What does it mean to be an anti vaxxer? We can’t even seem to agree on how to spell that term, so it feels almost impossible to accurately define it. According to google, the anti vaxxer is “ a person who is opposed to vaccination, typically a parent who does not wish to vaccinate their child.” Mainstream media apparently doesn’t agree with that definition, nor do our public health agencies. They actually define anyone who questions the safety and efficacy of Covid-19 vaccines as anti vaxxers. They have been wildly effective in their PR campaign to promote vaccinations against Covid as being “safe and effective.” It’s been an accepted practice in the advertising/PR world that simple phrases work best when trying to denigrate, discriminate, or even empower a portion of the population.
Vaccines are safe and effective CDC,FDA,NIH and mainstream media 2021-2022
Black Lives Matter
#Me too
Pro-Choice is Pro-Life
Covid is a pandemic of the unvaccinated. Public health agencies - 2021
Jews are the enemy of the people - Nazi Germany
The News media is the enemy of the people (Fake News) - Trump
All the News That’s Fit To Print - New York Times. No thanks,
Just do it. Nike
Ivermectin is horse paste - The FDA, MSNBC, CNN, The New York Times, Rolling Stone Magazine, WAPO, ETC.
Ivermectin is dangerous - Despite its 40 year history of 3.7 billion doses given to human beings before Covid and an impeccable safety record of less than a combined total of 7,000 VAERS reports since 1982, while Covid vaccines received 1.2 million VAERS reports within 18 months of roll-out, they continue to claim otherwise.
In an interesting article about propaganda titled Internet Memes: Leaflet Propaganda of the Digital Age, we can learn the history of these tools to influence large segments of the population. The internet however has created propaganda 2.0
As the author Joshua Troy Nieubuurt states:
Internet memes are one of the latest evolutions of “leaflet” propaganda and an effective tool in the arsenal of digital persuasion. In the past, such items were dropped from planes; now they find their way into social media across multiple platforms and their territory is global. Internet memes can be used to target specific groups to help build and solidify tribal bonds. Due to the ease of creation, and their ability to constantly reaffirm axiomatic tribal ideas, memes have become an adroit tool allowing for mass influence across international borders. This text explores the link between internet memes and their ability to “hack” the attention of anyone connected to internet using dense modality and cognitive biases. Furthermore, the text discusses Internet meme's ability (to) “sow discord by consistently reaffirming preexisting tribal bonds and their relation to traditional PSYOP tactics initially used for analog leaflet propaganda.
I have witnessed countless, previously well- respected physicians and scientists being defined as anti vaxxers simply because they committed the crime of reporting on legitimate scientific research that is inconsistent with the narrative provided by our public health agencies. Just this past week-end, an international conference was underway in Bath, England, titled The Better Way Conference, during which the media blasted all who attended. The description of career vaccinologists and virologists as anti vaxxers and conspiracy theorists would be comical if it wasn’t so dangerous in its intent to mislead.
The Davos of COVID Conspiracy Theorists Is Happening in a UK Town Right Now
Experts fear the 3-day Better Way Conference, which is a veritable who’s who of global anti-vax influencers, may lead to deeper radicalization within the scene.
Many of the biggest names in the global anti-vax and coronavirus conspiracy scenes converged on the UK city of Bath on Friday for a major conference that aims to give a respectable veneer to COVID truther ideology. The 3-day Better Way Conference bills itself as, in the words of its organizer Dr. Tess Lawrie – a vocal UK advocate of the unauthorized anti-parasite drug ivermectin as a treatment for COVID – promoting “an evidence-based approach to medical decision making, sovereignty, empowerment and reimagining the future of healthcare”.
I believe we can begin to change this narrative by redefining these heroes of Covid as Pro-Science Advocates (PSA). So for example, when we speak of Dr. Robert Malone we would begin by saying, Pro-Science Advocate Dr. Robert Malone. Or Pro-Science Advocate Dr. Pierre Kory, or Pro-Science Advocate Dr. Paul Marik or Pro-Science Advocate Robert Kennedy Jr, or Pro-Science Advocate Steve Kirsch. If we can gain widespread acceptance of this preface, then I believe we can begin to promote a more positive and honest portrayal of these brave physicians, attorneys, concerned citizens, and researchers. The reality is that the only crime advanced by these people is the request for scientific integrity, investigation, and open and honest debate. Does that sound like anti-anything? Ultimately the goal would be for all citizens of the world to have a personal choice about what medical treatments they will permit that involves their bodies. Does that sound like a conspiracy theory to you? Does that sound like an anti vaxx belief? What it does sound like is an anti-mandate position. I prefer to agree with Mother Teresa who said, “If you hold an anti-war rally, I shall not attend. But if you hold a Pro-Peace rally invite me”. Hence the Pro-Science Advocate preface.
No one in this group would ever consider preventing anyone from taking any vaccine or medical procedure. The only requirement they would support is Informed Consent. This concept has been part of our medical structure for many, many years. As cogently described by Nandini K. Kumar:
Informed consent: Past and present
INTRODUCTION
Informed consent is one of the key elements for protection of welfare of patients or research participants. Traditionally, irrespective of various cultural environments, whether in ancient India or during the Greco-Roman period, physicians were paternalistic in attitude and consent from patients was more of defensive medicine practice. However, the socio-cultural differences of those times persist even in modern times regarding obtaining informed consent despite existing guidelines/regulations for reducing exploitation. The vulnerability of patients/participants with reduced autonomy is universal, but application of an ethical principle of respect for persons depends on the political environment and cultural differences across the world….In modern times too, especially in the 20th century, despite there being guidelines/regulations to prevent exploitation by ensuring that informed consent has been taken, absence of that procedure or persuasion in various forms to obtain it exists even today.
Early philosophers spoke about “natural rights” that confer meaning of life from the time one is born, but in modern day parlance these are termed “fundamental human rights,” which are applicable in democratic countries and endorsed in international instruments. Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle recognized the purpose of ethics and analyzed normative ethical ideals affecting human life. However, later by the early part of 20th century, the concentration of philosophers got diverted to linguistic details or “logical analysis” of “moral semantics and other issues in meta-ethics.” Interestingly, when the German government's guidelines in 1931, emphasizing on present day requirements of informed consent and independent ethics review, were flouted by physicians influenced by the political ideology prevailing then, the shocking Nazi human experiments shook the philosophers awake. This gave rise to the much-acclaimed code–the Nuremberg Code. Among its 10 principles the longest principle is on informed consent. Later, the Helsinki Declaration stated the importance of having an ethics committee review a research proposal, which included an informed consent document comprising patient/participant information sheet and informed consent form. This was expected to put the nail on the coffin of paternalism, but in hierarchical social systems, mostly in developing countries, this is still a reality…Instances of violations of informed consent have occurred world over despite existence of ethical principles and regulatory mechanisms. In order to improve the situation, awareness programs and more aggressive training for various stakeholders are required through international and national efforts.
Informed consent–specific points
Consent is implied or implicit when a physician is allowed to do routine physical examination and investigations. This gets more restricted when a female patient has to be examined in a more intimate manner and when invasive investigations are required. The consent here will have to be more explicit in oral or written form. But when more risky interventions, surgical procedures, and long-term follow-up are involved, written consent is required as a safeguard. Any violation by a physician or researcher can be liable under tort or criminal law, and the patient can sue for battery or negligence depending on the extent of alleged offense.
Can anyone reading this, who has been vaccinated, please note in the comment section if you received true informed consent prior to being vaccinated against Covid-19? Talking to my small sample of friends and family revealed that NO ONE received true informed consent. Yes, they were handed a piece of paper that apparently spoke of potential side effects and even death but why would anyone bother to read something like that when they have been told over and over again that the vaccines were “safe and effective”. Let’s see if that is consistent with others around the country.
A Lt. Colonel in the military, who was a flight surgeon, was tasked with providing informed consent to 3,000 newly arriving soldiers. He provided a 30 minute presentation of the risks and benefits of these experimental vaccines which led to only 6 soldiers agreeing to be vaccinated. He was then ordered to stop providing informed consent, which he refused to do, citing the military code which required him to do so. He later became a whistleblower, one of three, who took their oath as physicians seriously, which states First do no harm.
On a good day, I believe we can bring about critical change. On a good day, I believe in hope for the future. If you agree, then I encourage you to do whatever you can to plant a seed in as many heads as possible. Don’t give up. Don’t give in. Rather, inspire others to seek the truth.
LET'S REDEFINE WHO WE ARE
Behavioral Science applied to vaccination uptake. Which ended up blowing through the ethical guardrails of applied behavioral science, despite its proclaimed adherence to.
https://obssr.od.nih.gov/sites/obssr/files/inline-files/OBSSR_VaccineWhitePaper_FINAL_508.pdf
Michelle,
I started following you when I saw a comment of yours on Steve Kirsch's Substack a few months ago. This is a very long post with a lot of information, much of it requiring lengthy review and analysis. Seeing that you are a retired shrink with extensive training and experience in studying the mind and how it works, how it is influenced I'm taking the chance you'll have time and interest to take the deep dive my comment invites you to do.
I've done a great deal of research on the field of behavioral science since the beginning of the pandemic when I read a NPR article about why the advice on masks flip-flopped. I paid enough attention in science classes to learn the scientific method and the claims made in most of the article were simply assertions, and I'm a sophisticated enough reader and experienced in the practice of political propaganda to know the meaningful part is usually buried towards the end. When masks were called, "a badge of honor."
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/04/03/826996154/coronavirus-faqs-is-a-homemade-mask-effective-and-whats-the-best-way-to-wear-one
This terminology made every hair on my neck stick up, having extensively studied the origins of the Holocaust. Adopted by Jews who were told the Star of David was a "badge of honor."
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/wear-it-with-pride
I knew then something foul was afoot. Discovering what is behind the distortions of reality becoming my intellectual pursuit for over two years now. I've come to understand the behavioral sciences are predicated on the belief that the people being governed are "too cognitively impaired and lacking perspective," to make good decisions for themselves. We are helpless in understanding what is in our own best interests, plagued by shortcomings and biases that our educated betters needs to protect us from. With respect to the pandemic they said we suffer from "optimism bias" wrongly assessing that our risk was minimal, so we have to have our fear amplified, "fixing" our perspective to match the perspective our more educated and wiser betters believed we needed to save lives. Statistical data now being released showing that we, the people actually had "better" perspectives, more accurate than our "betters" tried to fix (impose) on us.
This article in the UK Telegraph in May, 2021 is on how the UK applied behavioral sciences abusively during the pandemic, prompting the creation of an official inquiry. Called, "the science of totalitarianism," by members of the pandemic mitigation team who first believed it necessary, later realized how dangerous it had become. In the year since the inquiry was launched it unfortunately but predictably has sputtered and stalled, been whitewashed and used to justify the abuses, minimizing the actual harms. The inquiry was prompted by great book, "A State of Fear," I recommend, written and published by Laura Dodsworth in the months leading up to the announcement of the inquiry. She personally mailed a copy of the book to every member of Parliament as it was published, the impetus for the inquiry. Hint: Same exact thing happened here in the US. Just less transparency and no inquiry....yet:
https://web.archive.org/web/20210519003131/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/14/scientists-admit-totalitarian-use-fear-control-behaviour-covid/
My research has also led me to this important UK document that both the US and UK draw strategies and methods of governance using a Behavioral Science approach to help achieve their public policy goals.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/mindspace
Their governing model is based on this understanding they have created for themselves to justify their behavioral science-based "Stewardship" of the masses. Which is really an exercise in propaganda, doublespeak, self-aggrandizing and pats on their own backs for how wonderful and beneficent their adoption of these methods are for the helpless little people they govern:
https://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Public-health-ethical-issues.pdf
This is a very insightful historical document I found in my research. A treatment of a behavioral science-based law and governing system by Walter Berns in 1963. Responding to proposals that we turn to behavioral sciences to govern humanity. The first 14 pages are a game theory exercise on how judges could make legal decisions as a scientific endeavor rather than human reason and wisdom. The final 14 pages get into the claims of proponents and dangers and hazards of the "science" as law and governing. A warning from the past lost on deaf ears:
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2953&context=lcp
The same constitutional scholar, Walter Berns, wrote about the application of social and behavioral sciences in US law that eugenics was (is) based in. The determinant court case, Buck v. Bell, remains a constitutional application of social science as law in the US nearly a century later, only partially limited in Oklahoma v. Skinner following WWII. Yes, the same basis of government-approved medical tyranny that Nazi Germany practiced is enshrined in US law today under "stare decisis." Inconvenient and embarrassing fact of history to most of us who want to believe the promise and virtuous nature of our nation is the reality today. Shockingly, it is not.
https://sci-hub.st/10.1177/106591295300600409
The Behavioral Science plan for the US released early in the pandemic link is below:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32355299/
Cass Sunstein is in the middle of this proposal and study, he was coauthor of "Nudge" with the UK's Richard Thaler. Sunstein is an important figure in the widespread adoption of behavioral science as governance over the past 15 years. The book "Nudge" became the basis of creations of social and behavioral science teams in both nations at the same time, under Obama (SBST) and Cameron (BIT) that took on extraordinary roles since the pandemic. He has several protoges who've led behavioral science as governance across governments and Big Tech since he wrote the book. Jessica Hertz (Facebook & Biden administration) and Maya Shankar (Obama administration, Google Global Chief Behavioral Scientist, Clinton connected *and* GOP Frank Luntz, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy connected). Local state government Nudge has exploded, especially since pandemic. With bipartisan support.
Problem is, they couch it all with claims that they follow an ethical approach to "nudge" which purports to maintain transparency, honesty, building and maintaining trust, operating within established bounds of psychological manipulation. But when you read the Nuffield Bioethics Council document you see they just give lip service to those values and restraints. They've blown right through the ethical practices of behaviorism, from "Nudge" to coercive "Shove" and abusive "Slap." The "Science" has gone off the rails of ethical practice.
Ominously the same practitioners launched an international self-governing organization that seeks to be an authoritative body on the ethics of applied behavioral science. Launched in August, 2020, a proactive attempt to get ahead of their abusive and unethical application of the science from questions by authorities, like the UK inquiry, they knew would come. This organization is not to be given deference, they must be called out for what they represent: Foxes guarding the henhouse.
ttps://gaabs.org/team/
Behavioral science is a tool, or a weapon, depending on who is wielding it. Much like atomic research into the science of splitting the atom. Once discovered it can be applied as a weapon of mass destruction or for the betterment of mankind harnessing abundant energy to improve lives. The behavioral sciences in the hands of those wielding it today is a weapon of mass destruction of civil liberty and freedom across the globe. Shredding our constitution into something unrecognizable in the land of the free, home of the brave. Put into a state of perpetual fear. The science of totalitarianism. Professionals like you with ethics in psychological manipulation will be crucial to taking the science back from those who are using it as a weapon and put sufficient restraints on it so the practice cannot go off the rails ever again.
I'll leave you with these links from an invaluable resource I recently discovered about how to more effectively communicate with those who have followed the narrative, many smart, good, reasoned people who've made the colossal mistake of trusting authorities and influencers and then falling into group dynamics of conformity:
https://reachingpeople.net/presentations/
(Next three videos are from same presenter, worth being stand alone links)
The Top 6 Methods of Manipulation Used in the Media
https://www.bitchute.com/video/LAmBFCmU2LaW/
How to Effectively Wake Up Your Friends and Family
https://www.bitchute.com/video/1GUKsUu8xTgM/
5 Rules of Propaganda
https://youtu.be/JRYpyumCaaQ