Tennessee's Children Don't Need Protection from COVID-19

Brett Kelman penned an article at the end of last week titled 'In the race to protect kids against COVID-19, rural Tennessee falls far behind'. It's buried behind the Tennessean's porous paywall, but even if you were to read it, it's doubtful you'd glean any useful information from it.

Kelman, useful if only for his role as the local apparatchik parrotting COVID-19 stats as if they are magical incantations, writes sneeringly of rural Tennesseans in a manner we've become all too familiar with. Kelman's purpose is not so much to deliver us information as to direct anger wherever his Gannett editors command him to. Evidently all too willing to oblige, he churns out article after article which deflects blame onto poor, rural, White, Christian, and Conservative Tennesseans.

The implicit angle in all of Kelman's writing — and freshly expressed in this most recent article — is that White, Conservative, Christian rural residents are backwards, brutal, don't "follow the science", and need the soft-hand of benevolent bureaucrats (such as Kelman himself) to goad them into doing what is best for themselves.

But to the contrary, on the matter of vaccinating children under the age of 18, it seems that these "backwoods rednecks" have better instincts than their suburban and urban counterparts.

Let's get some information straight about how much danger COVID-19 actually poses to children. But before we do that, we need to clearly express why children must receive the vaccine.

The "vaccinate everyone" mantra has been repeated ad nauseam to the point of parody and verging on dogma. It's so canonical to the state-sanctioned view of the pandemic that when Janet Yellen stands behind a mic and says the best way to reduce inflation and fix the supply chain is for everyone to get vaccinated, people unblinkingly nod along. It's this quasi-magical — but backed by science — narrative that has pushed discourse so aggressively over the edge.

The science behind vaccination goes something like, "It prevents spread, so the more people that are vaccinated, the sooner we can rid the globe of the virus." But something that we've learned continually is these "vaccines" do not prevent spread. Seeing as the CDC changed the definition of vaccine early on in the rollout of Pfizer and Moderna's mRNA products from "conferring lifelong immunity" to "reducing symptoms", this is not secret information and is born out by the nations with the highest rates of vaccination who continue to roll in and out of lockdowns, undertake booster campaigns, and enforce mask mandates.

The most recent Omicron variant has overwhelmingly infected vaccinated — and in some cases, boosted — people which brings up a whole host of other questions. Research has even shown that breakthrough infections carry significantly larger viral loads which would indicate that vaccinated people who get sick are the most likely to spread the virus to others regardless of vaccination status and, in some instances, may experience more serious symptoms.

To health administrators, the "vaccinate the children" campaign comes from this angle. A quasi-religious belief in the Power of Vaccines joined with a false impression that mRNA shots prevent viral spread.

So, onto the kids. I'll just list the most crucial facts from a clarifying article by @ParacelsusDoc:

542 children in the United States (US) have died from COVID-19. The 2020 Census estimated that 72 million children live in the US. By the government’s own statistics, COVID-19 has killed 0.00075% of all US children.

Easy enough. When compared with other causes of death for children, COVID-19 sits at the bottom. It less likely to kill a child than drowning, a car accident, or even the flu.

But maybe the most damning and dangerous proclamation has been the dismissal of myocarditis and pericarditis observed in children under the age of 18 post-vaccination. The response from MSM outlets has been to say that myocarditis is mild in the young and exceedingly rare. Some studies even indicate that children who contract COVID-19 are 37 times more likely to get myocarditis than their uninfected peers which would be a good argument in favor of vaccination if the study wasn't deliberately manipulated [1] and if it actually prevented infection instead of just softening symptoms. Additionally, by some estimates, for every life under the age of 18 saved by the vaccine, an additional 117 would be killed as a result of heart issues stemming from the shot.

From the Doc:

Someone with myocarditis can have no symptoms, and then suddenly drop dead... For children who are diagnosed with myocarditis, one-third make a full recovery, one-third suffer from persistent heart issues, and the other third die or require a heart transplant.

I've never really been a "facts don't care about your feelings" guy, but let's review the facts from this brief tour through why Brett Kelman should be exposed as a fraud for journalistic malpractice and found guilty of spreading "fake news":

1. Vaccines do not prevent spread
2. Children are not at risk from COVID-19
3. Risk of side effects from vaccination are higher than from infection in children

So, why should we celebrate the coerced vaccination of children under the age of 18? What exactly are we celebrating here? Brett, care to chime in? Will your Gannett handlers allow you to do so?

FOOTNOTES

1. They take a paper showing rates of myocarditis among hospitalized COVID-19 patients (adults and kids) and compare it to the baseline rate of myocarditis in young, healthy non-hospitalized children, which is essentially zero. They then go on to take that inflated rate of myocarditis in the sickest of the sick (remember only 500+ children have died of COVID in US) to the underreported rate from the vaccination. The rate of myocarditis after vaccination should be 0. There is no other vaccine that has caused these kinds of issues.