Good Versus Bad – Public Perception of the Covid Issue, Massively Skewed

By Ivan Fraser

Globally, governments are drastically oversimplifying extremely complex data down to two simplistic categories: a latitude of Good and longitude of Bad. The consequences of which have created a public perception of the Covid issue which is massively skewed.

Most people are entirely unaware of the actual data. But they are largely aware of which category they ‘should’ fall into. That choice has been given to them in binary terms: vaccinated or unvaccinated. Moreover, good or bad.

Let us consider the categories, based upon actual data, collated by governments and independent scientists.

I propose that the data, and the apparent choices people have from which to place themselves on the good-bad graph speaks for itself.

I propose that the ‘good’ camp increasingly is viewing itself as a morally superior tribe, separated from the ‘bad’ by their superior moral beliefs and choices. Most people genuinely believe they are indeed correct. Many do sit between the narratives and do actually believe in certain grey areas of the debate. Unfortunately, these people too are ultimately rendered unto the ‘bad’ camp for merely questioning the authority of those wholly in the ‘good’ side of this equation.

  • Vaccinated good.
    Unvaccinated bad.

  • Vaccinated and ill with Covid good.
    Unvaccinated and ill with Covid bad.

  • Vaccinated and one of the millions injured by the vaccine good.
    Unvaccinated and uninjured by the vaccine bad.

  • Staying silent on the millions of vaccine injuries good.
    Talking about the vaccine injuries bad.

  • Being injured by the vaccines or having a loved one injured by the vaccines, but believing that the vaccines are still worthwhile, good.
    Being injured or having a loved one injured by the vaccine and therefore believing that the vaccines are dangerous, bad.

  • Disbelieving even official statistics of vaccine injuries good.
    Believing in vaccine injury statistics, even though official government statistics, bad.

  • Not having had Covid, and no natural immunity but getting vaccinated good.
    Having natural immunity to Covid due to infection, which is massively more robust and longer lasting than vaccinated immunity, and not getting vaccinated, bad.

  • Vaccinating your child for a disease they have next to zero risk of dying from, good.
    Not vaccinating your child, bad.

  • Vaccinating your child with a product that has a risk of injury or death, good.
    Not vaccinating your child to eliminate risk of serious injury or death to your child, bad.

  • Wearing a mask that has statically zero impact on viral transmission, good.
    Refusing to wear a mask that achieves zero health benefit to you and others, bad.

  • Mingling with others in groups having been vaccinated, with the possibility that you can transmit the virus to others, good.
    Mingling with others in groups when unvaccinated with the possibility that you can transmit the virus to others, bad.

  • Being one of the – at least – tens of thousands of people who have died because of vaccination. You are not categorized. You do not exist.

  • Believing erroneously that the vaccines are completely, or almost totally safe, good.
    Acknowledging the increasing numbers of deaths that are now likely over 100,000 (according to analysis of official data), bad.

  • Believing in the efficacy of the vaccines despite the most vaccinated countries having the highest number of cases and deaths from the virus, good.
    Believing the vaccine’s efficacy is poor because the most vaccinated populations have the highest rates of the virus, bad.

  • Believing the idea that the vaccines are our only way out of the pandemic, good.
    Believing that the vaccines are unnecessary because we already have treatments which can cure almost 100% of cases, bad.

  • Believing that the millions who have died are a natural consequence of the pandemic, good. Believing that almost all deaths could have been avoided by treatments we have had since the outset, bad.

  • Believing that proven treatments are unsafe, so should not be used, good.
    Believing the fact that these treatments have been proven safe in hundreds of peer reviewed studies over decades, bad.

  • Believing data from the pharmaceutical companies that are selling the products, then repeated by government scientists, despite actual data contradicting their claims, good.

    Disbelieving corporate data passed off as ‘science’ via spokespersons in government and media, and preferring independent peer reviewed scientific data from scientists with greater accreditation and expertise, bad.

  • Believing that a PCR test proves you are ill, good.
    Believing a PCR test has merely identified the presence of a fragment of viral material and says nothing about whether you are ill, bad.

  • Believing that if you have had a positive PCR test and die within 28 days, whether or not you had Covid, that you have died of Covid, good.
    Believing that the only meaningful data is whether you have died because of symptomatic Covid and therefore none of the statistics currently recognised have any meaning, bad.
    On the basis of the above, believing that statistics are grossly inflated, bad.

  • Believing that there was a need to destroy the lives of people based upon the above, as a sad inevitable consequence, good.
    Believing there never was a reasonable basis for lockdowns, economic damage, vaccinations, mandates, passports, and restrictions, leading to increased mental illness and lack of treatment for existing disease, based on the above fact that statistics are unreliable and that we have existing cures, bad.

  • Believing it’s okay to purchase experimental products from pharmaceutical companies with proven criminal histories of fraud and injury, and increase their wealth to the tune of billions, good.
    Believing it is wrong to reward and trust proven criminal organisations with billions of pounds of profit, bad.

  • Believing that the vaccine fits the definition of vaccine, good.
    Believing that the vaccine is actually gene therapy: taking a computer code, translated into mRNA, or DNA of only 1 of the viruses’ proteins, that is injected to make your body produce said protein, is not the definition of a ‘vaccine’, bad.

  • Believing that getting your body to produce a single protein from the surface of the virus gives you immunity to the virus itself, good.
    Believing that producing a single protein from a virus in your body is only causing a response to that single protein, and not the virus as a whole, bad.

  • Believing that gaining an immune response to the original strain of a protein on the surface of a virus, that no longer exists, immunises you to the current strain of the virus, good.
    Believing that receiving a gene therapy for a protein that no longer exists is pointless, bad.

  • Believing that the single protein artificially created and then expressed in huge numbers for far longer than natural infection by your own cells is safe, good.
    Believing that we do not know if it’s safe or not because we have never done it before, and we have not had enough time to evaluate long-term impact on human health, bad.

  • Believing that, despite the fact that all previous attempts to vaccinate animal test subjects against coronavirus has resulted in the death of all the test subjects, there will be no safety problems with doing it in humans for the first time in history, good.
    Believing that it is extremely likely that the use of coronavirus vaccines in humans will lead to illness, damage and death, simply because that is what happened before, bad.

  • Believing that vaccinating the entire world with an experimental vaccine that has no long-term safety data is reasonable, good.
    Believing that vaccinating globally during a pandemic with no assurances from studies that it may or may not cause damage as yet unknown to the entire human race, bad.

  • Believing we need to relinquish previously protected freedoms and ignore fundamental laws stating we cannot coerce or entice anyone to be vaccinated, good.
    Believing that rights and freedoms are fundamentally important and primary law against mandating, coercing or enticing anyone to any experimental medicine remains illegal and morally wrong, bad.

  • Believing erroneously that being vaccinated stops you getting infected, good.
    Believing correctly that you are as likely to be infected whether or not you have had the vaccine, unless you have had prior Covid and acquired natural immunity to the whole virus, bad.

  • Believing erroneously that a vaccinated healthcare workforce provides protection for those in their care, good.
    Believing correctly that a vaccinated workforce confers no protection to those in their care and may actually carry a higher viral load than the unvaccinated, bad.

  • Believing correctly that the vaccine confers minimal protection to the individual for the single endpoint of a reduction in symptoms, so everyone should be vaccinated, good.
    Believing correctly that the vaccine confers minimal protection to the individual for the single endpoint of a reduction in symptoms, so it is entirely the choice of the individual if they wish to be vaccinated, bad.

  • Believing that it is justified to sack workers who wish not to be vaccinated, good.
    Believing there is no justification for forcing people to be vaccinated, and morally incomprehensible to sack people for not wishing to take a treatment that purely benefits the treated if they choose not to, bad.

  • Believing that in-patients of hospitals, prisons and care homes have the legal right under current law, for example the Mental Health Act, to refuse any treatment, as long as they have the capacity to choose, good.
    Believing erroneously that nobody else has the legal right under current law, for example the Mental Health Act, to refuse any treatment, as long as they have the capacity to choose, also good.
    Believing that nobody has the right to use the excuse of pandemic to reverse decades-old laws, specifically designed to prevent medical malfeasance, even in a pandemic, bad.

  • Believing that your doctor or nurse telling you exactly the same information you have already been told to believe by the government and its paid scientists, who are repeating the information from the pharmaceutical companies, has more authority purely because of their position of authority, good.

Believing that most doctors and nurses probably do not have any more information or much more education in these matters than is already available to you, and that the only opinion you will be likely to get from your doctor is exactly the same, from exactly the same sources, and therefore carries no greater weight than you probably already know. In fact, if you have done independent research and realise that you know far more about the subject than the doctors and nurses advising you, bad.

  • Believing that the hundreds of thousands of scientists, doctors and nurses who are prepared to lose their careers rather than taking a Covid vaccine are either idiots or morally bankrupt, good.

Believing that, with so many doctors and nurses and scientists, being prepared to lose their careers rather than taking a Covid jab, there must be a very compelling reason, and it needs to be addressed, debated and considered as a matter of urgency, bad.

  • Believing that everyone in the ‘good’ category is good and everyone in the ‘bad category is bad, good.

  • Believing that everyone in the ‘good’ category is a victim of propaganda and brainwashing but have a right to believe what they wish and do what they wish as long as they are not harming anyone, and their views to be questioned and debated, bad. And everyone in the ‘bad’ category should have their views debated and considered too, also bad.

 

If you fall into the category of ‘good’ then you have a powerful sense of moral right on your side, supported by society and government. You can be allowed to be on tv and tell the world what is and what is not ‘truth’. You can be a ‘fact-checker’ and denigrate anyone and everyone in the ‘bad’ category. Your freedom of speech is preserved, and you are permitted to censor or ridicule anyone in the ‘bad’ category. You can freely call out the ‘bad’ and denounce them, and you can call for their freedoms to be restricted more so than your own.

If you fall into the ‘bad’ category, you have no official voice or place in current ‘society’. Your beliefs are not allowed to be considered or discussed in mainstream media, or by the government. Your social media posts will be deleted, and your accounts terminated. Even if you happen to be a leading expert in medicine, immunology, vaccinology, epidemiology; if you happen to be a Nobel Laureate. None of that matters if you are in any way on the ‘bad’ side of the graph. You are not entitled by those in the ‘good’ camp to certain fundamental freedoms enjoyed by the ‘good’.

You can be entirely ignorant of all the scientific data and have absolutely no idea how your immune system works, but as long as you fit the ‘good’ category, you are free to say and believe what you like all over the internet, on Facebook and Twitter, and take part in news stories and talk shows all over the world. You can write and report anything you like about Covid or the vaccines. All in the certain knowledge that you are right and morally ‘good’.

If you even question any of the ‘facts’ and opinions of the pharmaceutical companies, which scientists and governments are repeating to you, or the ‘fact-checkers’ who are also employed by the pharmaceutical companies, you are automatically rendered unto the ‘bad’ category. If you question any of the ‘grey areas’, even if your facts are true, even if they are from official government sources, but are deemed ‘bad’, you are ‘bad’. And this means you have fewer rights and freedoms than others in the ‘good’ camp.

A society of people who feel and believe they are ‘good’ is far more insidious a form of control than a free and questioning society. It creates division and penalizes anyone who veers from the narrative. And that includes anyone from the scientific community who may provide data and even proof that the data from the official narrative may be incorrect. Even when the entire accepted scientific process is founded on scepticism, reinterpretation and questioning of the validity of every scientific paper or theory.

The ‘good’ are captivated not by real data and truth, but a comfortable self-righteous sense of being ‘good’. Due to fears and pressures and controls imposed by their governments, the ‘good’ have surrendered their rights to freedom of thought and reason in favour of a form of Stockholm Syndrome at a level never experienced before. In contrast, the ‘bad’ are continually pressured to be ‘good’ and accept the narrative by a society of the ‘good’, who are increasingly identifying individuals as ‘bad’, and therefore not entitled to the same rights as themselves.

People are policing themselves as active tools of coercion and enticement and are actively acting against the freedoms of others in contravention of all that were previously held as sacred inalienable rights to freedom of thought, expression and equality under law. What was considered ‘good’ prior to the pandemic has become ‘bad’ through a series of emotional and divisively confusing signals coming from governments and pharmaceutically-aligned scientists.

Throughout history, it has been when a majority has assumed a moral ‘right’ or ‘good’ against another target of the ‘bad’, that such absolute faith in righteousness has been used to control societies that have committed atrocities.

It is not truth, data or proof, or even reasonable evidence that matters in a totalitarian society. It is all about whether you are deemed ‘good’ or ‘bad’ that counts.

Ivan Fraser is a registered nurse who qualified in 1991. Since which time he has worked in numerous nursing environments, predominantly in care homes for the elderly. He created and edited The Truth Campaign magazine which ran between the late 1990s to the early 2000s. As principal researcher, topics that he covered included medical fraud, alternative and complementary medicine, as well as numerous related studies into alternative views of science, history and subjects considered ‘conspiracy theories’. His drive, however, has always been towards finding a spiritual understanding of history, world events and human nature.

Ivan’s previous article Covid Truths can be found on The White Rose website here: https://thewhiterose.uk/covid-truths-revealing-article-from-health-care-professional/

 

Support-the-White-Rose-UK