explicitClick to confirm you are 18+

Will a Vaccine Protect You Against Government Hypocrisy?

ArzoumanJun 18, 2019, 8:26:35 PM

Is Andrew Cuomo possibly a “Founding Father” to a newly emerging country? On June 13, the New York governor signed a bill denying religious exemptions from vaccination for children attending school. His statement, as quoted by NPR, included the following:

"While I understand and respect freedom of religion, our first job is to protect the public health.”

The first job of government? Who knew? But there it is, unambiguously stated, an overarching mission statement for our elected representatives.

Embarrassed at not remembering basic civics, I searched the U.S. Constitution, “the supreme law of the land,” expecting “health” featured prominently. There’s all that Bill-of-Rights stuff, freedoms of speech, assembly, press, petition of government… there’s something about rights of people to be secure in their persons… unreasonable searches and seizures, yada yada…. Oh yeah, something about freedom of religion… actually the first freedom specified... nothing on health. Strange.

But Cuomo must know what he’s talking about; he’s a governor. Initially, I resisted the idea that our Constitution may be obsolete, until I realized there must be more behind this move. No government could expect anyone in their right mind to trade freedom for vaccination. What other wellness gains might we expect in an emerging health state? Buoyed with hope, I now anxiously await the unveiling of our new health government. Surely secret committees are already hard at work on the transition.

In the meantime, I eagerly anticipate the corrections to long-festering problems. With newfound focus, we will confront all the ways we’ve been undermining immunity in the first place. First, this likely marks the end of the running experiment on the public of secreting genetically-modified, glyphosate-enriched products into the food supply. Sadly for some, glyphosate, including its famous Roundup form, will be phased out before our biology has had a chance to adapt to it. Most people have been unconcerned about carpet-bombing the earth with a suspected carcinogen, or glyphosate’s ravaging effect on the gut microbiome and therefore on immunity… it’s almost as if they don’t know. Maybe it’s the simple comfort of dealing with the company who brought us the familiar brand names we all grew up with: Agent Orange, PCBs, DDT, bovine growth hormone (rBGH) and dioxins.

We might also expect a stall in the rollout of 5G wireless technology, with its special microwave-radiated “crowd-control” technology delivered from cell stations on every block and, for good measure, 20,000 satellites overhead just in case the every-block thing doesn’t work out. Such a simple, elegant plan; what could go wrong? But as the governor declared, the priority is now public safety; does that mean they’ll go back to perform the common-sense step they skipped, safety studies?  It feels so strange and scary to think this way, but big changes require that we adapt our thinking. There may even come a time when “common sense” feels perfectly normal and we’ll chuckle looking back on our unfounded fears of it.

And if the new government proves to be as aggressive safeguarding public health beyond vaccines, there should be no end to the beneficent mandates: broccoli quotas, compulsory injections of vitamins C and D, minimum weekly mileage requirements on foot or bike, and internments at fresh-air breathing camps out in the countryside. Junk-food breathalyzer checkpoints at airports, state lines, schools, or the DMV will seem invasive at first, but nothing great is ever achieved without sacrifice. Those caught dealing in black market “marginal” foods will face severe penalties, a handsome source of government revenue. The pharmaceutical presence in society will shrink precipitously, replaced by a new bureaucratic vision of clean streams and rivers winding their way through landscapes of family-owned organic and biodynamic farms under azure skies. The cows and chickens will thank us when their antibiotics-laden bodies are freed from stenchy CAFOs to graze in open fields, at least until they figure out we’ll eat them either way.

A grateful populous should feel relief that Governor Cuomo leaked government’s plan to protect our health, and anticipate sweeping changes. Gone will be the days when a Monsanto or Merck can buy scientific studies, capture regulatory agencies, curate the news, or defame principled scientists and truth-tellers. Citizens or government officials, formerly relying upon faked studies, will be able to confidently punctuate their arguments with “it’s the science,” and it will actually mean something.

Being privy to great changes, Governor Cuomo is presumably aware that vaccines are not entirely “safe and effective”; even vaccine-package inserts warn as much. He must know that the only consistent immunity the vaccine manufacturers deal in is their own, the blanket immunity from liability for vaccine injury, conferred by Congress in 1986. Yet the government has still paid out around $4 billion in vaccine damages over the years, even with “incidents” grossly under-reported and high standards of proof for damages. He must know that vaccines do not undergo double-blind placebo testing, or that mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde or aborted fetal-cell tissue may not be everyone’s first choice for injection. And though apparently not “newsworthy,” he must know as a public official that the vaccinated do their share in spreading the very diseases they are vaccinated against. Rest assured, though, that the governor knows what he’s doing; the most brilliant strategies are often the most puzzling. Surely he’s taking into account that the corporations behind vaccines are convicted felons in their other pharmaceutical dealings, having collectively paid out billions of dollars in fines for some of the most deadly, greedy and egregious violations imaginable.

Therefore, it is unimaginable that vaccination would be the sole compulsory directive by a government constitutionally repurposed to fight a public health crisis. That would amount to tyranny, a new nation, relieved of liberty, and medicated with the proposition that alternatives are berated equally. Vaccines represent one approach; let those who so choose opt in. But as the products of industries administrating the foods and drugs that have managed to create the most unfit, drug-dependent civilization in history, they cannot possibly represent everyone’s rightful path. If the statement “to protect public health” is sincere, there is so much more to be addressed. But unlike vaccination, most of that goes against big-money interests. Don’t hold your breath, but let’s wait for the government to unveil the rest of the plan to usher-in a new “golden age” of radiant public health. It must be really something for us to trash the Constitution we already have.

David Arzouman