by Joe Martino, The Pulse:
I found myself reading a piece in The Atlantic titled What To Know About Fall COVID Vaccines.
I thought to myself:
- Are we going to hear how effective they are?
- Are we going to find out who needs them and who doesn’t?
- Are we going to hear about the risks of vaccination or problems we’ve been seeing with COVID shots?
- Can we expect a holistic picture in this conversation at all? Something that would truly inform readers?
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
Coming from the Atlantic, the last two bullet points are not likely. And it’s not because they don’t employ talented and smart writers and journalists, but because they employ people who generally don’t think outside the box when it comes to cultural norms in their country. (I talk about this in my piece How We Are Being Misled.)
In this piece I want to offer some thoughts and observations on what’s driving the consciousness of people in our current moment and why it’s important to consider in our sensemaking – especially as it relates to what many feel is an unfolding meaning crisis that may only get more chaotic.
Vaccines For All
The Atlantic piece starts with Katherine J. Wu, a science journalist, explaining the latest recommendations from the CDC.
Katherine J. Wu: “Experts at yesterday’s CDC advisory panel were really making it clear that everyone stands to benefit in some way from this vaccine. COVID is very much still a real threat. People are still dying, and people are still being debilitated by long COVID. Even if risk is not equal across everyone in the population, this is a really important public-health intervention.”
Just hearing this may bring about the thought “How the heck are people still buying into this?”
She continues:
Katherine J. Wu: “I am all for enthusiastically recommending this vaccine to everyone. Some people are at higher risk, so I would even more strongly encourage those people to go get it.
When we think about any vaccine, especially COVID-19 vaccines, we think most about preventing severe disease. But there are secondary benefits of these vaccines too: For at least a time, you will have a lower risk of getting infected and spreading the virus. And if you do get sick, your symptoms may be shorter if you’ve been recently vaccinated. There may even be a lower risk of developing long COVID down the road, which is an important thing to keep in mind because we know that it can come out of even mild infections. Also, there’s really not a concern at this point of the vaccine running out.
[…] To be clear, there is really widespread consensus that everyone needs at least a couple doses of the vaccine. There’s no doubt in experts’ minds that going from zero vaccines to two or three is essential. The gains are going to be massive for everyone.”
We can clearly see here that Wu is in full support of these vaccines, doesn’t seem to see any controversy around them, and believes everyone needs one. But it goes further as we look at another piece she recently wrote.
In her recent piece, Wu interviews Dr. Paul Offit and Dr. Tony Fauci for her story. Her idea was to understand why Offit is not recommending COVID vaccines as a high priority for everyone, while Fauci is. It seems she also wanted to explore whether Offit is taking the best approach to what he’s saying regarding COVID shots.
She starts with:
Paul Offit is not an anti-vaxxer. His résumé alone would tell you that: A pediatrician at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, he is the co-inventor of a rotavirus vaccine for infants that has been credited with saving “hundreds of lives every day”; he is the author of roughly a dozen books on immunization that repeatedly debunk anti-vaccine claims. And from the earliest days of COVID-19 vaccines, he’s stressed the importance of getting the shots. At least, up to a certain point.
I find it ironic she spends time convincing her audience that Offit is not an anti-vaxxer. Why would someone who has a nuanced position on something have to be considered anti-anything? Oh right, this is literally the response from mainstream thinking toward anyone who has had a different opinion on vaccines.
Interestingly enough, those who play along with that propaganda, as I’m sure Wu has during COVID, now have to backtrack it when they want to critique those ‘on their side.’
We can see that Wu doesn’t agree with Offit when she says she believes everyone should get it and can stand to benefit from it, while Offit believes it’s more so useful for the older population.
To some extent it makes me feel her tension with Offit isn’t really about science or a holistic view of the COVID vaccine discussion, but more so with anyone who challenges exactly mom and dad say.. *I mean the CDC and FDA.
Does Wu view Australia as anti-vax? Their fall COVID recommendations state:
ATAGI recommends that all adults aged ≥ 75 years should receive an additional 2023 COVID-19 vaccine dose if 6 months have passed since their last dose.
ATAGI advises the following groups should consider an additional 2023 COVID-19 vaccine dose if 6 months have passed since their last dose, after discussion with their healthcare provider:
- All adults aged 65 to 74 years, and/or
- Adults aged 18 to 64 years with severe immunocompromise.
It feels that in Wu’s worldview, we can’t suggest public health agencies in her country ever get it wrong.
It doesn’t matter how obvious the need for questioning these organizations becomes, how much corruption is in their history, or how much evidence is brought forth, it’s simply “anti-vaxxer” nonsense.
Could the CDC SPIDER papers change Wu’s view of the CDC?
By this, I mean that in 2017 a group calling itself CDC Scientists Preserving Integrity, Diligence and Ethics in Research, or CDC SPIDER, put a list of complaints in a letter to the CDC Chief of Staff and provided a copy of the letter to the public. It clearly stated:
“It appears that our mission is being influenced and shaped by outside parties and rogue interests… and Congressional intent for our agency is being circumvented by some of our leaders. What concerns us most, is that it is becoming the norm and not the rare exception. Some senior management officials at CDC are clearly aware and even condone these behaviors. Others see it and turn the other way. Some staff are intimidated and pressed to do things they know are not right. We have representatives from across the agency that witness this unacceptable behaviour. It occurs at all levels and in all of our respective units. These questionable and unethical practices threaten to undermine our credibility and reputation as a trusted leader in public health.”
CDC SPIDER
A huge theme within our current zeitgeist is that highly credentialed folks are suggesting the CDC cannot be trusted as it seems a captured regulatory agency.
