>
James O'Keefe Exposes Massive $100 Billion Federal Contracting Scam In Latest Undercover Video
JUST IN: Trump Confirms Meeting With Putin in Hungary Is Cancelled… For Now (VIDEOS)
Identity of 21-Year-Old Semi-Truck Driver Who Killed Three People in Fiery SoCal Crash Released:
Amazon to replace 600,000 human workers with ROBOTS
Future of Satellite of Direct to Cellphone
Amazon goes nuclear with new modular reactor plant
China Is Making 800-Mile EV Batteries. Here's Why America Can't Have Them
China Innovates: Transforming Sand into Paper
Millions Of America's Teens Are Being Seduced By AI Chatbots
Transhumanist Scientists Create Embryos From Skin Cells And Sperm
You've Never Seen Tech Like This
Sodium-ion battery breakthrough: CATL's latest innovation allows for 300 mile EVs
Defending Against Strained Grids, Army To Power US Bases With Micro-Nuke Reactors
Recently, new data emerged showing that the COVID vaccines persist for up to 700 days within patients (and likely longer). As this is quite concerning to many, I was requested to write an article explaining how this happens, and how it relates to the egregious production process that characterized the COVID-19 vaccines.
Upsides and Downsides
A lot of things in life are trade-offs, and as I've gotten older, more and more I've come to appreciate how many things in our society boil down to the fact that the options for addressing them all have significant downsides, so in many cases no solution exists which is satisfactory to all parties involved.
As such, this dilemma is typically managed by some combination of the following:
•Having a biased focus which emphasizes the benefits of an approach a side supports and downplays its downsides (or conversely disproportionately focuses on the downsides of an opposing position). To this point, I've had countless issues I've debated both sides of and been able to effectively persuade audiences of each one—which highlights how subjective many of the entrenched beliefs we hold actually are (and, in turn, is why I put so much work here into fairly presenting both sides of each controversial topic I cover).
•Sweeping the downsides under the rug and gaslighting the populace into believing they don't exist.
•Blitzing the public into supporting a questionable policy before they have time to recognize its downsides, and if that fails, overtly forcing them to go along with it.
Note: I believe one of the reasons why governments frequently do horrible things to their people is because they are put in the position of having to "solve" a problem (but with no truly satisfactory way to do it), so they become habituated to using the three previous strategies to push their chosen policies along and simultaneously develop a collective mentality that those questionable approaches are necessary for the "greater good."
There are many different manifestations of this dilemma, many of which I believe are essentially reflective of a foundational concept in medicine—sensitivity and specificity.