5 ms·
there's a tin foil hat that thinks that Bill Gates wants to forcibly vaccinate them with a nanoscale identification chip under the guise of a coronavirus vaccin
by thu2111 6y ago
there's a tin foil hat that thinks that Bill Gates wants to forcibly vaccinate them with a nanoscale identification chip under the guise of a coronavirus vaccine
I don't know if that's really rising to the level of a tinfoil hat belief.
Bill Gates is very much interested in a COVID vaccine, as you'd expect given his prior work. The "nanoscale chip" thing comes from this research he funded:
https://www.sciencealert.com/an-invisible-quantum-dot-tattoo-is-being-suggested-to-id-vaccinated-kids https://www.sciencealert.com/an-invisible-quantum-dot-tattoo...
The idea is indeed to implant a vaccination record in the skin. It's not a chip and it seems they didn't decide yet what the record would actually contain, so the 'tracking' part that gets people worked up might not be valid depending on the precise details of how the tech is used. Done right it could be very cool, IMO.
As for forced vaccination, BillG seems to have gone back and forth on that one. Sometimes he talks about the importance of persuading people to take it. But the idea he wants to force people to take the vaccine comes from this part of an interview he gave:
“Here, we clearly need a vaccine that works in the upper age range because they’re most at risk of that,” Gates said. “And doing that so that you amp it up so it works in older people and yet you don’t have side effects … you know, if we have 1 in 10,000 side effects, that’s way more, 700,000 people who will suffer from that. So, really understanding the safety at gigantic scale across all age ranges — you know, pregnant, male, female, undernourished, existing comorbidities — it’s very, very hard. And that actual decision of, OK, let’s go and give this vaccine to the entire world — governments will have to be involved because there will be some risk and indemnification needed before that can be decided on.”
Note the last part, where he says that in order to "give this vaccine to the entire world", governments will "have to be involved" because it will create bad side effects (they will "suffer") in some hypothetically large number of people and therefore, there will need to be "indemnification".
It's very ambiguous here whether he's imagining governments will need to be involved merely to make vaccine manufacturers immune from lawsuits, or whether they need to be involved to push people into take it, as governments routinely do today.
At any rate, it's interesting you think this is a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. It's really not. Quantum dots tracking if you had a Gates Foundation funded COVID vaccine is something discussed in scientific journals.
- 29athrowaway 6y agoSounds fancy, but do you realize you can just simply cover it with a piece of tape or whatever, right? It's not a RFID chip like the ones used in dogs. And a friendly reminder: to be identified, no implants are required, just your face. Or, carrying a smartphone with all your personal information, Internet connection and GPS.
- thu2111 6y agoYou can't cover it if someone is demanding you make it available in order to be provisioned with some essential service. And of course you can zap an RFID chip too. The specific tech here isn't what people are worried about. to be identified, no implants are required, just your face Not if everyone is wearing a mask ;) But more seriously, the sort of people who worry about this also worry about widespread facial recognition too, so I'm not sure what kind of point this is meant to be. Phones are indeed tracking nightmares but they can also be switched off or left at home without any social expectation you have one with you. A qr code embedded in your skin, that's there specifically for the purposes of allowing governments to rapidly exclude parts of the population from vital services if they don't get injected with something, has very different connotations. At any rate I don't really want to debate the merits or demerits of quantum dots. Like I said, it might be cool, I didn't see any mention of what the dot would actually contain in the papers. But you don't have to be some kind of wild-eyed lunatic to think that maybe building this kind of infrastructure will have bad side effects. Remember that by now a lot of people don't trust public health officials at all. They've been both misleading and misled very routinely throughout COVID. Their judgement is highly suspect. They're incredibly prone to panic, bad use of data and over-confidence in the opinions of academics and scientists. Now they may soon want to mandate injections of vaccines, which do unfortunately have a long track record of safety issues regardless of what the anti-anti-vaxxers may claim. Look up Pandemrix for an example. Allowing public health to efficiently enforce their questionable judgement calls isn't obviously a win.