Since the beginnings of 2020, it may have felt like you’re living in an altered gumption of world. Major health parties across the world have changed definitions of medical periods that have a significant impact on everyday life. The Centre for Disease Control and Prevention recently announced they are contemplating yet another change in the definition contained in “vaccination.”1

The greater consequence for society is that by use false information, “health experts” are attempting to change your sensing of what’s genuine and not true. And in the process, they are perverting science.

For example, in October 2020, the The world health organisation deepened their clarity of herd exemption. In the past, herd exemption convey when enough people had acquired immunity to an infectious disease that the disease no longer spread widely in their local communities. Before science innovated vaccinations, herd exemption was achieved by exposure and retrieval from an infectious disease.

Courtesy of the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine, before October 2020, the WHO’s definition of herd immunity included both inoculation immunity and “immunity developed through previous infection.”2 However, in October 2020, the updated definition plummeted natural exemption and is now: 3

“’Herd immunity’, also known as’ population immunity’, is a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached.”

And, to add insult to injury, they include, “Herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from a virus , not by expose them to it, ” entirely rejecting the billions of people who have been infected naturally with measles, mumps, chicken pox and other infectious diseases, and who now have lifelong immunity to those diseases thanks to their natural infection, as to report to inoculations that wane and need regular boosters.

The definition change had instance, as other cancer clarities have also been changed. The original WHO definition of a pandemic from May 1, 2009, specified simultaneous outbreaks worldwide as having “enormous numbers of deaths and illnesses.”4 However, this changed leading up to the 2009 swine influenza pandemic, after which WHO removed the severity and high mortality criteria.

The change tolerated the WHO to declare the swine flu a pandemic after time 144 people had died worldwide. Fast-forward to September 2021, when the CDC reformed the definition contained in a inoculation from one that had ever held since at least February 24, 2011,5 which was “a product that produces immunity hence protecting the body from the disease.” The new definition is: 6

A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against ailments. Vaccines are often administered through needle insertions, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

It’s a definition that’s undoubtedly devised to describe what the mRNA COVID-1 9 gene regiman infusions do. And now, according to Dr. Rochelle Walensky, conductor of the CDC, they are contemplating making another change, this time to the definition of “fully vaccinated” for COVID. 7

Are You a Reasonable Child?

As of October 15, 2021, the CDC8 considered people perfectly vaccinated for COVID-1 9 if they are two weeks after their second dose in a two-dose series or two weeks later a single dosage from Johnson& Johnson. With the number of people getting inoculated diminishing in the U.S ., Biden administration officials are encouraging eligible Americans to get their booster shot, or else. 9 The “or else” was announced by Walensky, who told reporters 😛 TAGEND

“We may need to update our definition of ‘fully vaccinated’ in the future. If you’re eligible for a booster, go ahead and get your booster and we will continue to follow.”

Not surprisingly, and almost as if on clue, the CDC director’s observation are a reversal of her outlook in late September 2021. According to The Epoch Times, at that time she said officials were not considering varying the definition of “fully vaccinated.”1 0

Yet, exactly 1 month later at the end of October 2021, The Epoch Times reported that she was now suggesting that the explanation “may change as boosters become more commonplace.” Coincidentally, simply five days after that, the CDC announced their recommendations for a third, or booster, shot for everyone, and suggested a fourth quantity for certain immunocompromised individuals. 11

Besides the possibility that booster shots could go on ad infinitum, what’s worrisome is that Walensky’s definition of “fully vaccinated” could very well alter to fiscal and social interactions in the U.S ., not unlike what’s already happening in Australia, where Premier Daniel Andrews announced that any unvaccinated individuals will be excluded from fiscal and social activities. 12

Additionally, he warned that individuals could also be locked away if they don’t make the booster dose when they are required — all because of an illness that has killed merely. 012% of local populations and 1% of those infected. 13,14 This is far less than the 10.8% of all demises during 2019 in Australia attributed to ischemic heart disease. 15

In other statements, Andrew’s intent has little to do with confining the spread of an infection that has barely feigned “the two countries “. Instead, the expectation is the public will be’ tolerable children’ just as Alice is expected to be in “Through the Looking Glass.”

The analogy is clear: Health enterprises around the world have become modern-day “Humpty Dumpty” people who change the meaning of words merely because they can by virtue of the capability of its own position. For a refresher on this fairy tale, Humpty Dumpty haughtily informs Alice on how to understand his grammar and semantics: 16

“When I use a word, ” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a contemptuous color, “it conveys just what I prefer it to signify — neither more nor less.” “The question is, ” said Alice, “whether you CAN originate statements aim so many different things.” “The question is, ” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master — that’s all.”

Does that not chime accurately like what is happening today?

CDC Has a History of Changing Definitions

As mentioned earlier, reforming the definition contained in “fully vaccinated” would follow on the ends of other conversions the CDC ended September 1, 2021. The original interpretation of a vaccine had stood since at least February 24, 2011.17 By 2015 the CDC1 8 change over time the wording to include “stimulate[ ing] a person’s immune system to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.”

The wording stayed the same until August 26, 2021,19 when it was altered slightly to add the words “to produce immunity.” Days after the FDA committed final approval to Pfizer’s mRNA shot, the clarity varied again — this time, vastly. 20 If you compare the earlier definition to the latest definition, a vaccine 😛 TAGEND

Is no longer a “product” but instead is a “preparation”

Does not induce immunity but instead animates an immune response

Stimulates the immune response against diseases , not against a specific disease

No longer protects person or persons from the disease

As I point out here that earlier, these stunning alterations be unlikely created to allow the CDC, FDA and other governmental agencies to call the genetic rehabilitation experimentation dispensed worldwide a “vaccine, ” while knowing full well the so-called vaccine was not created to either grow immunity or prevent transfer of infection. In fact, by any description of a vaccine in use before 2021, this shot is not a vaccine.

Changing the Definition Follows Israel’s Example

According to data from the CDC reported in The Epoch Times, 21 it appears that more people are getting their booster shot at this time than are getting their first vaccination. The CDC reports that the quantity receiving a booster shot is 66.2% of those who are fully inoculated. While the CDC reports more than 189 million Americans are vaccinated, 65 million have not taken their first shot.

In Israel, in a move to ensure booster shots are part of their interpretation of amply injected someones, the government has mandated that inoculation passports expire six months after the second largest COVID dose.

To maintain a legitimate inoculation passport, someones must get a booster shot. 22 In Israel, people must use a inoculation passport to get into restaurants, theaters and forbids. New York City and San Francisco are using same passports, as is France and Italy.

Despite 65% of the population being fully vaccinated by October 26, 2021,23 Israel had recorded 1,324, 451 cases of COVID-1 9 as of October 27, 2021.24 According to the Epoch Times2 5 the seven-day average for infections September 2, 2021, was over 1,000 per one million people, which is twice the numeral considered to be in the U.S. and the U.K.

And, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal, 26 data from Israel’s Ministry of Health hint a majority of the members of those who are severely ill have received two quantities of the vaccine. While the Journal points out that “in recent days, unvaccinated Israelis have made up the bulk of those severely ill, ” it also says that officials attribute this to the fact that over two millions have gotten the third, or booster, shot, implying that some of the “unvaccinated” may actually simply lack access the booster 😛 TAGEND

“’The most vulnerable group right now are those people who have been inoculated with two doses and not the third, ’ Mr. Bennett said in a cabinet meeting last week, adding that they behaved as if they were fully protected, but weren’t.”

In this video, Dr. Vladimir Zelenko is testifying before the rabbinic field in Israel about the side effects being watched following the COVID-1 9 shot and the results he has had in treating his patients. Despite his testimony and information from their own data, state officials in Israel are still drive hard to vaccinate as numerous people with a booster shot as possible.

CDC Taking a Page From Anthony Fauci’s Book

The ever-changing CDC definition of vaccination appears to be similar to the route Dr. Anthony Fauci, conductor of the National Institute of Allergy and Contagious diseases and leader medical adviser to the president of the U.S ., has taken since the beginnings of the pandemic. His definition of flock immunity has also derived, apparently based only on his gut feelings. 27

Fauci has had ample opportunity to truthfully share information about an ongoing health situation. Yet, such statements demo “hes not” take a higher path of truth that would have helped Americans move smart decisions. Instead, he has engaged in what the daily online publication Slate labeled “noble lies.”2 8P TAGEND

The origin of a “noble lie” is from Plato’s Republic2 9 be drawn up in 380 B.C ., which is mainly is a discussion of the signify and sort of right. 30 A royal lie falls under the category of paternalistic lies. The American Psychological Association3 1 regimes this about lies with paternalistic purposes 😛 TAGEND

“Many lies that are intended to help others necessary the deceiver to make assumptions of determining whether lying serves others’ best interest.”

In other texts, Fauci may be functioning under the delusion that he has the right to lie based on hypothesis of determining whether the lies he tells are serving the best interest of those who have the full capacity and capability of understanding the science and building up their own mind.

An example of the paternalistic approach to truth-telling Fauci has made is his definition of herd exemption. A New York Times3 2 clause in December 2020 discussed Fauci’s perspective , noting that in the early months of 2020, he quoth a 60% to 70% forecast. Last-minute in its first year he boosted the list to 70% to 75% during video interviews.

By December 16, 2020, in an interview with CNBC, he said, “I would think that you would need somewhere between 70, 75, perhaps 80%. ” The next day, Fauci admitted to The Times reporter that he had “slowly but deliberately been moving the goalposts … partly based on brand-new science and partly based on his gut feeling that the country is finally ready to hear what he truly thinks.”3 3

He claimed he had retarded fostering the estimate because of vaccine hesitancy, saying, “We really don’t know what the real number is. I imagine the real range is somewhere between 70 to 90%. But, I’m not “re going to say” 90%. ”3 4

Are Fauci and the CDC Pulling a Code Red?

Essentially, what Fauci is saying is that he tells Americans what he thinks they can handle. And the ever-changing definitions of vaccines and “fully vaccinated” may be exactly the same policy being used by the CDC.

Much like the character played by Jack Nicholson in “A Few Good Men, ” Fauci is hiding the truth of his actions behind a veil of secrecy believing that Americans “can’t handle the truth.” In the movie, Nicholson’s character blurs the lines between the death of a Marine during an illegal hazing — extrajudicial reward — and defending the country against enemy incursion. 35

As the place plays out in the video clip below, you can imagine that Col Jessup, played by Nicholson, wholeheartedly imagines his lineup that led to the needless death of a Marine in the barracks, had protected others.

Without considering that the Marine could have been legally trained and discharged, Nicholson represents the unlawful action with an forceful speech, which makes the focus from his illegal order and arranges it firmly in the light of defending the country.

You can nearly imagine Fauci fiercely representing his lies with the explanation that Americans can’t handle the truth. Unfortunately, the truth about COVID-1 9 is not always readily experienced and not generally covered in mainstream media. 36,37, 38

Read more: