Redefinitions Required for the time of Covid
Before, People were presumed healthy unless they had a proven disease;
And Now, People are presumed sick unless they are proven well.
Before, a quarantine was isolating sick people from contact with healthy people;
And now, a quarantine is isolating everyone until they are proven healthy.
Before, a vaccine is a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease
And now, a vaccine is a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.
Before, vaccination was the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.
And Now, vaccination produces protection to a specific disease.
Before, when someone is vaccinated and gets infected anyway, it was called “vaccine failure”;
And now, it’s called “breakthrough infection.”
Before, immunity meant someone who is not infected when exposed to a disease;
And now, immunity means someone who gets not very sick when infected by a disease.
Before, herd immunity was a community where an infectious disease is unlikely to spread because most individuals have already been infected and are now immune.
And now, herd immunity is when everyone is vaccinated.
Before, censors were officials who suppressed communication deemed objectionable on moral, political, military or other grounds;
And now, they call themselves “fact-checkers”
JimBob Gets It
Science Matters 
I’d like info on RICO lawsuits that are proceeding against all the corrupt organizations racketeering off of vaccines and REMDESEVIR and influencing social media.
LikeLike
Don’t know much about that CP, You can try looking here:
https://dockets.justia.com/browse/noscat-13/nos-470
LikeLike
Hi Ron
Check out this article…
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/my-twitter-conversation-with-the-chairman-of-the-sage-covid-modelling-committee
I guess the UK government prefers to go with worst case models and nothing else.
LikeLike
Seems to be a pattern here with how models always come out with extreme outcomes! If youmask for them you get them!
LikeLike
Thanks for linking to that VR. The professor seems to assume that doing nothing is not an option. Policymakers must be perceived to be doing something, so scary scenarios help to get public compliance to whatever they decide. I suspect also something of the weatherman’s bias: No one complains if the weather turns out fine, only if it storms and you didn’t warn them.
LikeLike
Hi Ron, I agree with you wholly!
I had an interesting discussion about the anti-vaccine movement that led me to my thesis that there must be a segment of the population that disagrees with what the rest of the population is doing. That is the right state of affairs for our species to function and evolve. Of course, the majority will try to stigmatize and subjugate the minority. If this goes unchecked, it will get out of control and end in genocide in extreme cases. In most cases, however, this minority can help turn the tide against extremism. The reason people don’t understand this concept is because they assume that normal means everyone has the same consensus. But that’s where most people are wrong, because in a healthy society there are always people who think outside the consensus, right or wrong. Normal is the whole spectrum, and that is often difficult to accept. That requires tolerance and dialogue. We’ve lost that on a number of issues in recent years.
That people manipulate to get what they want isn’t new either, but if you see through the manipulation while the rest don’t, then it can only be one thing, you will find yourself alone.
Cheers VR
LikeLike
Before: Innocent until proven guilty.
After: Guilty until proven innocent.
LikeLike