Here is what I posted:
___________________________________
“It has to be some version of *sunk cost*. They have predicated their entire course of action on *safe & effective* and just cannot accept they were wrong.”
__________________________________________
Since you apparently require explication, I put *sunk cost* inside special characters meant to convey that phrase was not to be taken exactly literally & also specified “...some version...”. One can *invest* time or effort or reputation into an enterprise and regard that as the investment expensive enough to be worth defending.
Note that I also specified *they*, plural, meaning _all_ those obviously so invested.
I shall share: you (those defending the position) have publicly committed to “safe & effective”, you (all) continue to so maintain this opinion and you (plural) have not to date on this forum admitted that could be erroneous in light of the evidence.
What should be our conclusion? Either you are simply stubborn and cannot recognize evidence or you have some vested interest in clinging to a proven fallacy. What could such a vested interest be?
You have made yourself into the subject of speculation by your own actions. You go to lengths to back those actions with claimed credentials. The medical institutions which issue those credentials and to which you are beholden by virtue of possession of them, is known to financially reward those who parrot the party line and financially punish those who do not. That is not in question. We apply logic to your group assertions and you individually yelp like the dog who is hit by the stone thrown at the entire pack.
An opinion is neither a lie nor perjury. I do believe that the process of committing to a stance on controversial issues represents an investment of oneself. The “safety & efficacy” of this shot that the entire globe is discussing and which at least half of that population regards as contributing to mortality and morbidity, is such a stance.
A parallel discussion taking place globally over the past year and half has been the refusal of proponents of “safety & efficacy” to back down even a bit. This has, despite volumes of gold-standard studies from recognized professionals with verified credentials who have risked the monolithic cancel culture in order to do the work and publish it under their own names, seemingly become the hill the anonymous proponents of lesser stature choose to die on. Rightly or wrongly, this prompts the rest of us to question “Why?”
Reams of varying published opinion, even in professional publications, exist to this point. This plethora of opinion understandably shifts as the discussion progresses and evidence continues to roll in from credible sources. That is the purpose of discussion: to refine one’s conclusions and prompt further investigation. It is a corollary to the scientific method.
The vaunted experts at the CDC have _admitted_ they were wrong by changing their own posted statements & guidelines. Deborah Brix has written in her book & repeated on video since publication that the Covid Task Force operated to push vaccine information they knew to be false on the POTUS, on the populace, and on the world. Similar admissions, some inadvertent, have been made by those at similar levels of authority. While not one entity offered even an insincere apology and some even cast themselves as victims while tripling down on castigating any questioners, they _did_ admit & imply that they knowingly committed ‘a noble lie###’.
Why can’t you?
###: A ‘noble lie’ is one told in order to perpetuate a ‘greater good’. Yet, the perpetrators of this one, that the vaccine is safe and effective, also admit that no good at all resulted from their own lies. It was, instead, a conscious lie repeated vociferously in order to knowingly further their own power & control in concert with unelected global NGOs presently in an open public process of advancing global governance.