In the spirit of continuous improvement, I feel the need to improve on my first proposed vaccine mandate response letter. I realized after I posted the "No Thank You" letter that, while persuasive, it did not follow my own negotiation strategy which aligns with the improv comedy formula of always seeking to say "yes, and..." and avoid saying "no" if at all possible.
Further, in the intro to the first vax letter I neglected to inform readers that they could use, alter, and edit the letter however they saw fit and that I assert no copyright and expect no compensation for its use. So please use that letter and this one all you want and edit them however you want.
Below is Vax Letter 2.0. It is at the same time agreeable and also much more pointed about the outrageous risk that employers are attempting to foist upon their employees. Although more agreeable, because it exposes the raw risk reality of what is going on, no employer will ever agree to it. The primary purpose of Vax Letter 2.0 is to awaken, persuade, and move the public consciousness in a better and healthier direction. If it also saves your job, so much the better. Use at your own risk.
Thank you for your request that I be vaccinated. My answer to your request is "yes," I agree to be vaccinated. I will schedule the vaccination once you have responded to questions and agreed to the conditions below.
It is my hope and expectation that we will work together on these issues. I love my job and I am good at it. I appreciate your help in this process. I need the income to support my family. And I'm sure that you would like to avoid the very high cost of replacing me--approximately 50 percent of my annual salary. It appears that it is in our mutual interests to work together to retain me as your employee.
Again, I am saying "yes" in response to your request that I get vaccinated. At the same time I will need answers and/or some agreement on these issues before I schedule the appointment.
Authority. This may sound strange, but as an intial matter I need to know the source of the authority for your request. I understand that you are implementing this mandate because of an Executive Order from the President of the United States requiring that employers with 100 or more employees mandate vaccinations. I have searched for this Executive Order and have not been able to find it. Also, there are no OSHA rules. Federal rule-making is an administrative process takes time and is subject to public input and debate before finalization. That has not even started. So, if you can, please forward your authority to me. If you can't find any legal authority for your demand, I respectfully request that we end this conversation and get back to work.
Risk. As you may or may not be aware, all of the sellers of the vaccine that you require are completely immune from legal liability for any adverse health outcomes caused by the vaccine. In addition, because the vaccine has been fast-tracked under an "Emergency Use Authorization," it is not clear to me that it has been properly tested and proven to be safe. There is much anecdotal evidence of severe adverse outcomes--including Guillain-Barre Syndrome (paralysis) and Myocarditis to name only two. Many esteemed health professionals claim that m-RNA vaccines create increased health risk because they cause future uncontrolled immune response ("cytokine storms") when the vaccinated come in contact with future viruses. These smart health professionals liken the m-RNA vaccination to a ticking time bomb that explodes the immune system when the body is later subjected to new viruses. I don't know if this is true. I do know that whether or not this is true likely won't be known for years.
The known risk of contracting "Covid-19" is the infection to fatality rate (IFR). All available data indicates that the IFR for "Covid-19" is no different than all past prior seasonal flus. The Covid-19 IFR does not, therefore, support the narrative that it is an extraordinarily dangerous pandemic.
Further, credible evidence suggests that natural immunity (immunity created by my body should I contract "Covid-19") is around 17x more efffective than the vaccination you are demanding as a condition of my employment.
Of course I could be wrong, but based on the knowable facts, it appears to me that the health risk associated with contracting "Covid-19" is lower than the risk associated with receving a vaccination. And, as I said, I am still willing to receive the vaccination as you request. That is, I am willing to risk my life to retain my job. What I will require from you in return is that you, as my employer and the party that is requiring me to receive the vaccine, share in the risk. If I lose my life or my health because I have agreed to your request, I need you to assure me that you will compensate me (or my family if the vaccine kills me). This is necessary because the vaccine sellers themselves will not accept any risk associated with my taking the vaccine.
Dispute resolution terms. Because credible evidence suggests that the vaccines can cause autoimmune damage or failure and because autoimmune problems manifest in many different and nebulous ways, together we will also need to come to some sort of agreement on who bears the burden of proof regarding your obligation to pay me if I die or if I am afflicted by an autoimmune disease. I propose that, if I die before my actuarily-determined time, the burden of proof will be on you to prove that my death was not caused by the vaccine. Similarly, if in the next 10 years I acquire an autoimmune disease or other vaccine-related ailment, you will bear the burden of proving that the cause of my ailment was something other than the experimental vaccine that you have demanded. This is fair because I have agreed to risk my life for the company by acquiesing to your demand that I accept an experimental medical treatment and unapproved drug while the drug's seller refuses to accept any liablity. I should not bear all of the risk when the risk calculus is so unclear and probably weighted in favor of no vaccination. Since you are demanding that I receive the vaccine as a condition of my employment, you should bear the financial risk if this turns out to be a big mistake. I am willing to put skin in the game and risk my life and health. You, as my employer, need to have financial skin in the game if this turns out to be a bad idea. If we both have some risk, then we can expect that together we will make a better decision.
Because I am concerned that the United States legal system may be biased in favor of large corporations and pharmaceutical companies, I will also need some assurance that you will not renege on our agreement and take advantage of any systemic bias to avoid your obligation. I propose to you agree to pay liquidated damages of $5 million if you: (1) do anything to prevent my case from being tried in front of jury--this includes motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, etc.; (2) do anything to seek to deny or alter the burden of proof that we have stipulated to above; or (3) do anything to exclude any evidence, including this letter, that I offer in support of the claim that the vaccine you required caused my death or injury. Further, you will pay this liquidated damage sum even if any judge does any of these things on his own. And no judicial decision will be final (no res judicata and no collateral estoppel) if I do not receive a jury trial and you do not bear the burden of proof described above.
Please present me with facts that indicate that Covid-19 is not a psychological operation. Again, this may sound a little strange, but I have read Charlie Munger's invaluable practical guide to human thinking and perception errors entitled "The Psychology of Human Misjudgment," and I am concerned that the "pandemic" we all have been living through since January 2020 has a much stronger foundation in the collective human imagination that it does in objective reality. Every human vulnerability, every psychological ploy and trick detailed by Mr. Munger appears to have been used since January 2020 to convince the world that it is experiencing an extraordinarily dangerous pandemic rather than a normal, seasonal flu with very real but at the same time very negligible risk. Mr. Munger's observations read like a playbook of what we have experienced since January, 2020. Again, I could be wrong, but the cacophony of psychological manipulation appears to me to be what Mr. Munger would call a "lollapalooza" event.
Before I schedule my vaccination appointment, therefore please provide me with some evidence that the entire world has not been subjected to a mass Milgram experiment (complete with a bossy little man in a white lab coat), and has not been subjected to a mass Stanford prison experiment (with blue state governors eagerly assuming the role of wardens). Also please provide me with facts that show that the pressue to wear masks and to "social distance" had a real medical purpose and was not merely the use of social proof bias (herd pressure to conform). I will need some persuasive facts that indicate that Covid-19 presents an extraordinary risk to humanity as evidenced by a lethal IFR that is materially and statistically worse than all past seasonal flus. I will need facts that indicate that Covid-19 is not in fact the 2020 seasonal flu dressed up, repackaged, and conflated by focusing error bias and then further amplified and magnified by smart phones and computer screens. I will need some real, unbiased, and relevant data that show that Covid "cases" and "deaths" are real and have not been materially influenced by financial incentive bias (rewarding doctors and hospitals for connecting and overbroadly attributing deaths to "covid").
Finally, please provide me with evidence: (a) that the brilliant Angelo Codevilla (recently killed in a freak accident while walking home from church) was not prescient when he declared that the Covid-19 narrative was actually an ongoing psychological coup attempt; (b) that the inventor of the PCR test, Nobel Prize winner Dr. Kary Mullis (also the victim of an untimely death), was wrong when he said that the PCR test was useless in identifying Covid-19 and that he believed Dr. Anthony Fauci was a corrupt bureaucrat with no knowlege of medicine; and (c) evidence that Dr. Robert Malone (thankfully still among the living), the inventor of m-RNA vaccines, is wrong in recommending against m-RNA use for Covid-19.
In sum, before I schedule the vaccination appoinment, I need your help in accepting the notion that we are living through a very real and extraordinarily dangerous pandemic. All the evidence I see suggests that we have experienced a perhaps artifically enhanced seasonal flu which presents very real but very negligible risk and that the real and negligible risk has been amplified by focusing-error bias, smart phones, and computer screens.
Exemption Request. I realize that you probably will not be willing or able to agree to the conditions I have requested in this letter. I want the record to show that I was not the one who said "no." If you will not agree to my requests, then please consider this as my request for a vaccine exemption. You may call it a religious exemption if you like, although I don't have a religion. I know with certainty only a couple of things and from this foundation I understand Reality. I know that God created me and created you. I know that my body is the temple of His Holy Spirit. I know that Jesus Christ was crucified and resurrected and that He has redeemed the entire world and there is nothing you or I can do about this accomplished fact. I know that, whether I live or die, I am God's property and that I have trustee responsibility for my body, what I choose to do with it, and on what terms. It is from that perspective that I have written this letter. My exemption is based on this Reality, not religion.
If you agree to the conditions I have set forth, then I will receive the vaccination. If you will not accept the conditions of this letter, then please accept this as my Reality-based exemption request under whatever legal or other exemption you feel is appropriate.