Please re-read my comment. I cited WHO's new guidance as evidence that it's difficult to know the truth when confronting a novel coronavirus in a rapidly-shifting landscape. I made no references to booster composition.
Even so, it's clear that CDC and governments have for months been recommending boosters based on the SAME vaccine, i.e. formulated for the alpha strain, even as the Delta strain was taking root and becoming dominant. Inexplicably, they're still recommending the SAME booster formulation for Omicron. They have never recommended pausing to update the formulation for new strains. (If you can find any evidence to the contrary, I'd love to see it). I agree that vaccines should be updated, but Pfizer et al have failed to do this.
Yes, I'm a lawyer, and lawyers frequently make inferences or conclusions deduced in the context of the evidence presented:
"I’m angry at the public sentiment that tried to pressure and coerce people into accepting a dangerous narrative."
I inferred -- based on the author's obvious belief that there's a narrative downplaying the lethality of Omicron -- that she feels people who don't accept this narrative are being pressured and coerced into accepting it. You're attacking me for misinterpreting her statement, but you have yet to explain how I've misinterpreted it. What "dangerous narrative" is she referring to? Who is being pressured and coerced into accepting it? I ask because there were no links provided in the article.
Censorship and banning are a means of pressuring and coercing people to either behave or be denied participation on platforms that have become the dominant form of expression and commerce. Moreover, censorship does not require a governmental body to be involved:
"Censorship can be conducted by governments, private institutions and other controlling bodies."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship
I don't know what the "truth" is either. Perhaps we should ask Jessica, since she believes that politicians, influencers, school boards, life coaches, etc. are "knowingly distorted facts and ridiculing people" who try to "speak up about the truth." There is ample evidence of people (including doctors and nurses) who have been pressured and coerced into supporting perspectives endorsed by the CDC, the FDA, and the mainstream media. Again, I'm just looking for clarification. I see bold assertions without links or any evidence to back them up.
Healthy discussion does not entail accusing people of manufacturing claims and misrepresentations without providing evidence that they've done so. This mindset is what's turning Medium into a vicious echo chamber.
