Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

[Harvey]

[Mask]

https://odysee.com/@Corona-Investigative-Committee:5/Mike-Session-86-en:0

Corona Investigative Committee

Dr. Mike Yeadon | Session 86: The Fog Is Lifting

[stickdog99]

[stickdog99]

[stickdog99]

[stickdog99]

[stickdog99]

[stickdog99]

Oh, so it exists but it only kills fat people? I guess nothing to worry about.

Yes, it exists. Yes, it primarily kills fat people, the very old, and those with multiple co-morbidities.

If this describes you, you have something to worry about. You may even want to risk the dangers of vaccination and boosters every 6 months.

But please leave me out of your Worry World.

[MacCruiskeen]

"I'm saying that old people are most at risk of getting sick and dying."

"So what you're saying is, you don't care if old people get sick and die."

[MacCruiskeen]

Oh, so it exists but it only kills fat people? I guess nothing to worry about.

Yes, it exists. Yes, it primarily kills fat people, the very old, and those with multiple co-morbidities.

If this describes you, you have something to worry about. Yo may even want to risk the dangers of vaccination and boosters every 6 months.

But please leave me out of your Worry World.

COUPVID-19 is a programme of deliberate health-destruction. Promoting immobility and obesity is one important part of it.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FIl0JaDXoAciZuK?format=jpg&name=small

[MacCruiskeen]

Berlin, 9 Jan 2022 (1m 51s):

https://twitter.com/Patrici60345749/sta ... 9594411008

[stickdog99]

Wall Street Journal: Omicron Makes Biden's Mandates Obsolete

There is no evidence so far that vaccines are reducing infections from the fast-spreading variant.

By Luc Montagnier and Jed Rubenfeld
Jan. 9, 2022 5:20 pm ET



Federal courts considering the Biden administration’s vaccination mandates—including the Supreme Court at Friday’s oral argument—have focused on administrative-law issues. The decrees raise constitutional issues as well. But there’s a simpler reason the justices should stay these mandates: the rise of the Omicron variant.

It would be irrational, legally indefensible and contrary to the public interest for government to mandate vaccines absent any evidence that the vaccines are effective in stopping the spread of the pathogen they target. Yet that’s exactly what’s happening here.

Both mandates—from the Health and Human Services Department for healthcare workers and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration for large employers in many other industries—were issued Nov. 5. At that time, the Delta variant represented almost all U.S. Covid-19 cases, and both agencies appropriately considered Delta at length and in detail, finding that the vaccines remained effective against it.

Those findings are now obsolete. As of Jan. 1, Omicron represented more than 95% of U.S. Covid cases, according to estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Because some of Omicron’s 50 mutations are known to evade antibody protection, because more than 30 of those mutations are to the spike protein used as an immunogen by the existing vaccines, and because there have been mass Omicron outbreaks in heavily vaccinated populations, scientists are highly uncertain the existing vaccines can stop it from spreading. As the CDC put it on Dec. 20, “we don’t yet know . . . how well available vaccines and medications work against it.”

The Supreme Court held in Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905) that the right to refuse medical treatment could be overcome when society needs to curb the spread of a contagious epidemic. At Friday’s oral argument, all the justices acknowledged that the federal mandates rest on this rationale. But mandating a vaccine to stop the spread of a disease requires evidence that the vaccines will prevent infection or transmission (rather than efficacy against severe outcomes like hospitalization or death). As the World Health Organization puts it, “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission.” For Omicron, there is as yet no such evidence.

The little data we have suggest the opposite. One preprint study found that after 30 days the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had any statistically significant positive effect against Omicron infection, and after 90 days, their effect went negative—i.e., vaccinated people were more susceptible to Omicron infection. Confirming this negative efficacy finding, data from Denmark and the Canadian province of Ontario indicate that vaccinated people have higher rates of Omicron infection than unvaccinated people.

Meantime, it has long been known that vaccinated people with breakthrough infections are highly contagious, and preliminary data from all over the world indicate that this is true of Omicron as well. As CDC Director Rochelle Walensky put it last summer, the viral load in the noses and throats of vaccinated people infected with Delta is “indistinguishable” from that of unvaccinated people, and “what [the vaccines] can’t do anymore is prevent transmission.”

There is some early evidence that boosters may reduce Omicron infections, but the effect appears to wane quickly, and we don’t know if repeated boosters would be an effective response to the surge of Omicron. That depends among other things on the severity of disease Omicron causes, another great unknown. According to the CDC, the overwhelming majority of symptomatic U.S. Omicron cases have been mild. The best policy might be to let Omicron run its course while protecting the most vulnerable, naturally immunizing the vast majority against Covid through infection by a relatively benign strain. As Sir Andrew Pollard, head of the U.K.’s Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, said in a recent interview, “We can’t vaccinate the planet every four or six months. It’s not sustainable or affordable.”

In any event, the vaccine mandates before the court don’t require boosters. They define “fully vaccinated” as two doses of Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech or one dose of Johnson & Johnson.

Even if boosters would help, the mandates would leave tens or hundreds of thousands of unboosted employees on the job, who have zero or negative protection against Omicron infection, and who would be highly contagious if they become infected. In other words, there is no scientific basis for believing these mandates will curb the spread of the disease.

Omicron was mentioned sparsely at Friday’s oral argument, but the justices—particularly those most favorable to the mandates—appeared to labor under drastically false assumptions. Justice Stephen Breyer suggested that if mandatory vaccination went forward, that would prevent all new Covid infections—750,000 new cases every day, he said. This is wildly false. So is Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s assertion that “we have over 100,000 children . . . in serious condition, many on ventilators.” According to Health and Human Services Department data, there are currently fewer than 3,500 confirmed pediatric Covid hospitalizations, and that includes patients who tested positive and were hospitalized for other reasons.
It is axiomatic in U.S. law that courts don’t uphold agency directives when the agency has entirely failed to consider facts crucial to the problem. In many contexts courts send regulations back to the agency for reconsideration in light of dramatically changed circumstances. If the agency’s action “is not sustainable on the record itself, the proper judicial approach has been to vacate the action and to remand the matter back to the agency for further consideration,” as the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia put it.

Neither HHS nor OSHA ever considered Omicron or said a word about vaccine efficacy against it, for the simple reason that it hadn’t yet been discovered. In these circumstances, longstanding legal principles require the justices to stay the mandates and send them back to the agencies for a fresh look.

{Dr. Montagnier was a winner of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for discovering the human immunodeficiency virus. Mr. Rubenfeld is a constitutional scholar.}

[stickdog99]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... lians.html

The shameful and scandalous Novak Djokovic court case was, like so many other pandemic-era made-for-media events, pure Covid theatre.

While the Serb has now become an international symbol for fighting against coronavirus tyranny, the unsavoury saga shows just how far usually freedom-loving Australia has fallen down the rabbit hole of virus-inspired authoritarianism over the past two years.

The vicious attitude from local politicians and most Aussies shows the real dangers of a Zero Covid policy.

As I've been warning since 2020, it makes society nasty and inward looking – millions of paranoid residents now suspiciously regard international arrivals, even those with Australian passports – even sometimes their own relatives - as plague rats, determined to spread 'deadly' Covid Down Under.

Vaccination mandates have been accepted by most of the Australian media and politicians as an unquestionable necessity, with those who choose to remain unjabbed worthy of being alienated from society and individually shamed.

...

The growing outrage from honest Aussies fighting for liberty and freedom has been largely censored by the mainstream media, with massive protests given short shrift and anyone who dares lift their head above the parapet dismissed as an irresponsible anti-vaxxer.

So Djokovic most likely had no idea he was entering a tinderbox of confected outrage ready to explode as he flew into Australia after announcing on Instagram just six days ago, 'I'm heading Down Under with an exemption permission.’

With Prime Minister Scott Morrison facing what's expected to be a close election within months and the media quick to express outrage at the so-called double standards, within 24 hours Djokovic had become the most hated man in Australia.

Two years of such draconian policies has made Aussies angry.

Locking Djokovic up in a refugee quarantine hotel and doing whatever necessary to make it look like he was being handed tough treatment became a political necessity for Morrison.

But the entire farce shames the PM, opposition politicians and the Aussie authorities who blindly went along with it all.

As the incredulous judge Anthony Kelly in today's show trial pointed out, the government acted 'unreasonably' when it reversed Djokovic's visa and tried to deport him for violating Covid vaccine rules.

Djokovic HAD followed all the rules, closely negotiating with tennis authorities in a bid to prove his natural Covid infection within the past six months meant it would still be possible to enter unvaccinated.

But that was never going to be good enough for a country which has seen its moral compass turned upside down thanks to a hysterical and over the top response to a virus.

The treatment of Djokovic was about local politics, not public health or the safety of Australians.

In reality, the most devastating thing for public health in Australia has been two years of some of the most draconian and ultimately failed lockdowns in the world, including the near total closure of the international borders, illegally banning citizens trapped overseas for much of that time.

Such a policy meant, until the inevitable Omicron outbreak, there was virtually no natural immunity, so Covid is now predictably ripping through society, as it was always going to.

[Joe Hillshoist]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10387219/DAN-WOOTTON-Djokovic-whipping-boy-angry-Australians.html

The shameful and scandalous Novak Djokovic court case was, like so many other pandemic-era made-for-media events, pure Covid theatre.

While the Serb has now become an international symbol for fighting against coronavirus tyranny, the unsavoury saga shows just how far usually freedom-loving Australia has fallen down the rabbit hole of virus-inspired authoritarianism over the past two years.

The vicious attitude from local politicians and most Aussies shows the real dangers of a Zero Covid policy.

As I've been warning since 2020, it makes society nasty and inward looking – millions of paranoid residents now suspiciously regard international arrivals, even those with Australian passports – even sometimes their own relatives - as plague rats, determined to spread 'deadly' Covid Down Under.

Vaccination mandates have been accepted by most of the Australian media and politicians as an unquestionable necessity, with those who choose to remain unjabbed worthy of being alienated from society and individually shamed.

...

The growing outrage from honest Aussies fighting for liberty and freedom has been largely censored by the mainstream media, with massive protests given short shrift and anyone who dares lift their head above the parapet dismissed as an irresponsible anti-vaxxer.

So Djokovic most likely had no idea he was entering a tinderbox of confected outrage ready to explode as he flew into Australia after announcing on Instagram just six days ago, 'I'm heading Down Under with an exemption permission.’

With Prime Minister Scott Morrison facing what's expected to be a close election within months and the media quick to express outrage at the so-called double standards, within 24 hours Djokovic had become the most hated man in Australia.

Two years of such draconian policies has made Aussies angry.

Locking Djokovic up in a refugee quarantine hotel and doing whatever necessary to make it look like he was being handed tough treatment became a political necessity for Morrison.

But the entire farce shames the PM, opposition politicians and the Aussie authorities who blindly went along with it all.

As the incredulous judge Anthony Kelly in today's show trial pointed out, the government acted 'unreasonably' when it reversed Djokovic's visa and tried to deport him for violating Covid vaccine rules.

Djokovic HAD followed all the rules, closely negotiating with tennis authorities in a bid to prove his natural Covid infection within the past six months meant it would still be possible to enter unvaccinated.

But that was never going to be good enough for a country which has seen its moral compass turned upside down thanks to a hysterical and over the top response to a virus.

The treatment of Djokovic was about local politics, not public health or the safety of Australians.

In reality, the most devastating thing for public health in Australia has been two years of some of the most draconian and ultimately failed lockdowns in the world, including the near total closure of the international borders, illegally banning citizens trapped overseas for much of that time.

Such a policy meant, until the inevitable Omicron outbreak, there was virtually no natural immunity, so Covid is now predictably ripping through society, as it was always going to.

The lockdowns didn't fail. They stopped the spread of those earlier variants with shitloads less cases, illness and death than anywhere else in the world.

Why don't you people acknowledge that? Remember what Goebbels said about repeating a lie often enough.

What's more stupid?

People wanting vaccine passports for vaccines that don't stop infection or people claiming lockdowns in Australia did nothing when they stopped covid in its tracks three times?

This is one of those situations where both sides of an argument are wrong about stuff and they won't admit it because they have tiied their identity to it. IE its identity politics.

Its hard to seperate those two positions in terms of stupidity stakes imo.

BTW The reason Jokavich is so disliked in Australia is cos of his poor sportsmanship. He was an easy target. And elite tennis players are the most privileged sportspeople in the world. if they act like jerks then they don't have much popularity. Everyone here knows that a month ago Joker tested positive for COVID then went and hung around with a bunch of people including kids. Instead of isolating. Just the act of a privileged wanker with no care for other people. Typical religious fundy. And yet he isn't even the worst looking person in this debacle.

Its fucken hilarious that most incompetent moron we've ever had in charge of managing this country used him for political mileage and fucked it up.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Berlin, 9 Jan 2022 (1m 51s):

https://twitter.com/Patrici60345749/sta ... 9594411008

This is disturbing. Not only are these cops fucked (nothing unusual there tho) all those cowards standing around letting them get away with it.