First off, watch the two-minute clip below without over thinking it. Try and see what impressions you come away with. How does it make you feel about vaccines and glyphosate? After you’ve gathered and assessed your perceptions on the piece, please continue to read the text that follows.

Queuing the first impression I received...

---

Vaccines are 50% effective, so that’s good (if you’re not a pessimist) right? In addition, glyphosate raises your risk of cancer by 41%, but it won’t affect you unless you spray it onto crops. Also, it’s okay to eat fruits and vegetables treated with this pesticide because the one woman comes off upbeat, and seems intelligent.

---

Mind you – the above was my first impression before the logical side of the brain kicked in. The news media has this brilliant way of bypassing the critical factor in our heads that filters the data before it gets to us. One must observe with intent to overcome this. Even then, you must contemplate what you’ve just heard, and that's something that most people won't do.

Many will see this two-minute piece with some initial alarm and then go right back to sleep. After engaging the left hemisphere of the brain and running the info through my critical filters, I read the first banner presented on the screen which said: "CDC: THIS SEASON’S FLU SHOT IS LESS THAN 50% EFFECTIVE."

That was a genius marketing move when combined with the woman’s glass-half-empty half-full routine. Everyone fancies themselves an optimist and wants to go into things with a healthy mindset, right? The problem is, the writers designed her analogy to create a false impression, as any percent one to forty-nine is less than fifty percent effective.

Their vaccine could be 1.5% effective, and they can make the same claim which will cause people great delusion. Outside of vaccine effectiveness vaccine damage is not at all considered. For example, let’s say your son or daughter receives the flu vaccine, it’s possible they might not get the flu at all; however, they could come down with Guillain–Barré syndrome and die, or be lucky to survive the encounter.

The other topic discussed is glyphosate wherein the network’s banner graphic notifies you that the chemical raises your cancer risk by 41%. Woman #1 asks woman #2 whether her fears, uncertainty, and doubts about the weed killer is warranted. That’s when you’ll hear woman #2 chime in with her assuring tones that the study looked at farmers who spray pesticides and not your average Jane or Joe who eats vegetables.

Woman #2 is very careful not to mention that Monsanto creates special seeds which most farmers use that turns their produce into glyphosate sponges. These plants thrive when they should die-off naturally after having been exposed to the pesticide. Were the product to perish before it hit the shelf people would not purchase and consume these toxic fruits and vegetables and ergo, they'd be less likely to develop cancer.