COVID-19

[JohnRoberts]

A judge declared the travel mask mandate unconstitutional.
===
I've been watching audiences at basketball games and don't see many masks.

Walmart took down the mask signs, Post Office still requires masks.

JR

 

[hodad]

A Trump-appointed judge who was rated "unqualified" by the ABA when nominated to the federal judiciary. More judicial activism from far right extremists.

 

[fallout]

Must be a plane full of right wingers

@hodad, no one cares about masks anymore. Even the liberal loons in my neck of the woods couldn't care less with the exception of a few nut cases.

 

[57sputnik]

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...hites-vows-work-harder-get-people-vaccinated/

While vowing to ramp up biomedical tyranny and the effort to get more Americans vaccinated, U.S. Health and Human Services Director Xavier Becerra Experimental claimed the “safe and effective” mRNA shots are killing people with dark skin at a much higher rate than those with light skin. “By the way, we know that vaccines are killing people of color — blacks, Latinos, indigenous people — at about two times the rate of white Americans,” Becerra explained during a digital “White House Convening on Equity” seminar on April 14...

But the government needs to “work” harder to vaccinate Americans who have refrained from getting inoculated, he argued.

Eugenics? Depopulation?

 

[AnalogPackrat]

A Trump-appointed judge who was rated "unqualified" by the ABA when nominated to the federal judiciary. More judicial activism from far right extremists.

Funny how the Biden admin isn't bothering to challenge this "horrible" decision. Huh. Upholding individual rights against government overreach isn't activism, it's what the Judiciary should be doing.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Funny how the Biden admin isn't bothering to challenge this "horrible" decision. Huh. Upholding individual rights against government overreach isn't activism, it's what the Judiciary should be doing.

• The Biden administration said it will likely appeal a federal judge’s ruling that struck down coronavirus-related mask mandates on planes and other forms of public transportation.
• The DOJ and the CDC “disagree with the district court’s decision and will appeal, subject to CDC’s conclusion that the order remains necessary for public health,” the DOJ said.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

• The Biden administration said it will likely appeal a federal judge’s ruling that struck down coronavirus-related mask mandates on planes and other forms of public transportation.
• The DOJ and the CDC “disagree with the district court’s decision and will appeal, subject to CDC’s conclusion that the order remains necessary for public health,” the DOJ said.

I saw the news shortly after I posted. If they really felt strongly about it they wouldn't have deferred to CDC. Seems obvious they're just looking for political cover under the guise of "the science."

 

[fazer]

‎The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie on Apple Podcasts

Dr Jay Bhattacharya is the guess for the reason podcast. “How to avoid Absolutely Catastrophic Mistakes “ Very interesting analysis of the lack of focus in authority figures policy’s while demanding adherence to singleminded policy, for a never before seen reaction to a pandemic. Also examining the aftermath of people’s loss of faith in public institutions like the NIH and the WHO as well as many other institutions. It’s time for new people to take over for these organizations with a more collaborative view on matters.

 

[fallout]

Funny.. Skipping around that podcast, it sounds a lot like stuff that was being deemed 'a conspiracy' not so long ago by the experts.

Seems like this guy had it figured out for a while. I'll give it a listen, thanks.

 

[57sputnik]

https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/s...prevalent-among-vaccinated-unvaccinated-study

 

[cyrano]

As usual, statistics can't be read by reporters, nor by MD's...

“These extra cases among men aged 16–24 correspond to a 5 times increased risk after Comirnaty and 15 times increased risk after Spikevax compared to unvaccinated,” Dr. Rickard Ljung, a professor and physician at the Swedish Medical Products Agency and one of the principal investigators of the study, told The Epoch Times in an email.

Sounds terrible doesn't it?

I'm pretty certain either the reporter didn't understand what the Dr. was telling him, or the Dr. was quoted out of context. Here's what the study tells us:

These findings are compatible with between 4 and 7 excess events in 28 days per 100 000 vaccinees after BNT162b2, and between 9 and 28 excess events per 100 000 vaccinees after mRNA-1273.

Which is definitely worth noting, but nothing out of the ordinary.

 

[scott2000]

Which is definitely worth noting, but nothing out of the ordinary.

Seeing things like rates per 100000 in different contexts holds different weights... i.e. hospitalizations or deaths. Vaccinated vs unvaccinated.

 

[fallout]

Close to a 99% survival rate. Sounds terrible doesnt it?

 

[AnalogPackrat]

As usual, statistics can't be read by reporters, nor by MD's...



Sounds terrible doesn't it?

It does when you take into account the extremely low risk that Covid-19 presents to members of this age group.

I'm pretty certain either the reporter didn't understand what the Dr. was telling him, or the Dr. was quoted out of context. Here's what the study tells us:



Which is definitely worth noting, but nothing out of the ordinary.

Again, why push to vaccinate people who have extremely low risk already? If it was someone in your family who was negatively affected by "nothing out of the ordinary" wouldn't you feel differently?

Why are the Moderna developers now asking for approval in the USA to vaccinate children between 6 months and 6 years old? Hasn't it already been clearly shown that children who have no comorbidity factors (the vast majority) have practically zero risk from Covid? What happened to the Hippocratic Oath? To common sense, even?

 

[cyrano]

It does when you take into account the extremely low risk that Covid-19 presents to members of this age group.


Again, why push to vaccinate people who have extremely low risk already? If it was someone in your family who was negatively affected by "nothing out of the ordinary" wouldn't you feel differently?

Why are the Moderna developers now asking for approval in the USA to vaccinate children between 6 months and 6 years old? Hasn't it already been clearly shown that children who have no comorbidity factors (the vast majority) have practically zero risk from Covid? What happened to the Hippocratic Oath? To common sense, even?

This is data we only have because of widespread vaccination. If there hadn't been a push, less people would've been vaccinated and the data might not be available at all.

It's easy to be critical in hindsight. Imagine you needed to take the decision when all of this started.

Someone in my family is affected. She might die because of Covid. Yet if she dies, it's from cancer...

It's all very easy to stand on the sideline and be critical.

 

[cyrano]

Seeing things like rates per 100000 in different contexts holds different weights... i.e. hospitalizations or deaths. Vaccinated vs unvaccinated.

"Events" are people who got heart inflammation. Wether they died or not, isn't specified.

5 to 15 times more risk sound far worse, don't you think?

 

[AnalogPackrat]

This is data we only have because of widespread vaccination. If there hadn't been a push, less people would've been vaccinated and the data might not be available at all.

You make it sound like obtaining "data" related to the vaccine experiment is more important than potential harm it does to children who do not need it at all. Ridiculous.

It's easy to be critical in hindsight. Imagine you needed to take the decision when all of this started.

I've been critical of the single-minded push for vaccines as the only viable solution since the end of "two weeks to bend the curve" which was the start of the mass hysteria event.

Someone in my family is affected. She might die because of Covid. Yet if she dies, it's from cancer...

I don't understand what you're trying to say.

It's all very easy to stand on the sideline and be critical.

None of us are on the sideline if we live in a Constitutional Republic with protected individual rights. It is my duty as a citizen to hold my government to account for what they claim to be doing on my behalf. I won't stand on the sideline and passively watch more bad decision-making.

 

[scott2000]

"Events" are people who got heart inflammation. Wether they died or not, isn't specified.

5 to 15 times more risk sound far worse, don't you think?

Yes...Just saying it's used in other context and treated accordingly sometimes.

 

[cyrano]

You make it sound like obtaining "data" related to the vaccine experiment is more important than potential harm it dies to children who do not need it at all. Ridiculous.

You wouldn't know 16 to 24 year olds (the group in the study) showed that increased risk if there was no data.

Again, it's easy in hindsight.

I've been critical of the single-minded push for vaccines as the only viable solution since the end of "two weeks to bend the curve" which was the start of the mass hysteria event.

It's not critical if you keep avoiding the science, it's religious.

I don't understand what you're trying to say.

She's got cancer. Several treatments were postponed because of Covid patients taking up beds in the hospital.

None of us are on the sideline if we live in a Constitutional Republic with protected individual rights. It is my duty as a citizen to hold my government to account for what they claim to be doing on my behalf. I won't stand on the sideline and passively watch more bad decision-making.

So, if you don't live in a constitutional republic, you're on the sideline?

How do you know it is a bad decision? What do you compare against? Your belief?

 

[Matador]

You make it sound like obtaining "data" related to the vaccine experiment is more important than potential harm it dies to children who do not need it at all. Ridiculous.

Among the 3.7 million COVID-19 deaths1 reported in the MPIDR COVerAGE database, 0.4 per cent (over 13,400) occurred in children and adolescents under 20 years of age. Of the over 13,400 deaths reported in those under 20 years of age, 58 per cent occurred among adolescents ages 10–19, and 42 per cent among children ages 0–9.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 Vaccine against Critical Covid-19 in Adolescents

The overall effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine against hospitalization for Covid-19 was 94% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90 to 96); the effectiveness was 95% (95% CI, 91 to 97) among test-negative controls and 94% (95% CI, 89 to 96) among syndrome-negative controls. The effectiveness was 98% against ICU admission and 98% against Covid-19 resulting in the receipt of life support. All 7 deaths occurred in patients who were unvaccinated.
...
Among hospitalized adolescent patients, two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine were highly effective against Covid-19–related hospitalization and ICU admission or the receipt of life support.