MSM finally admits COVID jabs not appropriate for all?

It wasn’t long ago that the New York Times spoke harshly about those hesitant about COVID-19 vaccines, associating them with “right-wing extremists”. Source. They’ve also associated hesitance around pregnant women receiving COVID-19 vaccines with “myths” and “misinformation”, apparently unaware that the mystery juice crosses the placenta. Source. And just a few months ago they relayed the CDC’s recommendation “that all Americans 6 months and older receive at least one dose of the latest Covid shots”. Source. Six month olds, dude.

Now the New York Times has for some reason decided to tell a bit of truth: “Much of the world has decided that most young children do not need to receive Covid booster shots. It’s true in Britain, France, Japan and Australia. Some countries, like India, have gone further. They say that otherwise healthy children do not need even an initial Covid vaccination. In Germany, public health experts don’t recommend vaccines for any children, including teenagers, unless they have a medical condition.” What’s more, they actually acknowledge that “the experts [in these countries] have concluded that the benefits for children often fail to outweigh the costs”. Leaving no confusion about this astounding development: “The benefits are modest because children are extremely unlikely to become seriously ill from Covid and are less likely to transmit the virus than an adult is. The costs include the financial price of mass vaccination, the possibility that a shot’s side effects will make a child sick enough to miss school, the tiny chance of more serious side effects and the inherent uncertainty about long-term effects.” Source.

No, you didn’t misread. A mainstream news outlet just admitted that the jabs aren’t that beneficial for children, that we don’t know what the long-term implications are, and threw in a little indication that maybe, just maybe, the risks could outweigh the benefits (the risk of adverse effects may be ‘tiny’, but the risks of COVID in the young are tinier still).

Okay then.

Extra: You may recall I recently critiqued a Johns Hopkins study claiming that the benefits of the jab outweighed the risks in all age groups, in Oxford University Press’ influential American Journal of Epidemiology. This prompted an underwhelming and churlish response from the team from the Bill Gates and Big Pharma funded Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. They dared to indicate that I, being unfunded and struggling because of all the persecutions and cancelling, am biased. And not them, who are almost drowning in Big Pharma’s money. Happy to take my apology now.

Extra: As for experts from countries like Australia noting that the jabs may not be worth it for all age groups, I reached out to the New York Times to confirm that that was a reference to my peer-reviewed work on the jabs’ effectiveness and safety being exaggerated in clinical trials and observational studies, or my research indicating that the myocarditis risk alone appears to outweigh the benefits of the jab, at least in the young and healthy. They did not deny it by the publishing date. :)