evidence to ensure safety and efficacy. It is clear that government regulation is not equipped or capable of fulfilling its mandate regarding safeguarding consumers - and this should be a significant cause of concern for anyone considering taking a Covid vaccine. (4)
On the one hand, some people have this romantic view that government workers are brave souls who will do whatever is just and upstanding for the public good, with no motivation other than a desire to do the right thing. Yet, on the other hand, it's clear from history and our current reality that government isn't needed if we all act like angels. Government workers can only get away with what they do because of their power derived from unjust structures in place. Instead of relying on government workers to make decisions for us, it would be far wiser to challenge those structures and take responsibility for our actions. (5)
The concept of "angels" taking control of the government is simply naive. History has proven time and time again that the most powerful positions in government tend to attract those who have questionable ethics and value personal gain over the interests of their constituents. Without a thorough vetting process for all those wanting to be part of the governing machine, we are effectively leaving ourselves at the mercy of unscrupulous people looking to fatten their wallets regardless of the cost. A system dependent on angels ruling a country will only work if there is too much temptation for regular human beings to overcome, even in theory. (6)
It is no secret that governments love to meddle in all aspects of daily life, which has been especially true in the healthcare industry. Of all these government interventions, however, there may be no more excellent example of overreach than when governments attempt to regulate and manage vaccination policies. For starters, it requires experts who can understand some of the most complex questions in science – questions even more complex than those under consideration in many other commonly-regulated industries. This task is even more complicated by the genuine risk that those same 'experts' are taking every time they question or challenge any rhetoric put forward by Big Pharma. The idea that government bureaucrats can do this at any consistent rate is truly ludicrous and illustrates further their attempts to extend their reach beyond where they belong.
The only way to guarantee public safety and efficacy from Covid vaccines is for everyone to take responsibility for their own decisions. Only by looking into the facts, considering our personal preferences, and engaging in honest dialogue with the experts can we decide whether a vaccine is suitable for us. Anything else would be at our own risk; unfortunately, government regulations are not equipped or capable of safeguarding us here. We must all actively engage in discussions around healthcare policies to ensure that the power rests in our hands instead of those we elect. After all, it's our lives they are making decisions about - nobody else's! By understanding how the government works and actively regulating ourselves, we can ensure everyone gets the best healthcare possible. Only then can we trust the efficacy of our Covid vaccines and all other medical treatments.
A reference list
- Governments Cannot Effectively Regulate Vaccines. https://www.infowars.com/posts/governments-cannot-effectively-regulate-vaccines/
- Governments Cannot Effectively Regulate Vaccines – NewsWars. https://www.newswars.com/governments-cannot-effectively-regulate-vaccines/
- Iverson, Terry. "Stepping Up to the Plate." Production Machining, vol. 18, no. 10, Gardner Business Media Inc., Oct. 2018, p. 48.
- the answer to that - Traducere în poloneză - exemple în engleză .... https://context.reverso.net/traducere/engleza-poloneza/the+answer+to+that
- Casey, Bernadette. "NFL and Urban Outfitters Fail to Follow the PR 101 Playbook." PRweek, vol. 17, no. 10, Haymarket Business Publications Ltd., Oct. 2014, p. 22.
- There's no reason to support a small market NBA team: r/pacers - Reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/pacers/comments/6iak4n/theres_no_reason_to_support_a_small_market_nba/
Here is where I got the info for this article!
- https://www.infowars.com/posts/governments-cannot-effectively-regulate-vaccines/
- https://mises.org/wire/governments-cannot-effectively-regulate-vaccines
---------------------END OF DOC TIME 01/28/2023-----------------------
-------------CRITICAL THINKING NEWS BY - L. NORMAN. -------------
