Four key takeaways from the big NY Times COVID story

The very mention of the New York Times makes us throw up in our mouths a little, but we think it's worth parsing through the b*llshit to give you some truth-y goodness.

A remarkable thing happened last week: The New York Times published a long and detailed article about people who experienced injuries from their COVID-19 vaccination.

The newspaper says the story was the result of a year-long investigation. We suspect it also spent many months in various rounds of back-and-forth editing, as it is very cautiously and deliberately worded.

Here’s part of what “science” writer, Apoorva Mandavilli, wrote:

The Covid vaccines, a triumph of science and public health, are estimated to have prevented millions of hospitalizations and deaths. Yet even the best vaccines produce rare but serious side effects. And the Covid vaccines have been given to more than 270 million people in the United States, in nearly 677 million doses.

…thousands of Americans believe they suffered serious side effects following Covid vaccination. As of April, just over 13,000 vaccine-injury compensation claims have been filed with the federal government — but to little avail. Only 19 percent have been reviewed. Only 47 of those were deemed eligible for compensation, and only 12 have been paid out, at an average of about $3,600.

The story includes some harrowing personal reports, including a 37-year old Ph.D. who once was able to ride her bike and teach dance classes, but is now brain damaged and lives with her parents — unable to work, drive, or even stand for long periods of time.

By now, you’ve probably read the story, or seen a story about the story. Or heard about Chris Cuomo’s admission that he, too, was vaccine injured. It captured the country’s attention for being among the first public, mainstream coverage of the fallout of these injections. And it shows just how divided we still are as a nation on a medical intervention that should never have estranged us.

Mandavilli says her four key takeaways from the reporting are as follows: 1) For most people, the benefits of Covid vaccines outweigh any risks; 2) Federal surveillance has found some side effects but may miss others; 3) Proving vaccination led to an illness is complicated; and 4) Understanding the full range of side effects may take years.

The reactions to the reporting have been swift, loud, and fairly predictable. Many NPR-listening, Wordle-playing, matcha-sipping New York Times readers said it was irresponsible for the Times to even dream of reporting on such a subject, particularly “given the poor reading comprehension of the general public.” (Rachel from North Carolina must be a charming dinner companion, don’t you think?)

Among those who have been wary or critical of the COVID injections for some time, some said the story was “better late than never,” and “the dam is breaking.” Others — like

Pierre Kory, MD, MPA

— suggested the Overton window of socially acceptable discussion may now be shifting. Still others believe this is a political positioning tactic vis-a-vis the elections, to be able to pin blame for mounting injuries on Trump for rushing through the vaccine development process and not doing enough testing.

It is fair to ask ‘why now’ but ultimately, we know the ‘Gray Lady’ (as the Times is called) is really just a withered cadaver. Calling it a paper of record, which many still do, is an insult to paper. And records.

We — shamefully — presented the above paragraphs from Mandavilli and the corrupted editorial team at the NY Times in order to lay the table for our own stark, unwavering four takeaways about what the investigation really reveals:

1. Patients were not given informed consent. Every patient has the right to ask questions of their healthcare provider and to fully understand all the risks and benefits of the treatment they are being offered. They should also be informed of any alternatives that may exist. But as we all may remember, the two most common words that followed “COVID vaccine” were “safe” and “effective.” Patients deserved to be told more than “there may be some side effects but they are rare and will probably go away… but we don’t know for sure.” No one should be coerced or shamed into taking a therapy, or misled with false or incomplete information.

2. Public health officials completely abandoned their obligation to the public. “I feel bad for those people,” former FDA acting commissioner Dr. Janet Woodcock told the New York Times. “I’m disappointed in myself,” she added. “I did a lot of things I feel very good about, but this is one of the few things I feel I just didn’t bring it home.” People’s lives have been demolished by the jab injuries. As noted above, some are permanently disabled, unable to function as they once did. They’ve lost jobs, families, friends, life savings. And Dr. Woodcock feels bad. Maybe there’s a vaccine she can take for regret? The rot and corruption in public office must end and an era of true accountability should be ushered in. Part of that is a full accounting of everything. When the dust settled after World War II, the Nuremburg Trials laid bare the horrors of warped ideology that forever scarred humanity. We all must wake up, start paying attention, and demanding change, beginning first and foremost with putting everything — and we mean EVERYTHING — on the table for all to see.

3. Patients have rightly lost trust in doctors and mainstream medicine. “When I let myself think about the devastation of what this has done to my life, and how much I’ve lost, sometimes it feels even too hard to comprehend,” said the now-disabled PhD mentioned earlier. Another injured patient profiled in the Times piece, a 54-year-old nurse practitioner who still has ringing in his ears, said “I am told I’m not real. I’m told I’m rare. I’m told I’m coincidence.” Of the 30 interviews the Times reporter conducted, all said they had been “turned away by physicians, told their symptoms were psychosomatic, or labeled anti-vaccine by family and friends — despite the fact that they supported vaccines.” How will these people be able to trust medicine again? How will any of us? WHY should any of us?

4. We are still putting ideology above a pursuit of the truth. “For too long those of us with side effects have been quiet for fear of scaring away others from getting the vax,” said one commenter on the Times article. This is a person who describes themselves as “pro-vax” but who developed severe vertigo, migraines, and odd head pain two weeks after their booster shot. Despite their severe side effects, this person would still recommend others get injected. So they kept their mouth shut. This delusional, self-destructive, auto-censorship takes us back to our first takeaway, regarding informed consent. If talking about side effects is still considered ‘verboten’ because it might dissuade more people from getting injected, it gives cover to corrupt federal agencies who can then get away with saying ‘side effects are mild and rare.’ If no one is willing to talk about it, it’s like it never happened. What else are we lying to each other about? And why?

“This subject is uncomfortable,” said David Leonhardt in his New York Times Morning Newsletter the day the story came out, “because it feeds into false stories about the Covid vaccines that many Americans have come to believe — namely, that the vaccines are ineffective or have side effects that exceed their benefits. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the independent presidential candidate, has promoted these stories, as have some Republican politicians and conservative media figures.”

Let’s get one thing straight: talking about the dangers of a medical intervention and giving voice to the very real people who experience very real effects is not anti-vax. It’s pro-truth. Doing anything else is pure insanity.

As a society, if we can’t talk openly about something as potentially devastating as a mass vaccination campaign that may have caused widespread injury and that is being recommended for our most precious resource — infants and children — then we are so lacking in sense and cohesion that dialogue and consensus are not just elusive but impossible. Actually, it might be orders of magnitude worse; we may very well be living in a post-empathic world, devoid of humanity and gripped by warped ideology empowered by controlled narrative.

And, if you’re not mad… No, not just mad but seething, about the senseless destruction that has come between families, communities, and our country, not just from the jabs, but from the divisions and chaos the COVID era ushered in, you’ve not been paying attention. How we undo this cancerous disorder is the existential question we all need to ask ourselves… and ultimately answer.

---