Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.
It will take years for truth to emerge, but the process has begun.
The dam wall has finally broken. In the United States and Australia, the chapter of silence on reporting COVID-19 vaccine injuries appears to have slammed shut, due in no small part to Christine Middap’s excellent series of reports in the 'Australian'.
Throughout the pandemic criticism of masks or lockdowns was permissible, if frowned upon, but the vaccines attained an almost exalted status that ensured any critics—no matter the quality of their evidence—were unfairly disparaged as “anti-vaxxers,” “cookers,” or simply ignored.
Why this was so remains hard to explain, but some fault must lie with a too credulous, incurious mainstream media, naive to the political and financial forces that pushed governments to eschew the more sensible path of voluntary Covid-19 vaccination.
At the very outset, compelling entire populations to take a scientifically novel vaccine, produced on a political timetable, against a disease that for the bulk of people was a bad cold, was a highly questionable policy, arguably trashing traditional medical ethics about informed consent.
Social media performed abysmally too. The latest batch of Twitter Files revealed a systematic effort by US government-funded NGOs to remove even true stories of vaccine injuries where they could promote “vaccine hesitancy.” In an Orwellian twist of history, any posts throughout 2021 that warned of vaccine passports, mandates, or argued for natural immunity were removed.
“Panic may resent it. Ignorance may deride it. Malice may distort it. But there it is,” Winston Churchill once famously said of truth.
The mountain of bias and ignorance that’s weighed on reporting on Covid-19 vaccines is starting to crumble.
It may very well be that the vaccines did overwhelmingly more good than harm, but with proper media scrutiny the harms could have been less.
Veteran British journalist Piers Morgan recently apologised for his earlier histrionics. It might be an opportune time for many others to follow his example.
WIND: the thing I most object to (aside from brute government force) is the anti-science of the “follow the science” trope, the verbal diarrhea of science deniers—the “experts” who denied to others the ability to debate/study/question/etc, to the great harm to us all in every conceivable way.