An Open Letter to the Pro-Vaccine Doctors and Religious Leaders of my Community
This was originally written as a letter to a specific individual, but has since been updated to a generic version that can be used anywhere.
To whom this is relevant:
In the months since the covid vaccines have been made available to the public, you have been an extremely aggressive advocate for everyone to get vaccinated. Ensuring the health of the community is certainly a laudable mission. But in the zealous and single-minded pursuit of functionally 100% vaccination uptake in our community, you have systematically and derisively dismissed the rational, reasonable, and plausible concerns of anyone who doesn’t share your rugged enthusiasm for the covid vaccines. Worse, you have levelled serious attacks upon everyone who disagrees with your view, disparaging their intellect, honesty, religious observance, and character. Despite this, there has been no appreciable opportunity for anyone competent on our side to ever publicly articulate our positions and rationale. This is a cardinal violation of basic ethical standards for anyone adjudicating a dispute, and obviously applicable here. Thus we are attempting to correct this clear betrayal of elementary fairness by providing the ‘other side’ for those who have been sheltered by the collective decisions of yourselves to vigilantly censor any dissenting information, data, or hypotheses regarding the covid vaccines from the public community media platforms, and therefore view us as irrational conspiracy theorists (or worse).
Is Covid Treatable?
One of the foundational premises necessary to support any imperative for widespread vaccine uptake by the community at large is the claim that there are no effective treatments for covid that are readily available. If this claim is not true, then there is by definition no basis to ruthlessly hawk vaccines, regardless of their safety or efficacy.
Well, this claim is emphatically false, and this is about as black and white as an issue could be. There are numerous treatments with varying degrees of efficacy, some of which are nearly 100% effective as prophylaxis or early intervention if applied correctly and/or synergistically, including Ivermectin, HCQ, Methylprednisolone, inhaled/nebulized Budesonide, Quercetin, Fluvoxamine, Nigella Sativa, Fluoxetine, an assortment of anti-androgens, Nitazoxanide, Vitamin D, and Vitamin C among others. These even include viricidal antiseptics like mouthwash (any with cetylpyridinium chloride) & nasal rinse/spray (such as povidone-iodine or iota-carrageenan).
It is obvious that you did not consult with any of the world-renowned clinicians or scientists, or heroic frontline doctors, who actually treat covid patients with any of these protocols or drugs. You did not even try to consult with anyone who knows any of these heroic doctors. This is an astonishing failure to exercise basic diligence while investigating an issue. The brilliant medical luminaries who treat covid - some of whom have yet to lose a patient -include Dr. Paul Marik, Dr. Pierre Kory, Dr. Joseph Veron, Dr. Flavio Cardegianni, and Dr. Hector Carvallo, among many, many more. Did you know that quite a few countries mass distributed Ivermectin to fight covid (and were wildly successful too)? Japan, for instance, officially recommends Ivermectin as a prophylaxis and treatment for covid. If you choose to venerate certain Jewish physicians as infallible, fine, but that hardly gives you any basis or credibility to attack those of us who don’t just catatonically accept what we understandably see as brazen propaganda, and contrary to the success many of us have experienced firsthand using these treatment options.
We ask that you at least consider this: Over the past year or so, there have been at least 25 instances (so far) where the family of a ventilated covid patient - for whom the hospital conceded they did not have any other interventions to offer & thus expected the patient would die - demanded the hospital allow them to try Ivermectin; the hospital flatly refused; the family sued the hospital in court and won a court order forcing the hospital to allow the Ivermectin treatment; and the patient subsequently recovered. Two critical points are obvious from this:
1- Contrary to the claims of the FDA, CDC, et al, Ivermectin obviously has significant efficacy in treating covid;
2- The medical community is populated with many truly wicked and evil practitioners and administrators who would rather patients die than give them a 100% safe treatment even when they have nothing else to offer.
Blindly trusting the same people who are willing to do engage in such depraved and sadistic atrocities is hardly warranted, or even rational.
Are the Medical Community and Their Institutions Credible?
Another key premise necessary for there to exist any semblance of moral imperative to get vaccinated is the reliability of the medical community. If we cannot trust the medical community, then we cannot trust the claims they make about anything including the covid vaccines, which is critical to satisfactorily establishing that the vaccines are safe and effective. Even though this would seem to be “asked and answered” already in the previous section, it is worth exploring the lack of credible expertise of the anointed “experts”.
So let’s take a look at how the policies and opinions of the experts performed in the real world:
Science!! (For the dishonest or illiterate self-appointed “experts” out there who will try to depict the above charts as cherry-picking or some other such nonsense, realize that this is to illustrate a dynamic, not prove it decisively, which would require an in-depth look at a wider range of factors and so on.)
The appalling lack of scientific acumen displayed by our public health leaders was in fact so shocking that a group of preeminent worldwide scientists and doctors got together to write a formal document decrying the government policies, and providing a far more balanced and rational set of guiding principles and policy alternatives, called “The Great Barrington Declaration”. This was signed and supported by tens of thousands of experts as credentialed as anyone else in the academic world. (This also exposes the fanatical lie that “99%” of doctors support the mainstream’s version of the covid “facts” or their policy prescriptions.)
We could go on and on indefinitely prosecuting the case that the mainstream medical community and their alleged experts have no credibility for a number of reasons, but to do so is impractical for this letter. At any rate, this is merely a very general overview of the undeniably rational and plausible position that the mainstream experts are abject failures and emphatically unreliable, to say the least.
However, through your own positions on every relevant covid topic, you freely admit that you have uncritically embraced practically every utterance promulgated by the medical community. Worse, you have accepted their libelous and defamatory portrayal of anyone who dissents as irrational and either a propagator of or a believer in conspiracy theories. Yet, as stated, it is an eminently rational and predicated view that the medical community and their vaunted “expert class” have been not just factually wrong every step of the way, but indefensibly and egregiously so. (This is a partial list of statements/positions espoused early on, some of which were awful to the point of being deficient of even the weak patina of thinly reasoned logic.) Certainly no one believes that Chazal actually instruct us to blindly trust experts who lack expertise or who are corrupt?
Do the Vaccines Prevent Infection or Transmission?
It goes without saying that the lynchpin for the claim that “you are required to get vaccinated so you don’t infect someone else” requires that the vaccines at least significantly reduce the possibility of contracting and transmitting covid.
Did you know that such illustrious people (per your view anyway) like the CDC Director, the WHO Director General, and a host of others have publicly admitted that the vaccines do not stop transmission?
And even if they didn’t admit it, there are numerous studies attesting to this, demonstrating that vaccinated people compared to the unvaccinated carry equivalent (or greater) viral loads and culturable virus. Furthermore, the plain real world experience is simple and unambiguous proof that the vaccinated contract and spread covid.
But it gets worse. Did you know that the Public Health England data - that’s from the UK government - shows that the vaccine has negative efficacy on cases after about 6 months? Understand that the PHE dataset, although very far from perfect, is far and away the highest quality dataset available. It covers the entirety of the country’s population. PHE issues a new report every week. And unlike the CDC, they apply the same methodology of data curation and analysis to the entire geography and history for the entire country, allowing for fairly reliable trend spotting and comparisons between various cohorts, jurisdictions, and so on. Again, quite literally, the case rate in the vaccinated by 6 months is higher than in the unvaccinated, and this disparity becomes increasingly larger as time goes on.
The failure of the vaccines to stop transmission is also hardly unexpected. The vaccine trials themselves stipulated that they could not provide reliable data regarding whether the vaccines reduce transmission. Ask yourself this: Why did they deliberately designed the vaccine trials not to be able to determine the impact of the vaccines on transmission?
In any event, no honest person can reasonably claim that there is anything remotely approaching a conclusive case that the vaccines reduce covid transmission.
Is so-called “Natural” Immunity Conferred by Infection Equal or Superior to the Immunity Conferred by the Vaccines?
People look at anti-vaxxers (as in those against vaccination in principle) as “science deniers”, (in part) for denying the obvious immunity conferred by a vaccine.
Well, to deny immunity conferred by infection is considerably more illiterate! A vaccine by design is mimicking the pathology of infection in order to provoke the immune system into responding as if there was a real infection going on. So how can it possibly be logically coherent to assume without any indication that the covid vaccines that are trying to mimic a covid infection results in robust and durable immunity yet actual infection by covid does not??? Certainly, that is at minimum a truly radical hypothesis that belongs in the realm of unpredicated conjecture so long as there isn’t any actual evidence that strongly indicates such a phenomenon is true (which there assuredly isn’t).
The medical establishment are therefore anti-science immunity deniers. And they have continued to deny the reality of natural immunity even as an avalanche of studies and real-world observations prove the drastic superiority of natural immunity over the vaccine’s immunity.
Besides for the self-evident conclusion that, as a general rule, covid infection results in robust and durable immunity, the anti-scientific denialism of the immune system by the medical community shows how blatantly political and dishonest they are. That the medical community “lay-doctors” have largely accepted such an outlandish theory without any evidence demonstrates the degree to which they have surrendered their judgement and independent thinking to the public health authorities.
This already is sufficient to demonstrate the gross immorality of pushing vaccination on people who are justifiably distrustful of the medical establishment and the Jewish medical professionals who hold by them.
But we cannot discuss the covid vaccines without addressing the elephant in the room: safety.
Are the Covid Vaccines Safe?
You have chastised, insulted, and attacked all of us who believe that these vaccines are not safe - or at least that their safety has not been demonstrated - as irrational, immoral, and selfish. You even wrote that we are not acting in a manner consistent with being frum. And now you have gone so far as to express your conviction that we ought to be criminalized by the state. Your scorn for those of us who think that the vaccine is dangerous and toxic is unmistakable. But what basis can you possibly have to publicly malign us with such venomous and derisive accusations?
To begin, it is well known that there are innumerable drugs that were initially thought to be “safe” but were subsequently discovered to cause all sorts of problems, a phenomenon especially pronounced in therapeutics granted expedited approval. Many of these drugs had their approval revoked as a result.
It is also a well known phenomenon that regulatory agencies can be corrupted over time to serve the interests of those whom they are supposed to be regulating. This even has a formal academic name: “Regulatory Capture”. Corruption inside the FDA & CDC, and especially the NIH, has a long and tumultuous history (which is a subject that requires its own series of articles to properly document and analyze). In any event, there is no compelling reason to believe that the FDA isn’t operating under significant political, social, and financial pressures to approve the vaccines.
The covid vaccines currently available are novel in a few significant ways. “Novel” by definition means that we don’t have an analogous precedent that can reliably characterize or predict how the novel therapy will turn out. They also do not have long term observational data - which is the only way to determine if a novel therapeutic can lead to the development of health issues that take longer to manifest. Therefore, it is simply impossible for us to know what the long-term pathologies of the covid vaccines are, and what risks they carry. To deny this obvious self-evident truth – with all due respect - is to be a brazen and flagrant liar.
Yet even the short-term safety profile of these vaccines is not remotely settled.
The vaccines were initially presented as not plausibly causing any serious side effects. Since then, the medical community has been forced to concede that the vaccines can cause myocarditis, pericarditis, Guillen-Barre, Thrombocytopenia, Thrombosis, Strokes, and a whole assortment of dysmenorrheal issues, among other things (and again, this is only what they have been forced to concede to because they were so prevalent that it was untenable to continue to deny the association between the vaccines and these injuries).
So, regardless of what the true rates of all of these side effects are, none of them were uncovered by the trials, and all were initially declared by the mainstream community as implausible to be caused by the vaccines. How can it be irrational in light of this to believe that there could easily be other side effects happening, or that these side effects are occurring on a larger scale, than the mainstream medical community is willing to admit or recognize?
There is far more to say about the safety profile of these vaccines, but my goal here is to rebut the contention that anyone who is concerned that the vaccines might be unsafe is irrational, not produce a comprehensive statistical analysis to prove the vaccines caused “X” number of deaths or injuries.
Did the Vaccine Trials “Cut Corners”?
We just want to address this because one of the most critical - and vociferously and aggressively defended - assertions by the medical community is that “the vaccines went through all of the proper testing without shortcuts or cut corners”.
The long answer is to go through the minutiae of the trials and FDA approval process and document the innumerable problems, which isn’t practical here.
A few basic points though:
Although the trials were officially supposed to - ideally - run through at least 2023, they were “blown up” after only a few months when the control arms were vaccinated. (In layman terms, they gave the control group in the study the vaccine after about 3 months.) Although this isn’t technically illegal, and they did receive permission to do this, this is as nakedly corrupt as it gets, which is something that should not require elaboration. And it certainly forecloses the possibility of any long-term data emerging from the vaccine trials. Ever.
Some of the standard and critical tests they did not do - which go well beyond “cut corners” - include assessing the toxicity of the Lipid (LNP) mRNA “delivery vehicle” (ie does it interact with anything in the human body in a harmful way), where the “delivery vehicles” end up in the human body (distribution), the duration of spike protein production, the quantity of spike protein production, the distribution of the spike proteins in the human body, and the toxicity of the produced spike proteins (which by the way have a few modifications and are not perfectly identical to the native spike protein of the original Wuhan strain). The last one is of extreme importance since numerous toxicities of the spike protein were subsequently discovered after the vaccines were already in human trials.
It has always been a cardinal rule that a treatment is never approved for use in a population deliberately excluded from the development trials, especially pregnant women, who are at elevated risk from pretty much everything under the sun.
One of the subjects in the Pfizer trial for adolescents, a perfectly healthy then-12-year-old named Maddie De Garay, suffered what can be described as an inhuman ordeal of grotesque torture and permanent disabilities (yes, her injuries were that horrific, and we would encourage any skeptical readers to follow the above link). She went on national television together with her mother (and a few other vaccine injury victims) with US Senator Ron Johnson to tell her story, which is how we know it’s legitimate. (You can watch/listen to the heartwrenching video of her mother describing what happened here (tznius warning for those whom this is relevant).)
It goes without saying that if the vaccine trial report literally simply lied about a major vaccine injury that happened in the trial, the trial is a meaningless joke that does not remotely count as even low quality evidence for safety. Ultimately, we don’t know if there were other events like this one that were similarly covered up.
So yes, it is reasonable for one to suspect or believe that the vaccines may pose a degree of danger that is sufficient to warrant rejecting them, at least for the time being.
But Aren’t Many Anti-Covid Vaccine People Unable to Articulate a Coherent Basis for their Belief, or they Downright Believe in Wild Conspiracy Theories?
An oft-repeated attack on people who are suspicious of or reject the vaccine because of safety concerns is that they are unable to articulate a coherent or sensible basis for such a view; or that they believe/propagate conspiracy theories and other such nonsense.
With all due respect, this attack is deceptive and manipulative.
It is obvious to anyone with an ounce of sense who is intellectually honest that there are very, very few people who have the intellectual heft, scientific & academic literacy, political savvy, personality and free time required to be able to research and adjudicate the mountain of very confusing and discordant studies, data and expert opinions regarding covid. People live life based on general principles that guide whom and what they trust, their values, their experiences and their general understanding of the world. People also - although obviously to varying degrees - live by intuition, which exists on an entirely different plane than empirical arguments.
What animates the suspicion and rejection of the covid vaccines - for the vast majority of people who are suspicious of or reject them - is a perception or sense that the mainstream medical community lacks institutional credibility regarding covid. They have internalized (and not unfairly) - again to varying degrees - that the medical community, and the policymaking bodies and the people who wield their powers, have acted in ways that are incompetent, foolish, incredibly deceitful and/or plainly evil. These people have a sense that broadly speaking, public policymaking is not being guided or even meaningfully influenced by rational and considered fact-finding, debate, and cost/benefit analysis.
However, the average person cannot possibly translate these instincts into a coherent understanding of foreign subject matter, much less at a level where one would be able to unwind the lies of experts. Any competent expert can make even the most outlandish theories within the field of his expertise seem plausible and true to someone unfamiliar with the subject. It is not fair, nor is it remotely honest, to expect laypeople to be able to rebut the specific factual assertions of experts. One doesn’t need to know how to decisively refute a contention in order for their refusal to accept it to be rational, legitimate, and intellectually honest.
Furthermore, because of the actions that you have collectively taken - to lock out almost any whiff of dissent from almost all of the public media in the community - people with a clear intuition that the medical community is lying or clueless are left bereft of any competent voice to articulate and defend their positions except the most radical and extreme personalities. (This is something we have firsthand knowledge of, for example a few publications refused to allow this letter to the editor re facemasks, and this article about Ivermectin, to be published in their pages. We would encourage open minded readers of this letter to take a look at either of them, and judge for yourselves what the impact of either of those might have been had they been allowed to be published 7-8 months ago.) It is no wonder that people without any other options gravitate to what little is left available to them to give a voice to their views and experience. This is not a mark of irrationality; it is simply people deciding that the extremists are much less dishonest and off-base then the pathological charlatans of the mainstream medical community.
One thing is worth considering very carefully: Never in recent memory has there been such a powerful negiah (bias) afflicting our community leaders and medical professionals. They have loudly and daily proclaimed in the most definitive ways possible that the covid vaccines are absolutely safe and effective, to the point of advocating that people be compelled by various means to get vaccinated. Tens of thousands of people followed their advice, and tens of thousands more succumbed to their pressure. If the truth is that these vaccines are not quite as safe or effective, that would mean that people died or suffered all sorts of horrible injuries because of them, or contracted covid despite vaccination because they were lulled into a false sense of security that the vaccines are essentially impervious. Their credibility would also be absolutely blown to pieces. They have publicly humiliated, attacked, defamed, castigated, chastised, mocked and scorned those who refused to accept their proclamations of functionally impervious vaccine safety. It is impossible to exaggerate how powerful the inherent human impulse to preserve one’s sense of integrity, morality, and righteousness is when it is so severely threatened. We simply do not think it is rational to expect that people can be remotely objective about the issues pertaining to the covid vaccines when they are so heavily and intractably invested in the vaccines working out the way they promised they would.
Obviously, this is an issue that is broad and complicated. There was much more we would have liked to say but could not pragmatically do so in one missive. Ultimately, we hope that honest people will at least be able to see for themselves that rejecting the covid vaccines is neither irrational nor immoral.
Rational and Unvaccinated
Please spread this around as much as possible. It is only by getting the basic facts into the public domain that we can hope to force the pro-vaccine/pro-covid policies crowd to face the data and studies that do not fit their narrative.