Whether you agree or disagree with COVID mRNA injections or other older vaccines is not really the point.
The point is how the narrative keeps changing and with it the definitions used to further the narrative.
Narratives are talking points.
Not all talking points are correct.
I’ve learned in life and in medical practice to always question, question and question some more until the “narrative” is less of talking points and more true “reality”.
This is one of many reasons I completed a Functional Medicine Fellowship. It seemed to me like it was the Functional Medicine professionals that were asking all the questions to get a better understanding of health issues. I was happy that the Functional Medicine professionals often after taking this deep dive to get answers, ended up agreeing with Traditional Medical professionals. But on many topics there is a disagreement and thus other options for care for you to choose from. So asking questions furthered the understanding of health, wellness and disease processes and then opened up more available treatment options.
So this long winded topic comes down to:
Beware of “narratives”.
Beware of “changing definitions” to support a narrative.
Don’t be afraid to ask questions after question until you have a better understanding of your health issues and how to approach them.
Beware that those who profit in some way from a narrative will look to strengthen their stance while knocking down those that oppose their views. This really is just human nature. We always prefer being correct and not proven incorrect.
But who is correct or not and how the medical establishment has evolved the past three years is concerning. Instead of open professional debates to further a better understanding of all possible health interventions we get name calling, peer pressure, job pressure, coercion, threats, mandates and censorship to protect the current narrative.
So open your eyes please if they are not yet, especially when it comes to your health.
Congratulations to Novak Djokovic on his 2023 Australian Open Men’s Tennis Championship!
Novak was not allowed to play in Australia last year (2022) due to his non-jab status. He was allowed to play this year and showed he is a true champion.
Hopefully our country will change its policy towards COVID jab status for people wanting to visit, or in Novak’s case, compete here in professional tennis tournaments in 2023.
If you are not aware, the USA still does not allow foreigners to legally enter our country unless they have had COVID “vaccinations”. This would prevent Novak from playing in the US Open Tennis Tournament this Summer and other earlier tournaments here as well.
But Novak has stated publicly that it will be what it will be and he is not planning on changing his own beliefs on what to do for his health.
In the very near future I hope to begin putting other discussions in the chat linked above. These will be used to discuss items/subjects where I am not planning an entire substack article. I hope, if you have not already, join The Real Dr. Steven Horvitz subscriber chat above.
Right, it’s not about agreeing or disagreeing with the CV-1984 jab, it’s about changing definitions. It’s not a vaccine. The media/government/Pharma can call it whatever they want, but that does not change facts.
Changing definitions will happen across the board. When the names of certain food products have to be changed because they are offensive. Next it will be stated to change the name of "extra virgin olive oil".
I'm surprised anyone would still be using online dictionaries in this day and age.. or would even think about considering Merriam Webster to be a reputable source of definitions after they started accommodating those who can't tell the difference between literally and figuratively.
You can get a perfectly nice new copy of the Oxford new dictionary/thesaurus combo 2009 edition for about 9 bucks
Right, it’s not about agreeing or disagreeing with the CV-1984 jab, it’s about changing definitions. It’s not a vaccine. The media/government/Pharma can call it whatever they want, but that does not change facts.
Changing definitions will happen across the board. When the names of certain food products have to be changed because they are offensive. Next it will be stated to change the name of "extra virgin olive oil".
I'm surprised anyone would still be using online dictionaries in this day and age.. or would even think about considering Merriam Webster to be a reputable source of definitions after they started accommodating those who can't tell the difference between literally and figuratively.
You can get a perfectly nice new copy of the Oxford new dictionary/thesaurus combo 2009 edition for about 9 bucks