Posted on 04/27/2021 2:48:20 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Merriam-Webster, the dictionary company that has built a reputation for pandering to the “woke” crowd and embracing leftist government mandates, has quietly played their own role in pushing the Covid-19 “vaccines” out to the general public. They added a new definition to their listing for the word “vaccines” to match what’s currently being offered to the American people to fight the coronavirus.
NOQ Report first discovered this by accident. It started with an innocuous Tweet I posted and a comment that followed.
Isn't whether or not these are vaccines a matter of definition? It is to Merriam-Webster, at least. pic.twitter.com/oSA0FVIFLy
— Pete Finnegan (@Pete_Finnegan) April 27, 2021
It struck me as odd that the (b) definition seemed to match perfectly with the Pfizer and Moderna versions of the Covid vaccines. According to the dictionary, a vaccine is “a preparation of genetic material (such as a strand of synthesized messenger RNA) that is used by the cells of the body to produce an antigenic substance (such as a fragment of virus spike protein).”
The CDC website has a conspicuously similar way of describing the vaccines: “COVID-19 mRNA vaccines give instructions for our cells to make a harmless piece of what is called the “spike protein.” The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19.”
But that’s not how Merriam-Webster used to define “vaccines.” A search on Archive.org reveals that the last snapshot of the page before the pandemic did not list the (b) definition for “vaccines.”
Neither the words “mRNA” nor “spike protein” appear anywhere on the page.
For weeks, the expectations have been systematically lowered regarding the efficacy of the “vaccines.” Once considered a pathway to immunity and eventually a return to normalcy without lockdowns, face masks, and social distancing, the bar continues to be lowered. Many are still being told to wear face masks, keep their businesses closed or limited, and maintain safe distances from other people whether we’re vaccinated or not.
Twitter posted a trending topic last week that used very discouraging language to set our expectations even lower. In a post titled, “Vaccination helps reduce the transmission of COVID-19, according to studies and health experts,” the self-proclaimed Big Tech arbiter of truth said, “COVID-19 vaccines are effective at preventing serious illness due to the virus in those who have received them, according to medical experts. While the research on transmission rates and susceptibility among those already vaccinated against COVID-19 is ongoing, medical professionals and health officials advise that all Americans receive a vaccine once they become eligible in order to help reduce the spread of the virus.”
The whole purpose of vaccinations is not to “help reduce” infections. The purpose has always been understood to be near-complete elimination. This is why we rarely see cases of polio or measles. Some vaccines may be slightly less effective, perhaps 98%, but what we’re seeing with the Covid vaccines isn’t even close. The numbers are hard to pin down properly with everyone from the CDC to mainstream media doing everything they can to keep the real information suppressed, but the fact that so many people continue to get sick after taking the vaccine (and often BECAUSE of the vaccine), it’s no wonder companies like Merriam-Webster are trying to give credibility to them while companies like Twitter run cover.
It isn’t uncommon for our language to evolve based on new information. Words get redefined to match a changing world. But this move seems conspicuously political as if an agenda is in play that needs support. Merriam-Webster is happy to oblige.
In before the....
AMEN! The mRNA is NOT a vaccine! I though the J&J was going to be a regular vax like we used to get for polio etc., but it just gives you blood clots.... Not Good.
From the article: “But this move seems conspicuously political as if an agenda is in play that needs support.”
Actually, this whole article is nothing but a conspicuously political rank in support of the anti-vax agenda. Evidently, medical science isn’t supposed to evolve beyond the use of cow pox to eradicate small pox.
Words change meaning as technology evolves. Language also evolves with time. The following were all once very common English phrases:
Of the newe jet been thise weede, sooth?
And, for to drynken, strong wyn, reed as blood
Mine wanges werken me full wo
Blameth nat me if that ye chese amys
So moot I gon
The mRNA platform is simply the third generation of vaccines. The first were inactivated or attenuated pathogens. The second were conjugate or subunit vaccines. The third generation has been in development for decades. Yes, they are vaccines. They produce an immune response. They protect against disease. And soon, virtually all new vaccines will be mRNA based because they’re faster, cheaper, easier, and safer.
Sheesh..... is every cotton picking agency corrupt these dayz?
Is this the first attempt to use mRNA to vaccinate in a general population?
I would think that is the appropriate question.
The definition of a word should not precede its usage.
The word telephone has existed since the 17th century, but I think it was fair to call Alexander Graham Bell’s invention a telephone before every home had one.
I posted a thread about this back in January
I said
Last week the mRna stuff was not considered a vaccine
https://web.archive.org/web/20210118194713/https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vaccine
this week it is. it must be great to have control of language, I would be really gay if I did.
Note to the mod who deleted my comment, gay used to mean happy before the definition was changed. that was my whole point in using that specific word.
the ChinaFlu is NOT the reason for the VAX, the VAX IS the reason for the ChinaFlu...
What was a 17th century “telephone”. I doubt the definition in a 17th century dictionary would describe Bell’s design. Bell’s use wouldn’t have appeared in a dictionary until years after his invention or even general use of it. That’s how language works.
The dictionary would have to know about prior usage. If it is extremely limited in use, it would likely comment on this.
I take it from your response, as you seem knowledgeable on the subject, that this is the first actual use of mRNA to attempt vaccination in the general population.
I would expect, therefore, such a definition to NOT be in the dictionary, or if electronic, as it is, it could be there with such a distinction.
That this is not the case, probably is telling about the motivations of those providing the definition.
The Merriam-Webster word list is no longer a legit Dictionary.
It is a disinformation tool.
“Actually, this whole article is nothing but a conspicuously political rank in support of the anti-vax agenda. Evidently, medical science isn’t supposed to evolve beyond the use of cow pox to eradicate small pox.”
________
Minitru could use a guy like DugwayDuke.
“Words change meaning as technology evolves. Language also evolves with time.”
_____
Patronize much?
If it’s not from cow pustules, is it a vaccine?
1st blood clot death in Quebec. I am definitely waiting now to get the vaccine.
one guy in new jersey wrote: “Minitru could use a guy like DugwayDuke.”
Actually, the anti-vaxxer cultists would be far more at home there than I. It would be perfect for them since they would get to define the meanings of words to support their agenda .
“I take it from your response, as you seem knowledgeable on the subject, that this is the first actual use of mRNA to attempt vaccination in the general population.”
_____
This is the first actual use of mRNA to attempt gene manipulation therapy on humans.
Everyone getting these gene manipulation injections is participating in a multifaceted experiment.
The only reason the word “vaccine” has been grafted onto this technology is to allow its proponents to paint any and all detractors with the focus-group-approved term “anti-vaxxer”.
See 18.
Seek help, DD.
Is it anti vax to demand the treatment being administered to tens of millions be tested past the experimental stage?
The FDA denies use of experimental drugs for dying people that have more testing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.