Beliefs are Hard to Change
The Past is Repeating Itself
In 2004, I was writing my book, “FOWL - Bird Flu Is Not What You Think” (out of print). The number of messages used to imbed the ‘necessity of the flu vaccine’ into our collective consciousness was massive. Early in 2004, a presentation given at the National Immunization Program by the Associate Director for Communications at the CDC, Glenn Nowak, PhD, revealed the extent to which the media is used to force consumers into believing in the necessity of the flu shot. The following stats were from 2004:
During the week of September 21–28, 2004, according to information provided by Dr. Nowak, the airwaves carried a whopping 1,056 messages—that’s approximately one every fifteen minutes—urging viewers or listeners to get their flu shots. The most intense reporting on influenza generally starts in early October and
extends through mid-February, averaging 200 stories per week for 20 weeks. That’s at least 4,000 messages per season.
Endless stories of ‘flu shot delays’ and maps of influenza outbreaks amounted to free advertising for the manufacturers, with the unspoken subtext being ‘hurry, get your flu shot or you may die!’ Locations where flu shots could be obtained, such as churches, health departments, and local pharmacies — which are often announced on the local evening news — added to a free publicity bonanza for flu vaccine manufacturers. The use of local television to promote flu vaccines amounted to hundreds of millions of dollars of essentially free advertising for the pharmaceutical manufacturers, among the wealthiest companies on earth. This prototype was launched and tested years before the same techniques were used to promote the Pfizer and Moderna Covid shots.
What types of messages were delivered? Here is a partial list, along with the number of times the message pierced the airwaves in 2004:
Number of messages per week (in parentheses)
Doctors recommend/urge flu shot (285)
The flu kills 36,000 per year (221)
This could be a bad/serious flu year (174)
Flu vaccine is the best defense against the flu (149)
Oct./Nov./Dec. is the best time to get the vaccine (117)
Now is a good time to get the flu vaccine (106)
The same fear-mongering, used year after year, continues throughout the fall until influenza vaccine sales peak and start to fall off in mid-February when the media’s hawking subsides as quickly as the spring’s melting snow.
Given this level of indoctrination, is it any wonder the average person views the flu shot as one of the most important ‘prevention tools’ for maintaining health? Is there any doubt what when a similar hype started regarding the Covid shots, people had already been conditioned to run out and get their shot? Is it any wonder that trying to convince people to NOT take an experimental shot that had no track record of safety or efficacy was as hard as convincing someone to NOT take a mercury-laden flu shot?
Why Changing a Belief System is Nearly Impossible
Research into how people process media reports sheds some light on why it so is difficult for people to change their “beliefs,” even in light of compelling information.
A 2003 study by cognitive Professor Stephan Lewandowsky from the University of Western Australia investigated the effects of retractions on people’s memories of and beliefs about events relating to the war in Iraq. The study is long, but worthy of your time to read it.
More than 800 people from three countries—Germany, Australia, and the U.S.—were shown a list of events reported by the media. Some of the events were completely true, some were reported as true and then retracted, and some were complete fabrications. Each study participant indicated whether or not he had heard of the event, and then rated the likelihood of it being true. For each report the individuals had recalled hearing, they were asked to note whether it had subsequently been retracted and if the recall changed their feeling about the original report.
The results of the study were both fascinating and telling. The more clearly the Germans and the Australians recalled that an event had been retracted, the less they believed the original claim had been true. However, if Americans recalled hearing the report, even once, they tended to believe it was true, even if it had been retracted or denied.
The study offers many strong points to ponder:
Why were false memories confined to a specific segment of the population rather than affecting everybody?
Can people who are susceptible to false memories be identified on the basis of some other measures?
Did the public in other societies around the world share the perceptions of the American public?
Finally, how might the incidence of such false memories be reduced?
An interview reported in 2005 in the Wall Street Journal with Dr. Lewandowsky further explained that people build “mental models” of what they believe is true.
“By the time they receive a retraction, the original misinformation has already
become integrated into their mental model, or their world view. Dismissing what they had come to know as ‘true’ would leave their world in shambles.”
In other words, Americans continue to believe something is true or the truth, even after they have been shown unequivocally the information is false.
The study also supports what are referred to as ‘false memories.’ False memories are formed from a combining actual facts with opinions suggested by others. Over time, the person usually forgets the source of the original information, but s/he will come to believe the opinions that were added to the facts are also completely true. The more comfortable a person becomes with the ‘facts’ as they remember them—for example, that the Covid shots are safe, effective, and cause little harm—the less likely they are to even consider another point of view.
According to Lewandowsky’s study on Iraqi events, Americans are the most difficult to convince that they had been scammed. For example, even though no weapons of mass destruction were ever discovered, nearly 30 percent of U.S. respondents through most of the war still believed they existed despite mountains of evidence to the contrary.
This behavior, also called ‘confirmation bias,’ is embracing information that supports their beliefs and rejecting information that contradicts their beliefs.
For example, even though there have been more than 150 peer-reviewed studies proving unequivocally that masks don’t work, people are still wearing them and muzzing their kids. And even though many more people are dying with side effects caused by the shots than from a covid infection, people (especially Americans) are still lining up to get their boosters.
As Lewandowsky reported in 2005, “It appears Americans accept what they hear at face value, especially if they hear it from the television news.”
Fast forward to March 2020. His predictive statement has become prophetic.
This is why your friends and family don’t listen to your warnings about the Covid shot. And this is why, I said from the beginning of this scamdemic, “Want to know the CURE for Covid? Turn off your TV.”
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny is a board-certified osteopathic medical doctor. She is the founder of Tenpenny Integrative Medical Center, Tenpenny Health Restoration Center, LLC, medical clinics located near Cleveland, Ohio and several online educational businesses that can be found at DrTenpenny.com. She writes two Substacks per week. The first, posted each Saturday, is called EyeOnTheEvidence, pieces to help the general public understand complex medical concepts. The second, released on Sundays, are inspiration pieces OnWalkingWithGod . She also writes monthly for EpochTimes.
Dr. Tenpenny has invested 22 years and more than 50,000 hours of personal time, documenting and exposing problems associated with vaccines, including the Covid-19 shots. As an internationally known speaker and author, her many articles have been translated into at least 18 languages. She is a frequent guest on radio, podcasts, and TV interviews to share her knowledge and educate people on why they need to know what is coming through that needle.
I want to introduce a concept. A disruptive one. I hope you like it.
Smartphones are literally TV.
There. Mic drop.
They tell us that there is a generational gap: young people don't read newspapers or watch tv, they get all their information (malinformation) online. Preferably, using the smartphone. Therefore, the same people who made TV unwatchable moved to take over the Internet and make it unwatchable too. The young people are as bad informed as if they watched TV all day.
Therfore, there is a chance that the "new beliefs" of the newer generations are as immutable and unfounded as the beliefs of the older generations.
I know, too pessimistic.
I accept debates on this concept.
I took an English Comp class in high school, and was blessed with a curriculum based around learning rhetorical figures of speech (metaphor, simile, hyperbole, oxymoron, and many less well known). We had to find examples in magazines or newspapers and cut them out. That made us process the figures of speech internally, not just memorize a definition. It was a "sneaky" way to introduce critical thinking, as in "what are they really saying," and opened us up to ask "is this a trick to manipulate the way I think about something?" Years later when I figured out what that teacher had been up to, I went looking for a book that took a similar approach to figures of speech (or the principles of rhetoric) and came to appreciate just how rare was the kind of teaching I had received. I could not find a single book that did the topic justice--only academic treatises that missed the practical point entirely.
I wish there were more sneaky teachers like that, who helped us pierce the veil and reveal how we are being programmed to think.
Now when a new "event" such as the war in Ukraine or COVID comes along, I immediately set up two columns in my mind: A) This is the official story and B) The underlying story/a deeper look. I now find there is ALWAYS another side to the story. Over time I have developed resources that I trust. Critical Thinking with Dr. T and Dr. P has become one of my go to sources for filling out Column B. I also have a mental list of sources I can depend on to be broadcasting something so far from the truth that I can start out by assuming that exactly the opposite is likely to be true (CNN for example).
Money and power interests usually have an agenda they want hidden from the public mind, with a cover story we are not only supposed to believe, but to become emotionally invested in. The Network, or TNI, or the White House spokesperson, will tell us why we should cheer for the team they are putting on the field (a tip of the hat to Dr. P and his sports news).
Early on in the "cultural programming" process I try to sort out enough of what's really going on so that I can feed better resources to those who might listen to me--and indeed, over the life cycle of the Fairy Tale we are being fed, I find people are less interested, more set in their belief patterns, harder to reach--even when it becomes clear to me that the stakes are high, as they have been with the PlanDemic. Some people I can never reach.
I remember how with the COVID substory about early trearment--where we were fed the clear lie that only a vax could save us--I caught the initial press conference of America's Frontline Doctors who were already working with Iver and HCQ. It left me speechless when a very dear friend (a classmate, and fellow acupuncturist, with training in clinical research methodology) bit on the media trope that the doctor from Haiti was into black magic. She could not get past that character assassination--and ironically a racist smear--and the way it painted all the people in that group, and thus she was convinced that the message they carried, should be ignored.
How do we train and deploy more sneaky teachers?