Introduction
Vaccination as Victory over Nature?
“Let us not, however, flatter ourselves overmuch on account of our human victories over nature. For each such victory nature takes its revenge on us. Each victory, it is true, in the first place brings about the results we expected, but in the second and third places it has quite different, unforeseen effects which only too often cancel the first.”
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
The official narrative on vaccination is as follows.
In the past, human beings died of preventable diseases because the pathogens that they were exposed to were inherently extremely deadly. This mass death could not have been significantly prevented by factors such as better living conditions or diet, even if those would have had a positive effect. It wasn’t until the introduction of vaccination, starting with Edward Jenner’s smallpox vaccine, that the mass death caused by disease began to subside. The introduction of mass vaccination for diseases like polio, measles, etc. in the 20th century saved millions of lives. The further development of vaccination to encompass influenza, rotavirus, etc., are a positive development for humanity and we should try to develop vaccines for all human diseases. This includes things like HIV and RSV. mRNA vaccines, as developed for Covid-19, are a new and highly promising step forward in the development of the technology. Vaccines are safe and effective outside of very rare cases of anaphylaxis. Taking any vaccine that you are offered is the best thing that you can do for your health.
So, what are the problems of this official narrative? There is data from alternative sources demonstrating that at least some of these claims are clearly false. For example: measles vaccination was only introduced after measles mortality had massively declined and thus vaccination could not have been responsible for the decline. Newer vaccinations, such as the Gardasil vaccine, have clearly unfavourable risk-benefit profiles, to the extent that some countries have stopped using it, or do not include it on official vaccine schedules.
However, I would like to go beyond this and state that there is a problem with the whole concept of vaccination. I use an analogy to illustrate the point. As it is a Computer Age analogy, hopefully, it should be understood by those most technology obsessed invokers of the Cult of Vaccination:
Vaccination is like trying to fix a circuit board with a hammer.
The reality is the human immune system is extremely complex and multifaceted. It has been developed by millions of years of Mother Nature to protect us from disease. It does that job superbly well, so long as the environment supports it, that is, that it is not undermined through poor living conditions, exposure to toxic chemicals, and poor diet.
To give an idea of how complex the immune system actually is, we can look at the scientific literature. This article gives this description of immune response:
Immune cells sense infection and other environmental cues through a variety of extracellular and intracellular receptors. Ligation of these receptors leads to signaling cascades consisting of many dynamic processes including signal‐induced protein binding, phosphorylation, degradation, and nuclear localization. These signaling events lead to changes in gene expression, and subsequently to the production of both effector proteins required to combat infection and proteins involved in regulation of the ensuing, potentially host‐damaging, response. The number of molecular players or variables involved in any such activity can vary from hundreds to thousands, making immune responses immensely complex. This complexity is amplified by the multiscalar nature of the immune system, as these signaling and transcriptional responses occur in the context of diverse and dynamic cell–cell interactions.
Vaccination is essentially trying to ‘hack’ this extremely complex system through the extremely crude method of antigen and adjuvant injection. Vaccination sees the natural immune system as ‘insert A = get B’ or ‘insert needle = get antibodies = protection against disease’. The complex cascades of multiple interlinking factors are not present in this equation. Nor are factors such as route of exposure, and that injection of a dead/attenuated pathogen is a fundamentally different mechanism to the natural exposure which would be through, for example, aerosol. And here I am talking only of what we know or can surmise, because there is a large number of things about the immune response that we probably do not know.
There are certainly some individuals who are pushing vaccination for sinister motivations. An excellent example is Bill Gates, who is interested in vaccination as a means of depopulation. But the system of vaccination could not have gained such success in society without a massive degree of hubris on the part of scientists, governments, and everyone else in society who is going along with the vaccination narrative. Instead of being driven by the specific desire to do evil, they are blinded by the hubris of a victory that is impossible.
This hubris, of course, comes back around to us when we see massive levels of vaccination injury in our population. It is difficult to estimate how much vaccine injury there is in our population, given that all information about vaccine injury is suppressed. But there is enough evidence to link vaccination to a large number of health problems including autism, anxiety and mental health problems, autoimmune diseases, heart problems, brain inflammation, narcolepsy, and multiple other conditions.
A Note on the mRNA ‘Vaccines’
I trust nature more than I trust scientists like Dr. Anthony Fauci.
In some respects, the mRNA ‘vaccines’ do not belong here, as they are not vaccines by the actual definition of the term, however they are promoted as vaccines by the establishment.
The hubris discussion, however, is even more relevant when it comes to the mRNA concoctions. The hubris of traditional vaccination was bad enough, with the direct injection of an antigen and adjuvant, expecting the ‘hacking’ of the immune system to function effectively to create the antigen and not to have adverse long term reactions. The mRNA injections, on the other hand, mess with this system in an even deeper and more intrusive – and more dangerous – way by making the body produce the spike protein itself. This kind of immune hacking has caused disastrous consequences, with spike protein running rampant in the body and causing myocarditis, pericarditis, blood clots, and neurological injury, along with a massive amount of ‘sudden death‘ that is otherwise unexplained. The mRNA experiment is portrayed as, and considered to be by insane scientists, a ‘way cool’ experiment where they get to play God.
Conclusion
Note: I was inspired to write this article by Toby Rogers and his piece on ‘Why I’m an Abolitionist’. This article is a massive expansion of something I dropped in the comments over at the uTobian substack.
