Connect with us

General

The Insanity Of Modern Television & Entertainment. What Happened?

Avatar

Published

on

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

Watching my son James grow up has been a blessing in so many ways, one of which has been the opportunity to learn more about myself. Watching him learn how to learn has given me so many insights into my own childhood mentality and how those early experiences continue to affect me today.

advertisement - learn more

Of all the things I have learned in my short time as a father, one of them sticks out like a sore thumb, and that is the remarkable influence television has on a developing mind. Television is not something I desired to introduce into my son’s life until much later on, but I’m almost glad I have because of what I’ve learned from watching him watch the tube. Of course, he isn’t sitting in front of it for very long, maybe an hour every morning to get through breakfast, but even in that time I’ve observed some things that I think are important  to consider.

--> Our Journalism Is Moving - Our investigative journalism and reporting is moving to our new brand called The Pulse. Click here to stay informed.

Live Television

My journey with television also started at a young age. Mind you, I had three television channels while growing up, one of which could only be changed by someone going on the roof of the house and adjusting the direction of the antenna. Even though we only had three channels, I can tell you with certainty that I watched a lot of television. And my tastes were wide-ranging; from Oprah to Star Trek (the original and The Next Generation) to the great soap opera, Another World, to Spider-Man, Batman, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Tail Spin… I grew up in a great time for great television.

The Simpsons was a hit in our household, at least for my father, sister and myself. Looking back with the clarity and understanding that comes with age, I realize now that I only ever watched the Simpsons as a way to connect with my dad and my sister; I didn’t particularly like the show in and of itself. I was my mother’s son while my sister was daddy’s girl, and I often found it difficult to connect with the two of them. Television acted as a neutral medium through which I could bond with them, though I only figured this out later in life when I began to live and breathe television.

As a self-reflective adult, I know I’ve undertaken a long journey of transcendence, transforming my subordination to authorities into independence and an entrepreneurial spirit. I chose to break the old paradigms of my life and find out what I can really accomplish. For a kid who grew up on TV, a career in television which started out literally living inside a television studio made perfect sense, particularly if that child hoped to learn how to grow beyond the magic of the screen. I had to understand how what I had watched had been made if I was ever going to get it out of my head.

Bizarre Moments

I remember on the first day of my first real job in television, at Business News Network, I met the audio guy who worked on the original Sesame Street – a show I had watched often. What a bizarre moment that was! Here I am, meeting this slouching and overweight middle-aged man, who was an occasional cigarette smoker and regular complainer about all things audio and personal… and he is basically a parent of mine, however indirectly. I would liken the experience to meeting your childhood superhero in person only to find out that he or she is a complete asshole. Left in a state of shock, you immediately start to question your entire psychological framework, because the hero you have admired your entire life isn’t really the person you thought he was.

advertisement - learn more

The fastest way to transcend your hero is to find out that they are a villain as well.

Unfortunately, that’s been a common theme through my television career. A career that is more often filled by suppressed entrepreneurs and dependent workers, not to mention job-hating borderline psychopaths whose idea of fun consisted of sending correspondence letters to serial killers in prison (true story). I have spent a lot of time wondering why a person would intentionally put themselves into a work environment where they have to get paid to do what they despise and then complain about it for free. It’s completely bizarre. Then one day my sister gave me a gold mine of wisdom that put it all together.

She sent me an old audio file, hijacking one of my Grandfather’s cassette tapes that he had made for us, narrating some of the stories he wrote about his life. I guess at that time in my youth I thought it would be funny to record, at the start of one tape, the phrase “You’re a dork. You’re a dweeb! You suck!”. I wanted to shock anyone who might in future listen to the tape, and did so in a tone of voice that could only be described as Bart Simpson-esque. Hearing that blast from my past stunned me. My plan for shock and awe had worked, although I never thought the person being surprised would be myself.

Modeling Your Masters

Well, my sister and I had a well-deserved laugh over that. I must admit it’s a really funny audio clip. But it’s really stuck with me ever since because it’s not something I’d consider doing anymore, as the person I am today; not for any reasons of regret, but because I simply would choose not to, given the choice. I’m a different person now, much more mature in some ways (and much more immature in others). But on that sound file I heard Bart Simpson, and this has confirmed a huge theory of mine that I have been confronted with time and time again while working inside the television industry– that it’s called television programming for a reason.

At our most basic level, we are simply slightly intelligent monkeys, and as monkeys, well… monkey see monkey do. Now, I know that’s tremendously judgmental but I must make the point that we model behaviors we identify with and are exposed to, and that includes fictional characters. A good example of this is my friend, who we’ll call Andy. Andy is an interesting friend of mine. He himself believes he is scattered in many directions and often asks others for their opinion of his behavior. I often get the sense that he knows something is not quite right and he wants to help himself, but just doesn’t know what’s wrong or how to fix it. I didn’t even know what his problem was until another friend of mine showed me a remixed episode of The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, set to a music track. Watching this remix that compiled short clips of all the characters completed so much of my own puzzle about Andy. I recognized that Andy’s personality is built from the characters on that show. Everything from how he talks, walks, moves, sits, behaves, speaks, thinks… and so on. I confirmed with Andy that he used to love watching that show when he was a child and that again confirmed what I’ve suspected for some time.

When your parenting is fictional, you’re going to live a fictional life.

The biggest challenge most people have in life is not living the life they have. They are profoundly disconnected from their own existence and constantly distract themselves with sensory stimulants to prevent themselves from admitting the pain of their lifestyle. This in turn blocks them from the opportunity to accept the present as it truly is, and to see through it to the truth of their own magnificence.

Think about this for a moment: if you love your television characters, you’re not going to want to go beyond that for fear of losing the feel-good chemicals your brain releases while watching them. That in turn creates a fear of your own self, which is by default, an entity without these fictional personalities you have cherished. It’s exactly like an addiction where you fear the loss of the substance while simultaneously fearing the version of you that exists without it.

While on that topic…

Children’s shows nowadays look more like LSD trips with their flying smiling cars and buses and talking sponges… and that’s actually the point of it. If I have learned one thing through investigating psychedelic medicines, it’s that what you learn (or watch) while in an ‘altered state’ will stay with you in an unaltered state. I learned this professionally by hypnotherapist and seduction expert Ross Jeffries, who is a master of emotional and perceptual manipulation. Today’s television is literally a non-substance based psychedelic drug replacement with a narrative that fits the government guidelines for children’s television, and from my experience working a decade behind the scenes in television I can tell you with certainty that television has a political motive.

I’m not approaching this from a conspiracy theorist’s lens. I have literally been in the meetings where politics decide programming, and while you may not believe it, I don’t think it takes much to recognize what the narrative (or propaganda, if we’re being honest) of children’s television is preparing them for – unquestioning participation in a system which doesn’t work all that well or serve their best interests. But this new form of art is something that fixes itself from independent and inspired thought. It’s up to the visionaries to create the future and our visionaries are being lost watching the real desperate housewives of fill-in-the-blank, being programmed to think fake, act stupid, and complain a lot about personal drama.

Where has Star Trek gone?

And so I bring this story back to my son James. I grew up on Star Trek. As far as I’m concerned, Gene Rodenberry was an inspired visionary who saw beyond his time. Today we have laptops, cell-phones, 3D printers, and a host of other world-changing inventions that can be attributed to his creativity. I don’t see that in television anymore. What I see is desperate housewives and other cocaine addicted and mentally disturbed celebrities getting famous off of your time that you spend watching their lives instead of working on your own. What I see is murder being made into entertainment. What I see is rich duck-hunters taking your time and your money without giving you any sort of return on the investment besides a temporary emotional high. What I see now are shows about time-warps, demons and angels, vampires, the power of cops and the government, and an extraordinary display of how unintelligent humans can be. What I see is insanity entertainment and I believe it’s affecting all of us.

I believe that when Gene Rodenberry died, television died with him. It stopped being a vision, a program of what we can do as a species, and became a program of what we already dislike about our civilization. Put simply, if you keep showing a person the murderous side of our nature as entertainment, why would you expect them to value human life and their own life at all? Whatever we repeat we become good at and if we keep repeating the wrong actions, don’t expect to last very long in a world that is constantly striving to challenge us.

James gets his TV fix once in a while, but even on those few occasions I’ve seen a noticeable difference in how little he develops as a person the next day when compared to when he doesn’t watch television. I’ve seen it in other children as well and I’ve even seen it in parents who are struggling to raise intelligent kids. Every day, the same shows, the same songs, the same scripts said in a slightly different way. Eventually you need to have those songs in your phone to keep your kid quiet from having a tantrum while in a waiting room– just like an addict. Metaphorically, that’s equal to saying, “Watch your show and be quiet while I control your life with a super-stimulating medium made by people who are going to produce whatever they have to, to survive – not necessarily what you need to see to survive”.

Repetition wires your brain and can lead to great things so long as that repetition is great. That’s the insanity of entertainment and television as it is today. It’s less about being great and more about churning a profit for the production team. Meanwhile, you look up to your Kim Kardashian and want to be like her and meet her and love her and when you finally get the chance you get tackled down by her security guard. It’s insanity. I mean, just now I look on Google News for a headline about the Kardashian’s and the first headline is Kardashians Reportedly Hate Fat Brother for Being Fat.

Honestly, are you getting paid to care about that?

I apologize for this being one of the longest and by far the most ‘charged’ blog I’ve written, but I feel it must be said. Your time is your own. It’s your life. Use it wisely for your wealth and your health and if you want to help that along, turn off the TV and turn on your life.

——————————————

Stephan Gardner is a Life Performance, Personal Development & Psychology Specialist who helps people achieve mental well being through a luminary understanding of human behaviour, emotions and life transformation. A teacher of personal and spiritual development and dedicated Yoga practitioner, his mission is to inspire you to reach life fulfillment through inspired work, wisdom, and love. www.stephangardner.com

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

General

Abductions & Car Vandalism – Startling Australian UFO Report Unclassified

Gautam Peddada

Published

on

By

2 minute read

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

An uncovered Australian report performed by their Department of Defence. “Scientific Intelligence — General — Unidentified Flying Objects” is trending again. Those who have done extensive research on UFOs will find the Australian version of disclosure to be far more intellectually honest than the American version. Albeit it was conducted decades ago.

According to ex-US intelligence official Luis Elizondo, the Defense Department’s Inspector General is presently conducting three reviews. The inquiries vary from the Department of Defense’s handling of UFO claims to Elizondo’s alleged whistleblower retribution. The open IG cases are crucial to Australia’s report because they establish beyond a shadow of a doubt that the US Department of Defense is being dishonest and shady when it comes to the UFO subject. For decades, Australia has been a loyal friend of the United States. Within Australia’s boundaries, they share a military installation (Pine Gap). When a close defense ally’s intelligence agencies determined that the US was not being intellectually honest in its approach, perhaps it is reasonable to conclude that there is more to the tale than the 144 incidents studied since 2004 by the UAPTF.

The CIA became alarmed at the overloading of military communications during the mass sightings of 1952 and considered the possibility that the USSR may take advantage of such a situation.

Australian UFO study.

According to the summary, OSI, acting through the Robertson-Panel, encouraged the USAF to use Project Blue Book to publicly “debunk” UFOs. In a tragic twist of fate, when Australian authorities sought explanations from the US Air Force, the allegation was debunked. The authors of the study were depicted as conspiratorial and even crazy by the US Air Force. Ross Coulthart reported this, and it may be heard in a recent Project Unity interview. Courthart is an award-winning investigative journalist who is drawn to forbidden subjects. He also stated on the same podcast that a senior US Navy official identified as Nat Kobitz told him that the US had been in the midst of reverse-engineering numerous non-human craft. According to his obituary, Mr. Kobitz was a former Director of Research and Development at Naval Sea Systems Command.

Continue reading the entire article at The Pulse. 

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

General

PGA Tour To End COVID Testing For Both Vaccinated & Non-Vaccinated Players

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 4 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The PGA Tour has announced that it will stop testing players every week, regardless of whether they have been vaccinated or not.

  • Reflect On:

    Are PCR tests appropriate to identify infectious people? Should people who are healthy and not sick be tested at all, anywhere?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

The picture you see above is of John Rahm, a professional golfer on the PGA tour being carted off the golf course after tournament officials told him he had COVID. He was healthy and had no symptoms, yet was forced to withdraw from the tournament. He was told in front of the camera’s, and a big scene was made out of the event. You would think something like that, especially when you are a big time sports figure, would be done behind closed doors with some privacy.

Earlier on in June a spokesperson for the PGA Tour said that more than 50 percent of players on the PGA tour have been vaccinated. Although it seems that the majority of players on the tour will be fully vaccinated judging by this statement, it does leave a fairly large minority who won’t be, and that’s something we’re seeing across the globe as COVID vaccine hesitancy remains high for multiple reasons.

We are pleased to announce, after consultation with PGA Tour medical advisors, that due to the high rate of vaccination among all constituents on the PGA Tour, as well as other positively trending factors across the country, testing for COVID-19 will no longer be required as a condition of competition beginning with the 3M Open. – PGA tour Senior VP Tyler Dennis

The tour recently announced that the testing of players every week will stop starting in July for both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. This was an unexpected announcement given the fact that, at least it seems in some countries, vaccinated individuals will enjoy previous rights and freedoms that everyone did before the pandemic. Travelling without need to quarantine and possibly in the future not having to be tested could be a few of those privileges. Others may include attending concerts, sporting events, or perhaps even keeping their job depending on whether or not their employer deems it to be mandatory, if that’s even legally possible. We will see what happens.

Luckily for professional golfers, regardless of their vaccination status they won’t have to worry about testing positive for COVID, especially if they’re not sick. This is the appropriate move by the PGA tour, who is represented by their players and it’s a move that the players themselves may have had a say in. It’s important because PCR tests are not designed nor are they appropriate for identifying infectious people. A number of scientists have been emphasizing this since the beginning of the pandemic. More recently, a letter to the editor published in the Journal of infection explain why more than half of al “positive” PCR tests are likely to have been people who are not infectious, otherwise known as “false positives.”

This is why the Swedish Public Health agency has a notice on their website explaining how and why polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests are not useful for determining if someone is infected with COVID or if someone can transmit it to others, and it’s better to use someone who is actually showing symptoms as a judgement call of whether or not they could be infected or free from infection.

PCR tests using a high cycle threshold are extremely sensitive. An article published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases found that among positive PCR samples with a cycle count over 35, only 3 percent of the samples showed viral replication. This can be interpreted as, if someone tests positive via PCR when a Ct of 35 or higher is used, the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, and the probability that said result is a false positive is 97 percent. This begs the question, why has Manitoba, Canada, for example, using cycle thresholds of up to 45 to identify “positive” people?

When it comes to golf, the fact that spread occurring in an outdoor setting is highly unlikely could have been a factor, but it’s also important to mention that asymptomatic spread within one’s own household is also considerably rare. It really makes you wonder what’s going on here, doesn’t it?

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

General

New Study Questions The Safety of COVID Vaccinations & Urges Governments To Take Notice

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 9 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A new study published in the journal Vaccines has called into question the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.

  • Reflect On:

    Why are people hesitant to take the vaccine? Why are scientists and journalists who explain why hesitancy may exist censored?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

A new study published in the journal Vaccines by three scientists and medical professionals from Europe has raised concerns about the safety of COVID vaccines, and it’s not the first to do so. The study found that there is a “lack of clear benefit” of the vaccines and this study should be a catalyst for “governments to rethink their vaccination policy.”

The study calculated the number needed to vaccinate (NNTV) in order to prevent one death, and to do so they used a large Israeli Field study. Using the Adverse Drug Reactions (ADR) database of the European Medicines Agency and of the Dutch National Register (lareb.nl), the researchers were able to assess the number of cases reporting severe side effects as well as the cases with fatal side effects as a result of a COVID vaccine.

They point out the following:

The NNTV is between 200-700 to prevent on case of COVID-19 for the mRNA vaccine marketed by Pfizer, while the NNTV to prevent one death is between 9000 and 50,000 (95 % confidence interval), with 16,000 as a point estimate. The number of cases experiencing adverse reactions has been reported to be 700 per 100,000 vaccinations. Currently, we see 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations, and the number of fatal side effects is at 4.11/100,000 vaccinations. For three deaths prevented by vaccination we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination. This lack of clear benefit should cause governments to rethink their vaccination policy.

The researchers estimates suggest that we have to exchange 4 fatal and 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations in order to save the lives of 2-11 individuals per 100,000 vaccinations. This puts the risk vs. benefit of COVID vaccination on the same order of magnitude.

We need to accept that around 16 cases will develop severe adverse reactions from COVID-19 vaccines per 100,000 vaccinations delivered, and approximately four people will die from the consequences of being vaccinated per 100,000 vaccinations delivered. Adopting the point estimate of NNTV = 16,000 (95% CI, 9000–50,000) to prevent one COVID-19-related death, for every six (95% CI, 2–11) deaths prevented by vaccination, we may incur four deaths as a consequence of or associated with the vaccination. Simply put: As we prevent three deaths by vaccinating, we incur two deaths.

The study does point out that COVID-19 vaccines are effective and can, according to the publication, prevent infections, morbidity and mortality associated with COVID, but the costs must be weighted. For example, many people have been asking themselves, what are the chances I will get severely ill and die from a COVID infection?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD, from the Stanford University School of Medicine recently shared that the survival rate for people under 70 years of age is about 99.95 percent. He also said that COVID is less dangerous than the flu for children.  This comes based on approximately 50 studies that have been published, and information showing that more children in the U.S. have died from the flu than COVID. Here’s a meta analysis published by the WHO that gives this number. The number comes based on the idea that many more people than we have the capacity to test have most likely been infected.

How dangerous COVID is for healthy individuals has been a controversial discussion throughout this pandemic, with viewpoints differing.

Furthermore, as the study points out, one has to be mindful of a “positive” case determined by a PCR test. A PCR test cannot determine whether someone is infectious or not, and a recent study found that it’s highly likely that at least 50 percent of “positive” cases have been “false positives.”

This is the issue with testing asymptomatic healthy people, especially at a high cycle threshold. It’s the reason why many scientists and doctors have been urging government health authorities to determine cases and freedom from infections based on symptoms rather than a PCR test. You can read more in-depth about PCR testing and the issues with it here if you’re interested.

When it comes to the documented 4 deaths per 100,000 vaccinations and whether or not it’s a significant number, the researchers state,

This is difficult to say, and the answer is dependant on one’s view of how severe the pandemic is and whether the common assumption that there is hardly any innate immunological defense or cross-reactional immunity is true. Some argue that we can assume cross-reactivity of antibodies to conventional coronaviruses in 30–50% of the population [13,14,15,16]. This might explain why children and younger people are rarely afflicted by SARS-CoV2 [17,18,19].

Natural immunity is another interesting topic I’ve written in-depth about. There’s a possibility that more than a billion people have been infected, does this mean they have protection? What happens if previously infected individuals take the vaccine? What does this do to their natural immunity? The research suggesting natural immunity may last decades, or even a lifetime, is quite strong in my opinion.

There are also other health concerns that have been raised that go beyond deaths and adverse reactions as a result of the vaccine.

As the study points out,

A recent experimental study has shown that SARS-CoV2 spike protein is sufficient to produce endothelial damage. [23]. This provides a potential causal rationale for the most serious and most frequent side effects, namely, vascular problems such as thrombotic events. The vector-based COVID-19 vaccines can produce soluble spike proteins, which multiply the potential damage sites [24]. The spike protein also contains domains that may bind to cholinergic receptors, thereby compromising the cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathways, enhancing inflammatory processes [25]. A recent review listed several other potential side effects of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines that may also emerge later than in the observation periods covered here [26]…Given this fact and the higher number of serious side effects already reported, the current political trend to vaccinate children who are at very low risk of suffering from COVID-19 in the first place must be reconsidered.

Concerns regarding the distribution of the spike protein our cells manufacture after injection have been recently raised by Byram Bridle, a viral immunologist from the University of Guelph who recently released a detailed in depth report regarding safety concerns about the COVID vaccines.

The report was released to act as a guide for parents when it comes to deciding whether or not their child should be vaccinated against COVID-19. Bridle published the paper on behalf of one hundred other scientists and doctors who part of the Canadian COVID Care Alliance, but who are afraid to ‘come out’ publicly and share their concerns. Byram, as many others, have received a lot of criticism and have been subjected to fact checking via Facebook third party fact-checkers.

A recent article published in the British Medical Journal by journalist Laurie Clarke has highlighted the fact that Facebook has already removed at least 16 million pieces of content from its platform and added warnings to approximately 167 million others. YouTube has removed nearly 1 million videos related to, according to them, “dangerous or misleading covid-19 medical information.”

It’s also important to note that only a small fraction of side effects are even reported to adverse events databases. The authors cite multiple sources showing this, and that the median underreporting can be as high as 95 percent. This begs the question, how many deaths and adverse reactions from COVID vaccines have not been reported? Furthermore, if there are long term concerns, will deaths resulting from an adverse reaction, perhaps a year later, even be considered as connected to to the vaccine? Probably not.

This isn’t the only study to bring awareness to the lack of injuries most likely not reported. For example, an HHS pilot study conducted by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research found that 1 in every 39 vaccines in the United States caused some type of injury, which is a shocking comparison to the 1 in every million claim. It’s also unsettling that those who are injured by the COVID-19 vaccine won’t be eligible for compensation from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) while COVID is still an “emergency”, at least in the United States.

Below is the most recent data from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). Keep in mind that VAERS is not without its criticism. One common criticism we’ve seen from Facebook fact-checkers, for example, is there is no proof that the vaccine was actually the cause of these events.

A few other papers have raised concerns, for example. A study published in October of 2020 in the International Journal of Clinical Practice states:

COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.

In a new research article published in Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, veteran immunologist J. Bart Classen expresses similar concerns and writes that “RNA-based COVID vaccines have the potential to cause more disease than the epidemic of COVID-19.”

For decades, Classen has published papers exploring how vaccination can give rise to chronic conditions such as Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes — not right away, but three or four years down the road. In this latest paper, Classen warns that the RNA-based vaccine technology could create “new potential mechanisms” of vaccine adverse events that may take years to come to light.

There are a plethora of reasons why COVID vaccine hesitancy has been quite high. I wrote an in-depth article about this in April if you’re interested in learning about the other reasons.

Conversations like this are incredibly important in today’s climate of mass censorship. Who is right or wrong is not important, what’s important is that discussion about the vaccine and all other topics remain open and transparent. The amount of experts in the field who have been censored for sharing their views on this topic has been unprecedented. For example, in March, Harvard epidemiologist and vaccine expert Dr. Martin Kulldorff was subjected to censorship by Twitter for sharing his opinion that not everybody needed to take the COVID vaccine.

It’s good to see this recent study point out that the benefits of the vaccine, for some people, may not outweigh the potential costs.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Join us on Telegram

We post important content to Telegram daily so we don't have to rely on Facebook.

You have Successfully Subscribed!