Have We Turned the Corner on Covid Hysteria?

It’s taken 18 months, but the world slowly seems to be awakening from the hypnotic spell cast upon it regarding Covid-19.  As data becomes increasingly clarified, the most restrictive countries throw in the towel on containment, and people fight back against vaccine mandates, it’s worth examining how and why we may finally be on the road back to normalcy.

Restrictive Countries Give Up

A funny thing happened in Iceland.  Despite being an island that has restricted travel into the country, vaccinated nearly everyone, instituted a variety of restrictions, and wisely let the public health folks, and not politicians, handle the issue, the virus won. 71 percent of the population is fully vaccinated, with 84 percent of those over age 16 vaccinated, along with 99 percent of those over 70, 96 percent of those aged 60-69, 92 percent of those aged 50-59. Kids under 15 are 16 percent vaxxed. Yet 50 percent of new infections are in vaccinated individuals.

Not if Delta has anything to say about it.

Iceland's Chief Epidemiologist Þórólfur Guðnason says widespread vaccination has not led to herd immunity, saying, "What has happened… is that the Delta variant has taken over all other variants in Iceland. And it has come to light that vaccinated individuals can contract it relatively easily and spread infection." The same thing happened in New Zealand.  Even Taiwan, which had one of the lowest Covid counts in the world, could not stop Delta.

Countries Cop To Real Death Rate

Both the U.S. and many other countries have counted any death as being a Covid death if the deceased happened to test positive for the virus.  So while Covid may have been a factor in the death of someone with cardiac disease, but didn’t actually cause death, it is counted as a death.

The CDC quietly added a column to its data sets that separated out deaths that truly resulted only from Covid.  Italy recently did the same thing.  It turns out that 94 percent of US and 97.1 percent of Italy’s listed “Covid deaths” were all due to other co-morbidities.  The media “fact-checkers” nevertheless try to bury this.  They want to keep people afraid, because fear generates clicks.

Vaccine Mandates Get Pushback

Increasing numbers of workers, unions, and government employees are balking at vaccine mandates.  Other than the perpetually corrupt teacher’s union’s, most of the nation’s unions have either opposed or remained cool to vaccine mandates.

First responders have been particularly obstinate in their refusal.  Police in Chicago, L.A. County, Denver, Seattle, Detroit, Oregon, the Oklahoma National Guard, and numerous other municipalities are refusing the jabs as well as the mandates.  Some of this is due to simple objection towards experimental vaccines being required of the workforce.  In Leftist areas, the refusal is driven by the union’s desire to make every single thing part of a collective bargaining agreement.

Just say no.

President Biden’s absurd mandate for private employers with over 100 workers has been put on hold by the Fifth Circuit Court and OSHA has backed away from trying to enforce it.  The Sixth Circuit, another conservative course, will now consolidate all the challenges into one case, but in the meantime, thousands of front-line health care workers, who were championed as heroes just months ago, are being fired for refusing the vaccines.

Parents Want Control Over Their Kids

As we discovered in the Virginia gubernatorial election, parents don’t like having control over their kids taken away.  The National Institute for Health pulled together data showing the four categories for vaccine hesitancy “are religious reasons, personal beliefs or philosophical reasons, safety concerns, and a desire for more information from healthcare providers.”

A Kaiser Family Foundation poll found “Parents’ major reasons for not yet getting their children vaccinated include not enough information about the long-term effects of vaccination on children (88%), fears about side effects (79%) and fears the vaccine may impact their child’s fertility (73%).” The poll also found “20% of parents of 12- to 17-year-olds will “definitely not” get their child vaccinated, 9% will only have them get it if the school requires the vaccine and 23% plan to wait and see."

A total of 361 children have died from Covid.  The risk of infection is equivalent to every other age group, but the risk of severity is significantly lower, and risk of death is exponentially more remote.

Have a Merry Covid Christmas!

Vaccines Don’t Stop Infection 

Emerging data out of Vietnam suggests that the vaccinated may actually carry higher viral loads than those who are not, and infecting each other, thereby creating new variants in the process.

It stands to reason that vaccinated individuals are more likely to feel safe and engage in social contact, so that behavior increases in those individuals.  However, because they may contract asymptomatic Covid, they spread it to other unvaccinated individuals.  Couple that with the reducing efficacy of the vaccines over time, and it’s no wonder that faith in the jabs is waning.

What It All Means

Each of these items on their own might not be enough to cause a rebellion, but as the data filters out, resistance to restrictions on life are starting to take hold. People in states like Florida are living normal lives.  It’s only in the backward Leftist enclaves like Los Angeles and New York where one must produce papers to engage in normal activities.  Yet even there, cracks are appearing.

While L A. city now requires vaccine passports for just about any indoor activity, the  County Sheriff has announced he will not enforce the mandates.  There is no way that restaurants and bars with lower price points can or will enforce this nonsense, and many of those locations don’t care whether patrons wear masks in their six-foot-walk from door to table or not.  The question is how long it will take the upper-crust locations to decide that they will not comply.

It’s particularly notable that some school districts, many represented by the corrupt teacher’s unions, are also fighting back against student vaccine mandates.  The Calaveras School District in California refused.  Individual parents are bringing suit.

The other possible factor leading to resistance is people’s lives are now being directly affected by bad Covid policy in new ways, including inflation.  People can’t get products they take for granted because of supply chain issues, and they are costing more. “The Great Resignation” is the result of a wholesale re-examination of the meaning of life, the values we lead, and what we expect from our representatives.

These pockets of resistance are significant.  They were nearly impossible to find six months ago.  People have had enough. This may have just led to a Great Awakening: that we’re mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore.

Covid Elephants in the Room

How things have changed! The Covid “room” was once filled with white coats and blue suits, all advocating for stringent measures to fight a novel coronavirus: compulsory masks, social distancing, house arrest, punitive fines, devastating lockdowns and mandatory vaccines to eliminate the perceived threat of mass infection. And there was always space for more politicians, medical officers, presumed “experts” and media personnel to convene, often unmasked and in close proximity to one another. No longer.

The Covid “room” now seems to have shrunk, having become almost too small to accommodate a growing herd of elephants. An elephant in the room is often sufficient to damage a consensus. But by my count, there are at least eight elephants in the room trumpeting their inconvenient truths, all jostling for space, gradually crowding the previous occupants into the corners.

Elephant 1: According to the World Health Organization, no friend of skeptics, the mean Covid infection fatality rate (IFR) seems close to statistically insignificant, rounding to a figure of 0.20 percent. As the paper concludes, “Most locations probably have an infection fatality rate less than 0.20 percent.” The figure is confirmed by the Yale BMJ survey, which concludes: The IFR of Covid-19 in community-dwelling elderly people is lower than previously reported. Very low IFRs were confirmed in the youngest populations.” Indeed, “younger age strata had low IFR values (median 0.0027 percent). Similar values have been reported on many other sites and exposés, demolishing the Big Lie marshalled to terrify a population into submission to the administrative state.

Covid-free, we think.

Elephant 2: It turns out that domestic pets, mainly cats and dogs—though I have met domesticated ferrets on leashes or poking their noses out of jacket pockets—are virus shedders. Over the last few years my wife and I have lived in different parts of Vancouver, which by my lights may be the most animal friendly city in the world. On our many walks and outings, we have met innumerable masked people strolling with their unmasked dogs—some wheeling their cats in baby carriages—exploding the fable they have been living by.

Admittedly, the consensus is that animals were first infected by humans and then transmitted the virus back, though the trajectory seems on the face of it rather hard to prove. Denmark slaughtered 17 million infected minks; should cat and dog lovers do the same to their cherished pets? Or should animals be masked and social-distanced? I suspect that would be a bridge too far for pet owners who have no compunction applying the same regime to themselves and their fellow humans. As my U.K. research colleague Martin Parker (to whom I owe the impetus for this article) points out, the animal reservoir alone puts paid to the fantasy of Covid-zero.

Elephant 3: Israel, which many regard as the vanguard and petri dish of escalating Covid policy. Over 80 percent and rising of the population have received the staple two shots and over half the population have received the third booster; yet Israel is experiencing a dramatic surge in cases and deaths. Many excuses have been offered for this failure: easing restrictions too early, insufficient interest among the Haredim and Muslim communities, not enough booster shots—the list goes on. But there is no doubt that vaccine effectiveness wanes within months (always assuming that the vaccines were truly effective to begin with). Indeed, the majority of internet sites and official venues do not even trouble themselves with alibis but herald a magnificent success. The vaccines work, even if they don’t.

Elephant 4: Sweden. The country did not lock down, did not require masking, did not close the schools, and allowed most businesses to remain open. Vaccines are available on a voluntary basis. Despite the lies and dire predictions of Sweden’s virtual destruction, the country has prospered relative to others; even the BBC has had to admit, grudgingly, that Sweden has fared better than other countries. As Jeffrey Tucker shows in Liberty or Lockdown, Sweden’s  comparatively favorable results came about “because it refused to violate human rights.” 

Looking for a way out.

Elephant 5: It is now known that natural immunity is a better option than vaccine immunity. Vaccinated people may pose as great or greater a risk to society via transmission as do the unvaccinated. A Johns Hopkins University study of July 31, 2021 states: Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have similar viral loads in communities with a high prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant. Owing to robust natural immunity, people who recover from Covid are significantly less likely to transmit the virus than those who have submitted to the jab. The Lancet finds no correlation between vaccine-induced neutralizing antibody levels and viral loads or the development of symptoms.” As Grant Brown explains in an important C2C essay, we cannot inject our way out of this pandemic.

Elephant 6: Vaccine Adverse Events. There is growing anxiety among accredited health professionals and ordinary people that the vaccines generate serious side-effects that equal or outweigh their putative benefits. Passive reporting sites like VAERS in the U.S. and Yellow Card in the U.K. do not tell the whole story, recording only a small fraction, perhaps as little as 1 percent, of vaccine-caused infirmities and deaths. The real count is much disputed but appears to be unacceptably high. An encyclopedic volume by Peter and Ginger Breggin, Covid-19 and the Global Predators, presents a list of official government and medical sources attesting to the hazard, which can be dismissed only at our peril.

Elephant 7: Social collapse. The virtual destruction of the global economy; the disruption of supply chains; the casting of untold millions into poverty and solitude; the irruption of stagflation; the dismantling of the middle class and the annihilation of small business, throwing hundreds of thousands into bankruptcy, accompanied by “the greatest upward wealth transfer in modern history”; the demolition of Charter and Constitution, including the suspension of due process, the right of assembly and freedom of worship; the censorship of information; the establishment of a health cartel determining what is permitted and what is forbidden; the shuttering of schools and sequestering of children, depriving them of their pivotal formative years and blighting their future development; the mounting number of “excess deaths” owing to stress, depression, suicide and prolonged deferment of critical medical procedures, arguably eclipsing the Covid morbidity rate—all such factors lead to the stark conclusion that the orchestrated response to the virus was likely degrees of magnitude worse than the disease itself.

Ready or not, here they come!

Elephant 8: Vaxxports, the political mammoth of the herd. The Canadian edition of The Epoch Times observes that “Vaccine passports mandated by governments will create a highly intrusive surveillance system” that can force citizens “to reveal their health information but can also track their whereabouts.” Dr. Ann Cavoukian, former Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner and currently executive director of the Global Privacy and Security by Design Centre, worries that an individual’s driver’s licence, phone number and other personal information will be on record, establishing a “global infrastructure of surveillance,” in effect, the Covid State.

Of course, this is not just a Canadian instance of surveillance monitoring, but applies across the board to all Vaxxport nations. Similarly, The Sociable warns that “Covid passport mandates are fueling authoritarian social credit systems, digital identity schemes,” on the Chinese model—what is known as “corporate communism.” When one’s privacy is invaded, one’s most valuable “property” is compromised: one’s selfhood. Creating a system of medical apartheid and political oppression, the vaccine passport is the ticket to a totalitarian state.

It is true that elephants are an endangered species, no less so in the savannas of progressivist ideology and medical demagoguery. But when elephants congregate in the room, they claim a lot of space, carry considerable weight and do not consort agreeably with their adversaries. Admittedly, one must avoid the ingestion of hopium, an opioid that can enfeeble the will to act and ride the elephant. But things do change, and when the elephants finally emerge from the room, it may be triumphally and with much trumpeting.

Our Rube Goldbergian Supply Chain

The ripple effect of foolish government policy, propagated by an ignorant and biased media, has no end.  The latest knock-on effect continues to play out before our eyes, yet once again, neither the government nor the media will ever cop to it.  We’ve all heard about the supply chain disruption, but the real causes and effects are not being discussed.

The causes are partially rooted in government helicopter money dropped over the past eighteen months.  Stimulus checks, forgivable loans, 30-year SBA loans, rent moratoriums, rent assistance, eviction moratoriums – they all created reasons for people not to go to work.  While many programs have ended, many others continue.  Rent relief checks are still backlogged, and the child tax credit advances continue to deliver income so that people don’t have to work.

Fewer workers means fewer people to manufacture goods, transport goods, and stock the goods.  The result is that supply cannot meet demand, resulting in higher prices across the board (inflation).  No sector is immune.

Tough to keep ahead.

Those aren’t the only ripple effects, though.  Inflation reduces purchasing power.  So all the money that was given to people now buys less than it did, and when they eventually go back to work, their paychecks won’t stretch far enough.  Sure, the labor shortages will temporarily result in higher wages to offset the inflation, but once the labor market reaches equilibrium, those wages will fall again.

Thus, real wages – defined as wages adjusted for inflation – will actually decline.  Those same people the government was purporting to “protect” by telling them to stay home to avoid a virus with a 99.7 percent survival rate, will be unable to make ends meet.  Those that were already struggling will see their situations worsen.  Hourly compensation is up  2 percent, but real hourly compensation (inflation adjusted) is down 2.7 percent.  That’s a 4.7 percent swing in the other direction.

How then do people make ends meet?  By taking out short-term payday and installment loans, as well as pawning items.  That sends them further into debt, so that when the rent and eviction moratoriums end, they are in danger of becoming homeless. Government economic data shows just how bad things are.

Under Barack Obama, the Labor Force Participation Rate hit a 40 year low at 62.4 percent.  It improved to 63.4 percent in the pre-COVID Trump era.  Every single demographic, including women and minorities, hit bottom under Obama and recovered under Trump.

After bottoming out at 60.2 percent, the overall rate is now 61.6 percent.  That 180 basis point difference translates to nearly five million jobs.  It turns out that when five million people stay out of the workforce, there’s a supply chain problem.  Notably, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reports nearly 5.7 million people who are not in the labor force who want a job, and of those, less than 10 percent are classified as “discouraged” while the rest are not actively seeking employment.

Job losers on temporary layoff are, for the most part, back to work.  That number was 750,000 in February of 2020 and 1.1 million at the end of September.  These workers are returning to their jobs at a high rate.  That sounds great, except BLS reports that the areas with the weakest job growth in the past month are goods-producing, manufacturing, and wholesale trade.  This has also been the case across three-, six- and 12- month periods.

No thanks, we're on the dole.

Who didn’t lose their jobs during COVID?  Surprise: government workers lost the fewest of all the categories – only 1.7 million total.

The big deal, of course, is inflation.  The 12-month change in the CPI by category is the worst it has been in decades: 5.4 percent for all items, 4.6 percent for food, 4 percent for all items other than food and energy.

Energy is the real killer, however, up a whopping 25 percent.  The worst thing about energy price inflation is it filters through the entire economy.  Energy is needed to manufacture and transport goods to the middleman and end user.  It is required to heat homes, which means colder housing for all those people for whom inflation erodes purchasing power.

Want to make a burger at home?  Ground chuck beef prices are up 15 percent over the last year.  The bread for that burger bun costs 9 percent more. The cost of going out to eat rose at an average rate of about 3 percent over the past twenty years.  The rate of increase is now 4.7 percent.  The Producer Price Index for goods is up 1 percent, the most since 2012.

That’s the data, but there are other issues at play that created the supply-chain issues.  All the free government money, plus the fact that there was nowhere to spend it during the lockdowns, have resulted in surges in demand at the same time as labor shortages.

Not quite bounding over the main.

In addition, the Cato Institute points out that the entire shipping and logistics industries at our nation’s ports have been “warped by long‐​standing policies that have decreased port efficiency and unnecessarily stressed our inland supply chain infrastructure. Most notably, longshoreman unions have leveraged their ability to shut down U.S. ports (and thus much of the economy) during contentious labor negotiations to win contracts that decrease port productivity.”

Another problem goes back to the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, which requires all ships that move freight between U.S. ports to be U.S. built, crewed by U.S. citizens, and flagged in the U.S.  When supply is limited in that manner, it pushes shipping costs higher, and  offloads capacity onto land-based transport.  Trucks and trains that should be servicing the ports are on alternate jobs.

Thus, the supply chain pandemic begins and ends with government.  The lockdowns were unnecessary, causing the government to flood citizens with money, resulting in both labor shortages and demand surges, amidst obsolete logistics laws and regulations unable to cope with it. Who knew Rube Goldberg was running the country?

Enemies of the People: Dr. Fauci

Of Covid Mandates and Legal Liabilities

Last month President Biden announced an initiative that he asserts will ‘stop’ the SARS Cov-2 virus. A scientifically implausible objective, his outline included a plan to require all private businesses with 100 or more employees to ensure their employees are fully vaccinated or require weekly testing. The mandates are curious because they burden businesses in unprecedented and legally nebulous ways.

Using a mechanism referred to as an Emergency Temporary Standard through the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the administration asserts mandating vaccines will stop the transmission of the virus. However, the vaccine was neither developed for, nor indicated to arrest transmission of the virus. According to the FDA website, the vaccine is intended to “…reduce severe illness, hospitalization and death.”

So why might the Administration be issuing mandates for a vaccine that cannot achieve their stated purpose of ‘stopping the virus”? Consider possible reasons by looking through the lens of liability.

Cross my heart and hope to die.

As business-minded leaders do in the face of government overreach, a response must be developed that helps create certainty for the business. To get there in this case, one must review the most fundamental aspect of a mandate… if the business requires the action as a condition of employment, the business owns the consequence of what happens as a result. Understanding the business of vaccine liability may help a business determine whether it is in its best interest to accept the premise of the Biden Administration mandate, or perhaps consider other strategies, including legal challenges.

An important element of the liability relating to vaccines is whether the individual receives the Emergency Use Authorized (EUA)-version of the vaccine, or the newly FDA-approved, branded-version known as Comirnaty. While there is no difference in the actual drug in the syringe, there are differences in the liability protection offered under EUA for those who manufacture, distribute or in some way deliver the vaccine, compared to the FDA-approved Comirnaty.

According to the Congressional Research Service, “…in order to encourage the expeditious development and deployment of medical countermeasures during a public health emergency, the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to limit legal liability for losses relating to the administration of medical countermeasures such as diagnostics, treatments, and vaccines.”

In a declaration effective February 4, 2020, nearly six weeks before the U.S. lock-downs, the HHS Secretary invoked the PREP Act and declared Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) to be a public health emergency warranting liability protections for covered countermeasures inclusive of the available vaccines. According to the current PREP ACT, the protection against liability reaches into 2025.

Ummm...

All state and local governments, medical providers and related manufacturers and distributors of modalities for treatment of Covid-19 were exempted from liability. So for anyone who receives the EUA- version of the vaccine, which as of this writing is still the only version available in the U.S., one has no recourse from a liability perspective, except in very specific and limited circumstances should one experience an adverse event or die. However, once FDA-approved and sold under the brand name Comirnaty, liability is handled differently. Comirnaty is currently only available in Israel.

Under normal circumstances, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) provides compensation for injuries caused by most vaccines routinely administered in the U.S., such as childhood vaccines and non-pandemic seasonal influenza vaccines.

Enter mandated businesses. Once a vaccine is mandated by a private business, an entity not outlined and protected under the PREP Act, nor protected once a branded drug is available on the market, liability protection seemingly does not  exist for businesses.

Looking beyond the PREP ACT, consider the long-term efficacy data currently available. Since vaccines have only been available for a relatively short time, long-term data is simply unknown. However, that doesn’t mean the potential adverse events are not a liability for which a mandated company must model and prepare.

Consider the language from the FDA’s website, pertaining to long-term efficacy of the FDA-approved Comirnaty regarding Myocarditis and Pericarditis.

Additionally, the FDA conducted a rigorous evaluation of the post-authorization safety surveillance data pertaining to myocarditis and pericarditis following administration of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 Vaccine and has determined that the data demonstrate increased risks, particularly within the seven days following the second dose. The observed risk is higher among males under 40 years of age compared to females and older males. The observed risk is highest in males 12 through 17 years of age. Available data from short-term follow-up suggest that most individuals have had resolution of symptoms. However, some individuals required intensive care support. Information is not yet available about potential long-term health outcomes. The Comirnaty Prescribing Information includes a warning about these risks.

Add to this, we now believe the SARS CoV-2 virus was modified in a Chinese lab and the liability issues are more nebulous. A recently exposed a 2018 grant proposal submitted by Peter Daszak of the Eco Health Alliance, to DARPA, the Pentagon’s research and development arm. The proposal sought funding to engineer a Furin Cleavage site (FCS) into a beta coronavirus. The FCS was intended to increase the virulence of the virus in humans. DARPA deemed it too dangerous and denied the grant.

A year later, in 2019, a beta coronavirus virus with a FCS shows up having potentially ‘leaked’ from a Wuhan lab at which Daszak was coincidently using National Institute of Health (NIH) funding to make gain-of-function modifications to beta family coronaviruses. A significant percentage of the spike protein from the original strain of SARS Cov-2 are in the vaccine now being mandated. What other enhancements were made to that virus and inadvertently stitched into the vaccine? The answers are presently unknown.

Companies must decide whether mandating the vaccine for their most valuable asset, their employees, is a sound business decision. Can businesses confidently assert that without a legal fight, they will not have some liability in the face of potential short and long-term health issues associated with the currently available vaccine?

The Coming Viral Dictatorship

A pivotal feature of dictatorial regimes is the institutional lie, expressed as an unfounded message of millennial hope, an ever-changing set of legislated policies, and the tendency of authoritarian leaders to violate their own axioms and edicts. We see this happening before our eyes as a Covid-19 tyranny takes root on our own soil.

The manifold inconsistencies and deceptions that circulate regarding the draconian mandates and coercive measures imposed by Big Government to combat the Covid pandemic should by now have alerted the public to their suspicious nature. We have observed the extent to which these ordinances are regularly flouted by the authorities, who have been seen without their masks, disregarding social distancing rules, and travelling during lockdowns. Such exemptions are obviously a privilege reserved only to the elites, who do not scruple to lecture us on the current proprieties.

One popular slogan that we meet everywhere, on radio and TV, on the Internet, and emblazoned on ubiquitous signage, is particularly irritating: “We’re All In This Together.” Clearly, we are not. While small business owners and entrepreneurs struggle with bankruptcy as their establishments are closed down, Big Box stores operate at full capacity, teachers retain handsome salaries while refusing to enter their classrooms, government personnel continue to be paid in absentia, and politicians suffer no loss of ample remuneration.

This means you.

Weddings, church services, funerals, social gatherings, holiday celebrations and anti-lockdown protests are either curtailed or banned to prevent proximity transmission of the virus; BLM demonstrations involving thousands of people cheek-by-jowl agitating for “social justice” are permitted and encouraged. Doctors are here to serve their patients; now many have embraced telemedicine, which does not impact their fees as it does their effectiveness. Diagnosis at a distance is not reliable medicine, though it is lucrative medicine. The overall hypocrisy that confronts us at every level of political, corporate and professional society is so blatant as to be unbelievable—except it is entirely believable. We are manifestly not in this all together, not by a long shot.

Another sedative to which we are constantly exposed is the official platitude that the mandates under which we malinger are intended “to protect public health and safety.” The collateral effects of this faux campaign have, in fact, endangered public health and safety. The category of “excess deaths” owing to delayed medical procedures for cancer, Alzheimer's, heart ailments and diabetes, among other conditions, including critical stress, depressive suicides, and adverse reactions and deaths linked to the Covid vaccines now arguably surpass Covid morbidity numbers—which themselves appear to have been grossly inflated. Indeed, in a crowning irony, the virus may itself be “boosted” by iatrogenic interventions. One need only consult virologist and immunologist Robert Malone, the actual inventor of the mRNA vaccines, who warns against them as Covid-19 suppressants. 

We were assured that vaccine passports were the route to “public health and safety” and that life would soon be back to normal. Now triple vaxxing, masks and renewed lockdowns have become mandatory in many jurisdictions and nations. The temptation to blame and penalize the unvaccinated for any upsurge of “cases” is spreading and may easily translate into second-class status for the unvaccinated and a policy of forced internment. 

But who are the “unvaccinated”?  Israel’s Director of the Ziv Medical Center Dr. Salman Zarka admits that the definition is changing: “We are updating what it means to be vaccinated.” In the absence of a third jab (and counting), even the double-vaxxed fall into the category of “unvaccinated.” As Kit Knightly writes in off-guardian, “Israel is the petri dish”; if it works there, the rest of the world will follow suit. Of course, in another sense of the phrase, it doesn’t really “work there.” A multi-sourced chart published in the Financial Times, comparing over-vaxxed Israel to under-vaxxed Egypt, provides a sobering metric. Egypt is doing at least an order of magnitude better than Israel. Equally distressing, on August 22 West Virginia governor Jim Justice reported a 26 percent surge among the fully vaccinated and a 25 percent increase in vaccinated deaths. This surely is not a one-off.

Where do you think you're going?

It should be obvious by this time that we are dealing with a vast shell game. In an open letter to the Canadian Minister of Health, McGill University theology professor Douglas Farrow argues, correctly, that vaccine mandates are incoherent. That is surely the right word. Masks were supposed to keep us safe. They didn’t do very well, so the first jab was introduced, which should have offered immunity. Then came a second jab, followed by a third and counting. Then came the vaccine passports. Meanwhile, as noted, double-and-triple-jabbed Israelis are still fighting infection and transmission and have now even been refused entry to Portugal and to open, prosperous Sweden.

It is no surprise, at least among the concerned, that distrust is growing of our health authorities, the political class and the collusive “misleadia,” assiduously promoting a medical dogma that is plainly muddled, deceptive and hypocritical. It is also, to put it bluntly, totalitarian.

The next step is the construction of quarantine or internment camps, as currently planned in Australia. Similarly, in the U.S. the CDC has proposed a “shielding approach” that would establish “a group of shelters such as schools, community buildings within a camp/sector…where high-risk individuals (the unvaccinated) are physically isolated together.” As if this weren’t plain enough, the proposal states that “High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or ‘green zones’ established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level… They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.” 

Meanwhile, the National Guard is in process of hiring “internment resettlement specialists” to supervise detention operations and “provide guidance to individual prisoners.” It is not clear from the explanatory description what this program precisely entails, but it doesn’t augur well. On August 6, 2021, governor Bill Lee of Tennessee signed an executive order authorizing involuntary internment of targeted citizens, under the convenient designation of “regulatory flexibilities.”

Not to be outdone, the Department of Homeland Security claims that those resisting the vaccines pose a “potential terror threat.” If you oppose the vaccines, you are an “extremist.” The document is very clear: “These extremists may seek to exploit the emergence of COVID-19 variants by viewing the potential re-establishment of public health restrictions across the United States as a rationale to conduct attacks.” Bill HR 4980 currently before Congress would place unvaccinated persons on a No-Fly list and lead inexorably to a No-Buy gun control law. A No-Buy gun list would prevent people from arming themselves. As they say, you have been warned.

Welcome to Australia.

My own country of Canada marches in lockstep with the heavily mandated nations of Israel, the U.K. and, of course, Australia and parts of the U.S. According to NaturalNews, the Canadian government has ordered enough vaccines to inoculate every man, woman and child many times over for the next three years, having stockpiled 293 million doses for a population of 38 million. The report continues: Just months ago, the Covid-19 vaccines were hailed as a ‘miracle of science’ that were putting an ‘end to the pandemic’… But now the narrative has changed” and we can expect more censorship, travel restriction, contact tracing, deprivation of human rights, dodgy testing, and mask and vaccine mandates. The fear is that even supermarkets may eventually be placed off limits for the unvaccinated, forcing one to rely on doorstep deliveries. 

As we’ve seen, this despotic program is being implemented in the name of “protecting public health and safety.” It appears, rather, as if it is being put in practice to create a system of “vaccine enslavement” and authoritarian control. Our Prime Minister, after all, is on record as admiring the “basic dictatorship” of Communist China.

What next? One shudders to think. Where next? Who's next?

Those Covid Vaccines: Blessing or Curse?

Don’t want to get too provocative but wouldn’t it have been better if the vaccines hadn’t appeared at warp speed? Or appeared at all? At least these improvised vaccines. Many more people would have died, millions perhaps, is the official line. I am certainly not in favour of deaths. And maybe the official line is correct, and my questioning is wayward. It could be. I don’t know.

Let me start at a conceptual level with two propositions; neither of which should be particularly contentious. First, correlation is not the same thing as causation. Second, as the French political economist Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850) put it, adverse unseen effects of policies and actions, collateral damage if you like, often dwarf seen effects. To the first proposition:

Public Health England produces regular and updated information on the virus and vaccinations in England. Its Covid-19 vaccine surveillance report for week 32 (Aug 12, 2021), claimed, based on modelling, that “84,600 deaths and 23,395,000 infections have been prevented [up to 6 August] as a result of the COVID-19 vaccination programme.”

Possibly, but only 60,000 lives saved (to 23 July) were claimed in the previous report, quite a jump; and recall Neil Ferguson’s Imperial College modelling back in March 2020, which grossly exaggerated the likely deaths from Covid-19; and keep in mind also those “over-heating” climate models.

Trust the science.

Modelling of complex real phenomena is always tenuous. Have all relevant variables been included, logged as appropriate, and measured accurately? Have all irrelevant, distracting variables been omitted? There is no way of knowing. Moreover, when modelling says that the change in one variable is caused by the change in another, we know that the two are correlated. Models are not magical. Correlation is everything.

Suppose an expensive large-scale vaccination program was put in place and after a time there was an observed fall in infections and in the rate of hospitalisations and deaths per infection. You would need a very clever, and non-confirmation-biased, model not to show a strong causal connection. But there are other possible contributors.

The virus might have become less pathogenic through time as viruses generally do. Perhaps the cohort of the population particularly susceptible to the virus caught it in the early waves before the vaccinations became available or widespread. Perhaps spring and summer in the northern hemisphere has contributed to an attenuation of the virus’s virulence.

Bear in mind I am not at all saying that the vaccinations don’t work. The question is how effectively and for how long? Any hypothesis that they don’t work nearly well enough has been undercut by correlation. The vaccines are now somewhat bullet proof. Yet cases are rising again. For example, the rise in cases in the U.K. and Israel is put down to immunity waning and the consequential need for booster jabs. Those vaccinated can still catch the virus and pass it on. Conclusion: need for a booster jab. According to a CDC study and Public Health England, the viral load of those vaccinated who catch the virus is about equal to those unvaccinated. Conclusion: need for a booster jab.

Booster jabs and tinkering with the vaccines may well become the public-health objective. Slipping into the shadows will be the objective of preventing serious illness and deaths. It’s called “Solutioneering” after the philosopher Roger James. Means become ends.

They can't hurt, they might help.

Without vaccines much more focus would have been put on treatments. Natural immunity and treatments (even discounting the politically unacceptable ones like Ivermectin and HCQ due to their association with the dreaded Donald Trump) might well have put us in a better place right now. Of course, it’s counter-factual. There is no way of knowing. What we know is that boosters will be on offer. And maybe as frequently as every six months, judging by the success the virus is having in surviving the first round of vaccines.

Is there a way out? There is. It depends on the virus. We need the virus to become adept at infecting the vaccinated while becoming progressively less lethal. There has been speculation to that effect in the U.K. Natural selection might work in our favour. Mind you, a terrible outcome of a more deadly virus circumventing vaccines isn't worth thinking about, so I won't.

Vaccinations need to be seen as becoming redundant, despite any kicking and screaming from drug companies. Absent this outcome, the incipient collateral damage from vaccine dependency will become endemic. What will that look like?

First, loss of freedom. Vaccines are shepherding in identity papers. Worse, in this digital age, they’re shepherding in Big Brother. There will be data bases. They will know where you’ve been.

Media shills maintain that this is no different in principle from needing a yellow fever jab to travel to certain tropical places. Or, from parents effectively being obliged to ensure their children have certain prescribed vaccinations. No, these requirements are not remotely in the same ballpark as burdening the ordinary business of life with a need to establish one’s medical credentials before entering football stadiums, night clubs, shopping centres, churches, trains, buses and the like.

Second, division; to wit, effectively, medical apartheid. Extraordinarily, some putative conservative commentators are pushing the line that the way out of lockdowns is to provide those vaccinated with normal freedoms.  Implicitly that means denying those same God-given freedoms to the unvaccinated. How long before the unvaccinated need to wear badges? Here in Australia you can see numbers of them on Rupert Murdoch’s Sky News.

What could go wrong?

Third, degradation of human interaction. Vaccines which don’t prevent infection and transmission, point to continuing mask mandates. We know those on the left love masks. They will need little reason to insist we keep wearing them.

“Approximately 60-65% of all meaning in human encounters derives from non-verbal clues,” according to an article by Burgoon and Hoobler in the Handbook of Interpersonal Communication, 2002."The nonverbal component of the communication process is as important to the teacher/student relationship as the verbal component and often much more so," according McCroskey and Payne in Nonverbal Behaviour in Interpersonal Relations, 1991. It's not contentious. Covering faces, masking, is no small imposition. It's a crippling one.

The response of governments to Covid has already severely damaged human well-being. Continual rounds of vaccinations and all that goes with them is a road to a sickening future. Ripping the agenda out of the hands of public health officials is one key to a better future. More political leaders like Florida governor Ron DeSantis. Fewer sell-out conservatives in the media. But more than anything,  a relatively benign, highly transmissible, virus mutation for which vaccinations have no answer.

Regarding Covid-19, Public Policy v. Panic

Nothing has better demonstrated to me the impossible clash of true science -- the constant search for and the skeptical sifting and winnowing of empirical evidence -- with public policy than the worldwide response to the Covid-19 virus about which so little was known  when it first appeared.

Science, like the Western legal advocacy system, depends on proponents and opponents clashing and presenting their best relevant arguments for us to decide an issue, but the search in science on any issue must be ongoing, and in law and public policy there are practical and procedural time limits. It would be wonderful if there were some alternative responsible forum to quickly test the assumptions of policy makers (often contradictory and based on little or poor evidence), but there isn’t much leeway to my knowledge.

The Western court systems are generally a reasonable way to test the validity of fact but the timing problems make it almost impossible to do so rapidly enough to matter when it comes to this disease. Good public policy on scientific issues should be made with far greater humility than it presently is, and perhaps the only way to get around the normal strictures is to create a rapid response team of experts critical of the public policy gurus who can file affidavits in support of their findings and persuade courts to issue temporary injunctions pending full expedited hearings. Absent that, the only way to deal with this overreaching is resistance, and -- down the road -- the ballot box. When it's often too late.

The face of the medical bureaucracy: Rochelle Walensky

This week the  CDC announced new guidelines suggesting fully vaccinated people should again mask. Among other things,"It added a recommendation for fully vaccinated people to wear a mask in public indoor settings in areas of substantial or high transmission."

The CDC recommends universal indoor masking for all teachers, staff, students, and visitors to schools, regardless of vaccination status. Director Rochelle Walensky stated this week that “fully vaccinated people have just as much viral load as the unvaccinated, making it possible for them to spread the virus to others,” so school children should be masked. She should be ignored if it her claim is not supported by equally sound research -- and it isn't. It's based instead on data from a single study in India, where different vaccines were in use, and was so deficient it was rejected in peer review.

She’s not alone, however. There has been a drumbeat to reinstate some of the most loathsome and freedom-destroying diktats we’ve just come out from under. Organizations and businesses are demanding employees be fully vaccinated and some even requiring vaccinated persons to mask. How do these square with the feminist slogan, “my body, my choice,” and the concept of privacy of medical information in HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act)? How are these requirements that you prove you’ve taken the vaccine even constitutional?

Loader Loading...
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

On July 18  a U.S. District Court decided preliminarily the first test case I know of against the new restrictions, Klassen v. Trustees of Indiana University. Law Professor Eugene Volokh , a legal scholar worth respect, explains why the Court denied a preliminary injunction sought by the students against being forced to mask, social distance and  vaccinate or qualify for an exemption on religious or medical reasons. 

Under guiding principles of federalism, our Constitution preserves the power of the States, within constitutional limits, to adopt laws to provide for public health and safety. Twice the United States Supreme Court has upheld state authority to compel reasonable  vaccinations. [The court is referring here to Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905) and Zucht v. King (1922). -EV] The States don't have arbitrary power, but they have discretion to act reasonably in protecting the public's health.

Students at Indiana University have a significant liberty protected by the Constitution—refusing unwanted medical treatment based on bodily autonomy. The Fourteenth Amendment says no state may "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." U.S. Const. amend. XIV § 1. Given this due process protection of liberty, longstanding constitutional law prevents a public university—an arm of the State—from mandating a vaccine for its students unless it has rationally pursued a legitimate interest in public health for its campus community.

Does this mean that it’s constitutional for the university to issue such a mandate? Not exactly. The students sought injunctive relief, not a final decision on the merits. As Volokh notes, the injunctive relief “requires a strong showing that they will likely succeed on the merits of their claims, that they will sustain irreparable harm, and that the balance of harms and public interest favor such a remedy.”

You can always transfer, kids.

But the students have other options which the court had to balance -- they could apply for a medical deferral, take the semester off (the mandate applies only for the coming semester), attend another university or attend online. (In this respect the students have more options and may have had a weaker case for injunctive relief than might some other litigants covered by similar mandates.) And in a request for injunctive relief there is usually no opportunity to fully flesh out that these directives are unnecessary in the public interest, unreasonable, and therefore unconstitutional .

In a nutshell here’s the legal problem: testing the reasonableness of the state action would take a great deal of time, given the number of conflicting expert opinions on a scientific matter -- one on which we have so little empirical evidence  and where the evidence seems to be so quickly changing. Adding to that is that the mandates tend -- as here -- to be of short duration so that by the time the issue would be resolved it would likely be moot.

It would be wonderful if it were easier. It would be even more wonderful if the mass media and social media which combined in the Trusted News Initiative  to restrict information contrary to the official public health directives and the latter unable to hide behind the protections of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 to restrict diverse views on these mandates. More open discussion might improve state decisions and lessen the impact of scare accounts on judicial reviewers of those decisions. 

In any hearing on the merits here’s some of the evidence I expect the opponents of these mandates would produce;

  1. The mortality rate from Covid-19 in the U.S. has been low (affecting mostly the elderly and those with co-morbidities) and is now at the lowest point .Even the new bugaboo about cases from a new "delta" variant is overblown as the  “cases” are asymptomatic or very mild. Harvard Medical School Professor Martin Kulldorff pointed this out on Twitter, writing that “In [the] USA, COVID mortality is now the lowest since the start of the pandemic in March 2020.” He reports: "Far more people were dying from COVID-19 months ago as we were winding down restrictions than are dying today as some call to reinstate them." With mortality so low, it’s hard to argue that reinstatement of Covid restrictions is reasonable.
  2. Government restrictions ignore the fact that most of the U.S. has natural immunity to the virus. Some 80percent of American adults are immune to the virus: More than 64 percent have received at least one vaccine dose and, of those who haven’t, roughly half have natural immunity from prior infection. There’s ample scientific evidence that natural immunity is effective and durable, and public-health leaders should pay it heed. Only around 10 percent of Americans have had confirmed positive Covid tests, but four to six times as many have likely had the infection.
  3. At this point we know enough about treatment so that Covid 19 or its variants are easily treatable at home. It should be engaged in its early stages, not when hospitalization is required because no treatment has been received.
  4. Like every other drug or vaccine the Covid vaccinations are toxic at some level in some percent of people as Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the technology behind the mRNA gene therapy (the Covid vaccinations) indicates at the link.
  5.  There is already a cheap, effective, fast treatment in the early stages of Covid-19: Ivermectin.  “The statistically significant evidence suggests that it is safe and works both for treating and preventing the disease.”

So, on one hand we have reputable scientists confirming low Covid mortality, broad natural immunity to the virus, easy rapid treatability of the disease at home and seemingly deliberate  underreporting of vaccine toxicity by public health officials. The problem remains how to bring this information to judicial fora in time override the unconstitutional--because unnecessary and unreasonable -- restrictions on liberty.

   

At Every Level, Government Has Botched the Covid Response

One day, even Democrats will realize that government has not only botched the response to Covid-19 at every level, and at every step of the way, but that it's generated more harm for more Americans than virtually any other policy in modern American history. That’s not hyperbole.

How and why was the response so poor, and what can we do to halt this fiasco from happening again?

The “how” emanates from the “why,” and the “why” in entirely rooted in fear.  In the early days of the virus, we simply didn’t have enough information about what we were dealing with.  It was all rumor, stoked by the media to generate fear to generate clicks and eyeballs.

With fear as the root cause, and the media as its ally, politicians became terrified.

Because the top priority for any politician is to remain in office (power), their decisions are inexorably tied to that priority, with the exception of those relatively few conservatives and libertarians who actually have integrity.  No politician wants to be the one who's known for killing thousands of people, so it was much easier to take a draconian approach and kill everyone slowly over a number of months and years than risk killing them with the virus.  This kicks the can down the road.

That approach also protects them because, should scads of people die from the virus, it would generate a fierce emotional response from everyone, including Democrats.

CDC, meet NIH, meet NIAID...

Moreover, explaining how and why lockdowns had terrible systemic effects is an intellectual and complicated argument.  Because Democrats don’t understand economics in the first place, the chance of blowback was far less.  Indeed, just look at how Democrats focus on the emotional elements of everything about Covid and paid no attention at all to the collateral damage.

Some of the more skeptical citizens believe all of this to have been intentional on the part of policymakers.  That gives Democrats too much credit.  It overlooks a simpler and more elegant explanation: politicians are nothing special.  They are normal people who don't have any expertise in anything.  They relied on “experts,” who offered narrow perspectives that didn’t take holistic public health policy into account when providing parochial advice.

To an epidemiologist, every virus looks like a nuclear bomb.  To a public health doctor, every virus is a situation to be managed effectively and efficiently.  You see the distinction.

This, by the way, is all the more reason why governors Kristi Noem of South Dakota and Ron DeSantis of Florida are to be commended.  They have integrity.  They used their own minds and stuck to their principles and have been proven right.  As the studies over collateral damage are eventually concluded, expect to find far less drug and alcohol abuse, spousal and child abuse, anxiety, depression, and suicide in those states.

That’s the “why.”  The “how” derived directly from this ever-present foundation of fear, which has undergirded every single Covid-19 policy decision at every level of government. The politicians need to show everyone that they are on top of the crisis, so they grasp at straws, and grasp the worst possible choice for a “test” to determine who has the virus and who doesn’t.

Another mask or two might have helped.

PCR testing was never intended as a diagnostic tool, according to its Nobel Prize-winning inventor.  The test shoves a swab up your nose and scrapes around for everything, and then the PCR procedure amplifies what’s in the background. As inventor Kary Mullis says, “It allows you to take a miniscule amount of anything and make it measureable and then talk about it.”

If the sample results are amplified 35 times, everyone would test negative.  If the sample results are amplified 60 times, everyone would test positive.

Thus, what nobody really knows or understands is that the number of positive cases are likely vastly over-reported.  Yet because the government proclaimed it the gold standard, it became the gold standard, because the government was so terrified of Covid that it had to lock onto something that gave it the feeling of control.  “Here’s a test!  Let’s go with it!” The result was an unreliable test that produced unreliable data that was presented as gospel.

Indeed, the data provided has never had any context.  All we get is raw "case" and death counts.  One must dig (a lot) to find how those cases distribute across age, location, comorbidity, and economic status.  Even then, we are not provided information regarding how many cases were asymptomatic or non-serious.

Suddenly, the news is all about “rising case and death counts,” not that 80 percent of deaths were in the elderly and 94 percent had at least one co-morbidity.

Without that context, the politicians decided that the entire country must be locked down, regardless of consequences.  Even worse, fearful politicians like Gov. Cuomo shoved the elderly who were sick right into nursing homes, turning them into death camps.

The terror prevented these politicians from making rational public health decisions, and the ignorant media took their lead.   There was never any public health campaign, and there is still not , to push the simple preventative measures that we know enhance immunity:  vitamin D, zinc, and quercetin.

We still don’t have clear answers as to why HCQ and ivermectin – cheap and widely available therapies – were demonized and thrown out instead of letting people making their own choices. Heck, they could have at least done the same clinical trials that the vaccines went through.

Why not?  Because government is reactionary, not pro-active.  Just as none of the pols wanted to be the guys who let millions die of Covid on their watch, none of them wanted to take the risk by advocating other measures, just in case they don’t work.

Government by its nature can only react with a one-size-fits-all approach, because government never considers the individual.  It sees a herd.

Our grand mistake as conservative Americans is that we gave them a herd.  Nobody stepped up to disobey.  Nobody chose to keep their business open.  Nobody chose to defy mask mandates, even in areas where law enforcement said it would not enforce such stupid mandates.

As a new round of mask mandates looms, we can’t let that happen again.

Don’t Combat Covid Hysteria with Vaccine Hysteria

Conservatives are supposed to be rational, thoughtful, and logical, relying on data and reason to reach supportable conclusions. These conclusions form the basis for our beliefs and policy, and is one of the ways that we distinguish ourselves from Leftists. Regrettably, however, there is a disturbing trend that runs counter to these tenets regarding the Covid-19 vaccines. If we are to fight Covid-19 hysteria, we must do it with data and facts, not unsupportable hysteria surrounding the vaccines or anything else. Vaccinations, like everything else, are a matter of choice, so let's choose wisely.

All of the data in this article is consistent across the USA and the world.

About the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization

The FDA has a rigorous process for drugs to earn approval from the agency. In circumstances like a pandemic, there is an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) process. The process is exactly the same, but occurs on an expedited basis. What matters the most is not the timeline so much as number of participants. All three vaccines cleared Phase I and II. For Phase III trials, Pfizer had 43,000 participants, Moderna had 30,000, and J&J had 40,000. Patients were followed for 60 days after treatment. All trials included a placebo group, so we’re concerned with events in the vaccine group.

All vaccinations may result in “adverse events,” i.e. relatively minor side effects. Those don’t concern us. Serious Adverse Events (SAE), or “any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, or resulted in persistent disability/incapacity,” were almost non-existent.

The CDC’s data since the advent of the EUAs has shown similar lack of serious adverse events.

Statistically, you're safe.

On the basis of aggregate population, a given individual is ten times more likely to die from Covid-19 than from a vaccine. After eliminating the Covid-19 deaths from people age 65 or older, a person is four times more likely to die from Covid-19 than the vaccine, with the chances of a SAE being roughly equal to dying from the virus.

If we are going to call out the absurdity of locking the world down over a virus with a 0.2 percent chance of killing the general population, in which 94 percent of deaths were in those 65 or older with an average of three comorbidities, it is incumbent that we call out equivalent absurdities regarding vaccines fears.

What About the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) Data?

Anyone can make an entry into the VAERS. There is no supporting evidence required. There is no medical professional follow-up required. Covid-19 reports have been tracked down per the above link, supporting the low rate of SAEs.

Some 551,172 reports regarding the vaccines have been made to VAERS. Even if all of them were legitimate and verified, they represent 0.17 percent of the 321 million doses administered in the U.S. thus far. The unverified count for death, permanent disability and life-threatening reports numbered just over 29,000, representing an infinitesimal 0.009 percent of the vaccine population. That’s on par with each manufacturer’s data. Again, those numbers are unverified. The actual number is likely less.

Interestingly, the number of reported deaths from the virus is 598,624 out of a population of 328 million. The total VAERS reports are nearly identical to the number of deaths attributable to the virus for almost exactly the same size data population.

Are The Vaccines Effective?

The aggregate incidence of Covid-19 in the U.S. is about 11 percent, assuming testing is accurate, which it probably is not. It is likely that PCR-testing gives a significant number of false positives. It is also unclear just how many deaths are truly attributable to the virus alone.

However, we can look to data from Johns Hopkins to determine any correlation between vaccine administration and case count. By clicking on the map of virtually any state or country, vaccinations are correlated with a decline in case count. It’s critical to note that this is merely a correlation, and does not prove causation. A rigorous statistical analysis would be required to determine the rate of case decline at various points before and during vaccination periods. Indeed, case count had already started to decline from their peak when the vaccines began to be distributed.

However, Pfizer reported 95 percent effectiveness with its vaccine, Moderna reported 94 percent, and J&J reported 64 percent. “Effective” does not mean you are immune. It means your body will respond as designed to limit the severity of any illness.

"Vaccinated" doesn't mean "immune."

Are the Vaccines Necessary?

It is notable that 94 percent of all virus deaths occurred in people who had an average of three comorbidities. 80 percent of deaths were in those persons aged 65 and older. About 74,000 people under age 54 have died from Covid in the U.S., or about 12 percent of the total. Roughly 14,000 have died under age 39, of which slightly more than 1,000 were under age 24.

In Sweden, where restrictions were far looser than in equally-populated Los Angeles County, there are fewer confirmed Covid cases (10.8 percent vs 12.6 percent). Sweden’s population is 37 percent vaccinated, while L.A. County is at 70 percent. Sweden’s death rate is 1.46 percent vs. L.A. County’s 2 percent.

The fairly strong inference here is that the lockdowns made no difference. Yet one other possible inference is that vaccinations made no material difference. That’s because the virus had already burned through the most vulnerable populations (the sick and the elderly).

No More Myths:

  1. No, the vaccines don’t “change your RNA.”  This presentation offers a solid explanation of how the mRNA vaccine works.
  2. No, the spike protein doesn't make you ill. See above.
  3. No, the vaccines are not some sinister plot by Bill Gates to reduce population.
  4. No, Big Pharma is not in league with the government to put poison in your body. The only way to encourage private enterprise to develop vaccines was to remove liability.
  5. No, the CCCP did not intentionally release the virus. It would make for a really lousy bioweapon that only kills old and/or sick people. China depends on the global economy, especially that of the U.S., for its own economic health (for now). Had this been intentional, multiple people would have been deliberately infected and flown around the world to spread it. That didn’t happen.

World's worst bio-weapon? Or yummy soup!

As sad as it is to hear stories from people who have lost a loved one as an apparent result of a vaccination, it is critical to recognize that these are anecdotal incidents no different from those of people who say they know someone “young and healthy” who died from Covid. The chances of either occurring are extremely remote. In neither case can any broad conclusion be drawn.

Why is the government at every level pushing everyone to get vaccinated? It isn't some conspiracy. It's because politicians have been reactionary from the start, terrified that people will die, they will get blamed, and lose their jobs and power. They are doing what they always do -- covering their collective and individual asses.

Reason.  Logic.  Data.  Analysis. That’s what makes us special. Keep it that way.