>
Your Opportunity to Weigh In on Federal Vaccine Policy - Deadline Sunday Sept 20
Palantir $PLTR CEO Alex Karp says "AI companies have to be nationalized"
It's infuriating that they know better, but sell us out until they leave
World's smallest CT scanner fits in the palm of your hand
The Tesla Roadster will blow people's minds
Peter Thiel-Funded Company Anduril to Triple the Number of Autonomous Surveillance Towers...
Quantum computing may soon become part of the microscope itself.
Volkswagen Just Unveiled The Most Efficient EV Ever Tested
NASA Super Light Solar Sail Project Will Be 12-40 Times Lighter and Faster
Space Telescope Interferometer to Image Exoplanet Continents
Twenty-five years of "temporary": how 9/11 built a surveillance state Americans never vote
I'll Never Buy Another WALMART Battery!
Shoei GT-Air 3 Smart helmet drops with built-in AR for $1,500

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.