Let's start this out by reaffirming that I am not a doctor. I am not here to advocate for or against any particular medical decision or medical treatment. I do not know enough about biology or chemistry to advocate for anything other than a good night's sleep and the wellbeing that moderation has been known to produce, but since I have also disregarded both sleep and moderation from time to time, that makes me (at best) a hypocrite so take that particular medical advice with a grain of salt…just a grain, mind you. We wouldn't want to get the hypertension crowd riled.
There is a new study out by the British Medical Journal (BMJ) that links the Pandemrix flu vaccine with a sleep disorder known as narcolepsy – this condition apparently occurs primarily in children and young adults who have received the flu vaccine. Upon further research, the vaccine principally causes problems for people of European descent who are for some reason more genetically prone to narcolepsy in the first place.
I don't know why. I don't care why, but it is an interesting bit of information that might come in handy the next time you feel compelled to dust off that old Trivial Pursuit game in which case you are most likely disregarding my advocacy of sleep and moderation and that brings us back to square one.
Does this mean that you should forego vaccines in the future for your children for fear that they will no longer be able to endure their state mandated, daily indoctrination that comes with their free education or for yourself out of fear you will no longer be able work the 16 hours a day necessary to pay for that free education plus the mortgage on your underwater house? Having already reaffirmed that I'm not a doctor, I think it is safe to assume that I don't know.
What I do know? The American mainstream media's rapid-fire response to the BMJ…no, we'll go back to using British Medical Journal because for some reason BMJ strikes me as inappropriate… study was absolutely exhilarating. It, oddly enough, reminded me of something out of Star Trek – you know those scenes where the Enterprise is coming under attack by the Romulans (was it the Romulans or the Klingons? I always get them confused) and Scotty calls up to the bridge that the shields can't take another hit…we need more power…I'm giving you all we've got! You know the drill.
I'm just saying, when the MSM is in control of the daily messaging, it's so seamless that you hardly notice that you are being spun. Yet this study from the British Medical Journal perhaps took the American media by surprise, because the push to neutralize its affects was so forceful, reactionary and fearful… there was a cautionary directive baked in to each story that people shouldn't get the crazy idea in their heads that they should stop getting the vaccines every year because narcolepsy is a rare European problem and the flu is deadly.
Let us pause to digest that information. Is the flu deadly?
Is it more or less deadly than unpredictably falling asleep at inappropriate times – you know, like driving a car, operating heavy machinery, et al?
The whole overreaction to the narcolepsy story seemed little strange. One might say that it was off-putting – even jarring. When the MSM has to hustle to get a loose-cannon narrative under control, it's as if you suddenly become aware of the Earth's rotation. It gives you a strange sensation, almost like vertigo.
But to be fair, the press is only trying to tease out behaviors that will lead to a healthier America so even if they are spinning, it's for the promotion of disease control. It's for the common good…?
Common good. Makes me wonder who owns stock in the companies that produce vaccines. So here's what I'm thinking. Long ago, I came to realize with regard to the great, vast expanse of knowledge that is available throughout the universe, that I know virtually none of it. I like learning, but I don't learn for the sole purpose of collecting factoids. For me, information should reveal truth. It should be interesting. It should connect. So if you will permit me, I would like to invite you into my learning process as I examine the nation's ongoing vaccine debate.
Let's talk about breast cancer as our first non sequitur of the day. You see, Fox News reported yesterday that metastatic breast cancer in women 25 to 39 is on the rise. There are a lot of things that we could discuss about late stage, deadly breast cancer that would be smart, trendy, feminist and very forward thinking. We could talk about how we should find a cure, how we can organize a walk-a-ton or buy the right brand of saltines and how this will raise money for a cure. We could discuss how we should spend less on war and save our nation's endangered bosoms. We know what to discuss because it's exactly what we have been trained to discuss. That's the narrative.
In general, the press will feel very comfortable running with the Fox News story because they own breast cancer. They own how it's reported. They own how you respond to those reports. Heavens to Betsy, they've wound the choreography of that story so tightly that they have 200 pound linebackers beating the living snot out of each other on football fields across America while wearing their "pretty in pink" sports gear.
And since the MSM owns breast cancer, they can fail to point out that any rise in breast cancer in women 25 to 39 ought to be alarming because these women are of childbearing age and should therefore be protected by their own natural defenses. It's when women become infertile that they are then at risk for cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis, etc.
But if we brought up that particular angle of the breast cancer debate, we would have to wonder if these women of childbearing age are or ever have been infertile and if that infertility is connected to contraception or abortions which are narratives that the media owns as well so we won't be seeing that connection being made on CNN anytime soon.
Right. Now let's talk about Mayor Michael Bloomberg for just a moment, shall we? Mayor Bloomberg is concerned about…how much soda you drink? Is that what he cares about? Do you really think that Michael Bloomberg cares about your soda intake?
Well, he must because he drove legislation to prohibit the sale of soft drinks that are larger than 16oz in New York City. He is currently leading the charge against 2 liter bottles of soda with pizza delivery. He is imploring the NYS legislature to follow his lead and implement this cola war at the state level. He clearly wants to protect the people of New York from their own stupidity by restricting excessive cola consumption.
So when New Yorkers order pizza, they will have to order it with four to six separate cans of soda instead of two liters.
And they will pay tax on four to six separate cans of soda instead of two liters which will be funneled into programs to promote education about nutrition and childhood obesity.
And after they have made super-sized containers illegal in the Big Apple, politicians will begin complaining about all the extra refuse that is being created by those piggy, wasteful New Yorkers who buying four to six cans of soda instead of two liters. New Yorkers will be inundated by news stories about garbage dumps and recycle facilities that are over capacity…and the next mayor of New York will lead the charge against garbage by pushing through a new tax to create a new program that will educate New Yorkers about green alternatives.
Has the press really bothered to explore that angle of the cola crusades? I've seen it discussed in various conservative media strongholds but have we seen it on MSNBC or the networks?
So what does any of this have to do with narcolepsy and flu vaccines?
This is the connection that I see. There are two kinds of politicians in this world. There are Statesmen who work to protect your individual liberties and there are Statists who seek to expand the role of government in your life. There are two kinds of doctors in this world. There are healers who look for the best way to keep their clients healthy and there are Statists who work to expand the role of government in your life. There are two kinds of teachers in this world. There are educators who teach children by teaching them teach themselves and then there are Statists who work to expand the role of government in their lives.
And then there two different kinds of reporters in this world. There are reporters who seek the truth of every event, report the facts and let the chips fall where they may and then there are Statists who – hmmm. They own all of the important information and the way it's disseminated. They decide what information you should have in order to tease out desirable behaviors from the population. They withhold information that they think works against that end.
Doesn't solve the problem at hand, does it? Should you get vaccinated for the flu next year in light of the British Medical Journal's study on sleep disorders or not?
I don't know. You should do what you think is best for you based on the best information at your disposal. It's not a decision that I should be making for you.
And it's not a decision that the mainstream media should be making for you either.