The "I've had the jab and I feel fine (for now)" caper

I know someone who had the Covid jab (let's not mis-name it a vaccine because it ain't) and said she "felt fine".

The next day she was really really ill and is still ill as I write with symptoms worse than my own experience of Covid 19.

So I get irritated by the fatuous remark from people who have had the Covid jabs "just to show how brilliant they are" and that:

"Well, I've had the jab and I feel fine."

That's hardly the freakin' point is it?

Let's go over it:

The fact that someone does not drop dead or roll about in screaming agony as they erupt in strange lumps as soon as they have had the jab does not tell us damned thing about the medium-and long-terms effects of these biochemical agents.

As is the case with vaccines and other pharmaceutical agents, the longer term effects over the ensuing months and years are of serious concern because it is only in the longer term that the full extent to their adverse effects shows up. This is why you have long-term trials - or used to before the gov decided they're not important enough to bother with.

So the "I've had the jab and I feel fine" propaganda gambit is beside the point and deliberately distracts from the crucial life-or-death issue of long-term effects.

In fact, in so far as it imparts a misleading safety message and thereby seduces others into putting their concerns aside, the "I feel fine" brigade may well find they have contributed to the long-term harm of friends, family, neighbours and fellow citizens.

Assuming of course that what they have had is actually the vaccine and not some sort of placebo.

I cannot assert that this is the case but I have my suspicions that many of the pro-vax politicians, for example, who are making a big show of getting jabbed for the camera are not actually receiving the vaccine.

If there were some sort of thoroughly impartial oversight and confirmation of the genuineness of the event, I'd be more convinced.

Given that it is by now already known that anyone taking the jab IS risking an adverse health event to an as yet un-quantified but apparently uncomfortably high degree, I doubt whether any public figure pulling a stunt to sell us on submitting to the pseudo-vaccines is going to risk the humiliation and adverse publicity of getting sick after the jab.

Imagine the uproar if a high profile champion of the vaxes - such as, say, Matt Hancock - has the jab with full public fanfare and declares through his face nappy "I feel fine", then winds up in hospital a few hours later with heart palpitations, partial paralysis and strange lumps.

Apart from the fact that such an event would make millions of Brits very happy, we have to consider that it would kill the whole "let's vax everybody quick" caper stone dead.

Do you think these skilled propagandists would actually risk that? It only needs it to happen to just ONE of them and their entire operation is dead in the water. Imagine the mileage that people like me would make of it if happened.

It is noticeable that, so far as I know, whilst many of the plebs and rirfraff taking the jab ARE suffering adverse reactions (in such numbers there are freakin' websites devoted to allowing people to describe their experiences as a warning to others) almost immediately, NOT ONE celeb or politician, so far as we know, has manifested any reaction at all.

The fact of the matter is that, as I said, an extraordinarily high number of people ARE experiencing adverse reaction immediately after the jab.

I have no idea of what the percentage is (and nor apparently does anybody else, including those pushing the vaxes, who SHOULD damn well know). That will need to be researched and staticised, although who in their right mind would stake their life on the gov and its cronies doing an honest job of that?

All one can say is that, whilst the number of people hit by serious health issues is not the majority, the percentage IS still very alarmingly high.

I've not noticed any other vax produce so many adverse health events so quickly after it was administered. And some of these reactions are extreme.

Even when "not the majority" such events are cause for concern.

For example, if you play Russian Roulette with a revolver with one bullet in the chamber, spin the chamber, put the gun to your head and pull the trigger, you have only a one in six chance of blowing your brains out. In other words, the odds are six to one in your favour that you won't die.

But would you still risk it if even on those "favourable" odds? Maybe you would if there incentives were high enough.

And this analogy falls short given the current situation. It would be more apt to imagine playing Russian Roulette NOT KNOWING whether there were any bullets in the gun at all, or one, two, three and so on.

As for the incentives for risking the new pseudo vaccines, well they are not great. Even the government has admitted they probably won't protect you from catching the bug or transmitting it.

So what is the logic of risking the vax? Apparently they think the vaxes might possibly reduce your symptoms a bit if you catch the bug. Maybe it will reduce the chances of the bug killing you. Maybe.

Of course, the chances of the bug killing you are pretty low to start with unless you are in a high risk category such as the very fail/sick/elderly and even then you are more likely to survive than not.

But if you are frail/sick/elderly what are your chances of surviving the often pretty awful reactions to the "vaccines"? We don't know yet because - of course - it has not been researched and the elderly are now being used in place of the usual lab rats.

The fact is nobody knows what will happen with these new pseud-vaxes. The gov and manufacturers could not even predict and warn people about the various adverse reactions that are already happening to large numbers of victims These things are so poorly researched and hurriedly brought to market no one was able to predict even the immediate effects.

This of course makes the option of "informed consent" a nonstarter. When people are persuaded to submit to the vax, they are NOT told about:

The immediate health impacts. These were only known about AFTER thousands or millions of people were vaccinated. And even then they are only now beginning to be broadly known thanks to the efforts of the people's media and public-spirited social media groups. If it had been left to the gov and corporate media, one wonders if these health problems would have been kept quiet until after the entire populace had been vaxed.

So we have what looks to be a serious problem with often severe reactions to these vaxes in inordinately high numbers of people. And these reactions are occurring in younger, reasonably healthy people You read up on the sort of things people are experiencing (this site provides lots of examples) and you then wonder whether, if some elderly person in a nursing home gets hit with reactions as dire as that, they are they going to survive it.

It may well be that the vaxes given to the elderly are already hastening their demise (see this report from Gibraltar for instance). Such things will of course be put down to old age or existing illness (they were about to die anyway) so it will for the time being be relatively easy for the gov to hide these consequences.

It will not be so easy somewhere down the line as a surge in deaths shows up date-coincident with the vax roll out.

So when someone has the jab and does the "I feel fine" routine, they may well be, albeit unwittingly, doing a great disservice to others because it is akin to the Russian Roulette thing: "Well I just pulled the trigger and I feel fine. Why don't you have a go too?"

Worse, theses vaxes need a second dose (God help us) and we will have to wait and see what the health impact of that second dose is going to be both on people who had no reaction to the first dose and those who did have a reaction.