The OSHA Mandate injunction heads to the Supreme Court; a huge company drops its injection mandate; South Africa baffles experts, which is good news for us; DeSantis fills Florida's stocking, and more
Hey Jeff - I wish I found your writings a couple months ago! You are so extremely helpful to me and many of my coworkers who were in the crosshairs of the Federal Contractor Vaccine Mandate. Then, coworkers at some of our sites were under the OSHA Vaccine Mandate. I work for a major Dow 20 company that treated us horribly, unethically, and probably violated many laws in doing so. On the legal analysis that you provide - this is actually one of the most useful parts of your writing - so please keep it up and go into a little more detail if possible. We love it and need it!
I agree that any honest assessment of the facts would lead SCOTUS to send the ETS back to the pit from whence it came.
Unfortunately that carries limited comfort for me, because most of our pandemic response has not been characterized by an honest assessment of the facts. If facts and logic were the determinants of this issue so far, we would not even be in this position.
I'm just praying that the appeal to SCOTUS bucks the general trend.
'Astrazeneca’s Evusheld, is an antibody cocktail that works BEFORE you are infected." That doesn't sound like a treatment. It sounds like another "vaccine" coming to you from the fine folks at pharma. AND these have been authorized under EUA, which means that long term safety studies are lacking. Please be careful before running out and volunteering to inject yourself with these miracle ("non-vaccine") magic bullets.
Unlike the so-called "vaccines", these antibody cocktails do not expose you to the toxic spike protein, much less trick your own cells into manufacturing that toxic spike protein.
Regeneron's monoclonal antibody cocktail has also been shown to offer long-lasting protection, but for some reason, the FDA hasn't authorized it for use as a prophylactic.
A friend in Virginia recently had covid, went to the hospital, they gave him what he described as a cocktail, and felt great the next day, better than he had before covid. Apparently it's not just preventive, if we're talking about the same thing.
I could see that coming a mile away and I'm not describing anything to you. "It's mostly in his head." I see. You're a mind reader as well. You haven't the slightest clue who this guy is.
"AstraZeneca Evusheld AZD7442 is a Long-Acting antibody combination (non-vaccine) modified to provide long-lasting protection up to 12 months potentially. AZD7442 is a combination of tixagevimab (AZD8895) and cilgavimab (AZD1061), derived from B-cells donated by convalescent patients after the SARS-CoV-2 betacoronavirus."
How can somebody trust the produce of the same or similar company, a part of a big pharma, proven to be all about lies? This is question for Jeff too. I've been enjoying C&C posts for few months now, but ... Can you be half-right in what you half-believe? Is it a half-lie or propaganda?
I agree. Even if this proves to be a perfectly safe wonder drug, we won't really know for many years, will we? The vaccines have proven these companies cannot be trusted. The experience of pediatric trial participant Maddie DeGray is all I need to know. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92Qw-u80L4k
Its appalling to me that there is never any discussion about the morality or legality of OSHA itself. Its just accepted as a given that the fed gov of the US or any state or local gov for that matter has any authority to dictate to a private group how they conduct business ( they dont). THe whole thing rests on a fundamentally flawed premise. And the premise itself is disingenuous because the original intent of the formation of OHSA might have ostensibly been to ensure "workplace safety" but the real impetus and subtext behind and beneath ALL of these initiatives, programs, and regulations are to get votes for a certain pol so that pol can retain and augment power. Since there are far more workers than employers and one needs 51% to win an election. Nixon and other like him could grandstand and propagandize about "workplace safety" and further their careers by "promising" to protect workers from those big bad greedy unfair bosses. WHen we read this opinion and we are struck by the ignorance and ideology masquerading as serious ethical philosophizing we have to remember that foundation of OSHA itself was borne out of class warfare, politics, grandstanding, economic ignorance and power lust. Even the name is a smokescreen . It should be called the marxist class warfare agency.
Tammy K Clark and Kristen Meghan Kelly are both PPE and OSHA specialists who have called out OSHA and the Federal government on this very thing. They have written a peer reviewed paper on all aspects of these OSHA violations and mandates.
11/8/2021 - Florida Gov. DeSantis Press Conference - Filing Divorce Papers From Biden, OSHA and Unconstitutional Mandates
“No cop, no firefighter, no nurse, nobody should be losing their job because of these jabs – we must stand up for people and protect their jobs and livelihoods. What the federal government is doing is wrong. It is wrong to kick people out of work; it is wrong to try to micromanage businesses; and it is wrong to deprive key industries of people that we need. Most importantly, what they are doing is unconstitutional and we have a responsibility to stand up for the constitution and protect Floridians. I called a special session of the Florida Legislature to address this, and today I am proud to roll out our agenda to Protect Florida Jobs. These may be the strongest protections for both private and public-sector employees anywhere in the country. I want to thank Speaker Sprowls and President Simpson for stepping up to make this possible.” - Governor Ron DeSantis
nope ... disagree... you are committing Bastiat's fallacy of the seen and unseen...
There needs not be an OSHA to ensure workplace safety . In fact workplaces would be much more efficient and safer with NO OHSA. In a functioning free market workers would know and understand that certain jobs were more dangerous than others. Oil rig workers have high injury rates in order to attract oil rig workers the salaries are much higher. IF oil rig workers think that the work conditions are just recklessly dangerous they will quit. What determines the safety of the work place is the competition in the market among employers and the freedom workers to have to move from job to job. The level of capital accumulation in the economy also is critical. 100 years ago, there was air conditioning, no smoke detectors, no fire supression etc. What allowed these safety technologies to be invented and devleoped and then demanded or wanted by workers? Capital accumulation. What allows for capital accumulation? Free markets, limited gov, low taxes, no regulation( b/c regulatory agencies are ALWAYS captured and corrupted) and sound money? What stands in the way of all of this? OSHA and all the other gov agencies. So what is OSHA there for? To squash competition, protect the status quo and entrench vested interests and buy votes. OHSA and its ilk have make things LESS safe and efficient than they would have been if there was NO OSHA. Its a testament to the power of markets that there have been improvements in the safety of hazardous workplaces DESPITE this massive corrupt fascist regulatory state in which we find ourselves
who invested and mass produced smoke detectors? Did a smoke detector exist in 1890?, 1940? How could something like a smoke detector even come into existence? Through savings , investment, R+D and mass production driven by the profit motive that allowed the mass production of smoke detectors to the point where they were affordable and plentiful that employers could install them in workplaces.
Fire suppression systems, smoke detectors... if there had been an OSHA in 1850 or 1940 and they mandated smoke detectors and fire suppression, well there was none of this tech back then. You are erroneously viewing workplace safety through a modern day lens and applying todays safety standards to conditions decades ago. OHSA and govenment did not invent or mass produce smoke detectors or fire suppresion. Government has no resources of its own, everything it has it has to take from the private sector by FORCE of taxes. THe more gov takes and tried to control the fewer resources the private sector has to accumulate capital and save and invest in mew technology like safety equipment .
Maybe there was a company that spent the money to buy some of the earlies smoke detectors. ANd they installed them. THey were expensive. They let the workers know that they had a "SAFER" factory. So some workers were willing to work there but maybe for less money in exchange for the safer environment? Other workers understood that other jobs and places like a coal mine were more dangerous, but they were willing to work there.
You are assuming that a political agency like OSHA will be able to know all the aspects of the market and judge what safety tech or practices people want or what is most needed, a group like OSHA can never know this. Meanwhile agencies like OSHA are ALWAYS captured by the groups they are ostensible created to regulated.
workers and families are not destroyed by corporate greed. Workers and families are employed by corporations and earn a living that they otherwise would not be able to earn. When the industrial revolution started in EUrope and america why did poor rural people and familes move to the cities to work in factories? Why would these people relocate from what you probably consider buccolic sunshine and lollipop life in the coutryside to sweat away in some dingy dangerous factory? because the factory work was a BETTER deal.
Noone forced british rural folk and German peasants to move to cities and work in factories. THe corporations that spung up offered these people more money and a BETTER working condition than they had in the country. Imagine if you were a rural British farmer. That was a life of toil and marginal starvation in 1850. Now imagine you could work INDOORS!?
Also a lot of these factories were making goods for the masses, so those "greedy capitalists" were actually manufacturing goods for these same working class people to consume that made their lives better. ANd that same dynamic continues to this day. The " greed" or profit motive that you mistakenly and ignorantly criticize is actually what built the middle class and is the basis for the prosperity that we enjoy in the West. A prosperity that is UNDERMINED and destroyed by agencies like OSHA
There needs not be an OSHA to ensure workplace safety . In a functioning free market workers would know and understand that certain jobs were more dangerous than others. Oil rig workers have high injury rates in order to attract oil rig workers the salaries are much higher. IF oil rig workers think that the work conditions are just recklessly dangerous they will quit. What determines the safety of the work place is the competition in the market among employers and the freedom workers to have to move from job to job. The level of capital accumulation in the economy also is critical. 100 years ago, there was air conditioning, no smoke detectors, no fire supression etc. What allowed these safety technologies to be invented and devleoped and then demanded or wanted by workers? Capital accumulation. What allows for capital accumulation? Free markets, limited gov, low taxes, no regulation( b/c regulatory agencies are ALWAYS captured and corrupted) and sound money? What stands in the way of all of this? OSHA and all the other gov agencies. So what is OSHA there for? To squash competition, protect the status quo and entrench vested interests and buy votes. OHSA and its ilk have make things LESS safe and efficient than they would have been if there was NO OSHA. Its a testament to the power of markets that there have been improvements in the safety of hazardous workplaces DESPITE this massive corrupt fascist regulatory state in which we find ourselves
It's charming to read the views of people who think government agencies are here to protect us. That is such a sweet and comforting view of the world. The government is here to help us!
The reality is . . . giant global corporations write the laws, which are passed unread by Congress.
The same happens with agency mandates such as the rules that OSHA promulgates. It's not about worker safety, as should be obvious -- but weirdly isn't obvious to some people. It's about firming up the control of the oligarchy-- making the CFR regulations so extensive (many books worth) and difficult to apply that ONLY a giant corporation can be in compliance.
Thank you Pascal20 for your support in this debate. Its actually WORSE than just that. because once again... its all the hidden things that would or could have been done had OSHA and the swamp of other so called regulatory agencies had not ever been established and sucked the productive time and capital away from the private sector.
Think about what we are facing with the CDC and NIH. These group have monopolized health research and funding. They are lead by people with a certain worldview and ideology . They have been shown to be corruptible and corrupted, and frequently wrong about many things.
What would have prevented this? --- well.. competition, free market....
if there was NO taxpayer funded politicized medical research then ALL research would be private and only those projects that had the best chances of serviing humanity with the best quality , lowest cost medicines and medical services would be produced. But instead we have this crony miasma of federal agencies.
Once again fallacy ... Bastiat. just because I dont think government can or should do a thing, doesnt mean that I am opposed to that thing. I am FOR safety. Clearly... just like I think there is a role for vaccines. But workplace safety is a spectrum and cannot be mandated by politicians and bureaucrats. Complicated societal and technological problems cannot ever be solved by the application of force and violence ( LAWS). Someone who might be left leaning or liberal- progressive minded ( like you?) often seem to have no conception of this. SO when I make a cogent argument as to exactly how and why a politized bureaucratic organization can never make workplaces safety and actually hinder the progressive improvement in working conditions that only a free market can bring, you resort to name calling... cancelling me by calling me names like "right-wing nut".
Ensuring that workers have a decent wage or standard of living is a laudable goal as well so YOU might be in favor of a state level or federal level minimum wage law. But the problem is that the minimum wage laws actually result in the disemployment of the least skilled , most vulnerable members of the workforce. THe min wage laws actually protect the higher skilled and unionized workers at the expense of the poor disadvantaged people and make unemployment worse! So min wage laws result in MORE unemployment among the MOST vulnerable and least skilled. ANd OSHA makes workplaces less safe than they would be if there was no OSHA.
My greatest concern around the Supreme Court reticence is that truth (if at all) may come too late. If millions of people are forced to get the jab, what benefit to the parties and those in whose interest these cases serve (other than future policies) is a later ruling? The time is NOW!
What do you think about Jacobson being (at least tacitly) overruled in Casey? It was a string cite but clearly the Court recognized an evolved understanding of privacy and bodily autonomy since Jacobson was decided (whatever I may think of Casey otherwise). How can people continue to rely on Jacobson? How will the Conservative Supreme Court Justices thread the needle of overturning Roe while also overruling Jacobson? (or will they merely distinguish it on State vs Federal grounds?).
One thing I disagree with Jeff on -- this is not merely a difference in federalism from Jacobson. This is a fundamental liberty question - the facts of Jacobson are distinguishable NOT ONLY due to federalism but ALSO (and more importantly perhaps) on the fundamental rights of human beings to avoid coercion absent extreme and certain public health interests noted in Jacobson (even if that coercion is direct from the feds or indirect through corporate cronies).
Hopefully this is an opportunity to recognize that large public multinational companies are often acting in a governmental enforcement role even absent administrative edict. Having CEOs make weekly calls with the White House to foster a public policy action -- or worse, a global climate agenda -- or whatever, with large hedge funds acting as the sword to compel that interest is worthy of civil rights protection. As a libertarian/conservative/right-leaning individual, I share the reflex to avoid limiting or forcing private action, but our public companies are no more "private" than OSHA.
From Casey...
"No evolution of legal principle has left Roe's doctrinal footings weaker than they were in 1973. No development of constitutional law since the case was decided has implicitly or explicitly left Roe behind as a mere survivor of obsolete constitutional thinking.
It will be recognized, of course, that Roe stands at an intersection of two lines of decisions, but in whichever doctrinal category one reads the case, the result for present purposes will be the same. The Roe Court itself placed its holding in the succession of cases most prominently exemplified by Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), see Roe, 410 U. S., at 152-153. When it is so seen, Roe is clearly in no jeopardy, since subsequent constitutional developments have neither disturbed, nor do they threaten to diminish, the scope of recognized protection accorded to the liberty relating to intimate relationships, the family, and decisions about whether or not to beget or bear a child. See, e.g., Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678 (1977); Moore v. East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 678 (1977).
Roe, however, may be seen not only as an exemplar of Griswold liberty but as a rule (whether or not mistaken) of personal autonomy and bodily integrity, with doctrinal affinity to cases recognizing limits on governmental power to mandate medical treatment or to bar its rejection. If so, our cases since Roe accord with Roe's view that a State's interest in the protection of life falls short of justifying any plenary override of individual liberty claims. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept. of Health, 497 U.S. 261,278 (1990); Cf., e.g., Riggins v. Nevada, 504 U.S. ____, ____ (1992) (slip. op., at 7); Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210 (1990); see also, e.g., Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952); Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 24-30 (1905)."
Also, I try ought it was notable that the 6th Circuit decision was completely silent on natural immunity.
I note also an excellent point Dr. McCullough made on the recent Joe Rogan podcast -- before you take the jab required by your employer... at least consider the so-called "social contract." What is the return commitment - how long will they ensure your employment? The consequences of your vaccination (whatever they may prove to be) is forever. What of your employment? Might you still be laid off tomorrow?
That doesn't make sense. If you agree to comply and don't, you are in breach and can be fired. Though I doubt any employer would agree to such a thing (unless you are desperately needed and irreplaceable, in which case they might not fire you anyway),
And the fact the vaccine does not prevent transmission. So sick of “to help slow the spread…..” from employer memos. Actual MISINFORMATION allowed to go on.
While Florida’s DeSantis is light years ahead of near commie, Michigan, I do not trust anything that comes out of big pharma. I wish he would make ivermectin and HCQ as readily available as this new prophylactic. My guess is he does not want to piss off the puppet masters who now rule the globe, (or so they believe), and their long reach is powerful. I am also sure this is some deal offered to FLorida so it can be made available to everyone who wants it. Alas, if ivermectin could be as widely distributed, it would be so much cheaper, HCQ was over the counter in many African nations a year ago. Now it’s gone poof, unless you ‘re someone with Lupus, who have used it all through this crisis. In Michigan,pharmacies still can not write scrips for either.
Yep. Gov DeSantis's latest pronouncements confirm a disappointing pattern: Promote expensive treatments (including possibly-risky EUAs) while ignoring inexpensive long-established very safe treatments like Ivermectin, HCQ, D/k2, Zinc. I hate to think "it's the Benjamins." This while his Dept of Health continues to lie about the vaccines & trick folks into injecting themselves and young kids.
Harmful misinformation, nothing on effective, safe, INEXPENSIVE treatments & prevention.:
And: "Effective 11/2/21, CDC authorized the Pfizer vaccine for children 5-11. Contact your pediatrician to discuss vaccinating your child and to schedule vaccination. You may also schedule at pharmacies, county health depts & local clinics...WHO classified a new Variant of Concern called Omicron, and is coordinating with a large number of researchers to better understand it...The most effective way to protect yourself and loved ones from variants is to get vaccinated [false]. As of July, over 99% of new COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations & deaths nationwide are unvaccinated [false]. While it is possible to become infected even if vaccinated it is exceedingly rare [false], and rarer still that vaccinated people require hospitalization or die due to COVID-19. Other mitigation including frequent handwashing, social distancing & wearing a mask in public places also greatly reduce your chance of being infected." -FDOH auto reply
=======
From Jeff: "people who are “Covid naive” should DO SOMETHING. Injected or not, if folks haven’t had Covid, they could take their vitamins, stock up on some ivermectin just in case, and watch Dr. McCullough’s interview on Rogan, where he suggests a simple beta-dyne nose rinse. And of course, at risk people should consider taking advantage of Florida’s new prophylactic GlaxxoSmithKline mAB therapy."
Good advice, but all of us here are already doing that. Why not lobby DeSantis to promote offer low-cost prevention-treatments at the clinics, to benefit tens of millions?
That's great if you're not elderly, fat, etc, and you've nothing better to do for a few weeks. I had an HCQ scrip filled just when Trump started babbling about it, before it quickly sold out & was denied & he screwed the pooch even worse by hogging up 30 million doses in a gvt bank. A few days later my temp went from normal to 103 in an hour so I started the course. Temp back to normal in 2 hours, fever never returned. At 64, nothing like that had ever happened to me. I'm very glad I had HCQ. I now have Ivermectin too and have taken it with great effect.
Yep. Trump's babble-bungling screwed the pooch in many ways, then panicked and jumped on the covid hysteria bandwagon. Still falsely claims the vax is safe and effective.
I'm sure you're right about the deathspirator & remdesivir, but that's no reason not to claim everyone would be fine with tylenol. Many would've survived if given early access to HCQ, IVM, D/k2, Zinc, budesonide etc
Covid deaths are massively exaggerated - fraud. You do know folks have actually died from covid? Your plan to "just" ban covid from death certs would also be fraud.
Starting over. I'm never on Twitter, ignoring your attack. So you're saying there's no such thing as a death from covid? If not, how could banning covid as cause of death not be fraud?
I don't think you can just call it something else, but we should be able to expose the fraud-exaggeration of covid deaths. Even many commie-libs are getting sick of this, and are increasingly open to the truth. The covid tyrants are about mid-air over the shark.
Thanks for calming me down a bit about the 6th Circuit. But regardless of what eventually happens in court, most of the damage has already been done. When I read the stories of vax victims, people who have already been fired, etc. no court decision is going to restore them to their previous lives. But at least I am bit more optimistic that the Supreme Court will weigh in and hopefully stop this madness and wake people up to the medical totalitarianism that seems to be growing by the day.
The intellectual side of me is finding the mandate issue incredibly interesting to watch play out in real time. The emotional side of me fluctuates among fear, anger, and sadness. Legal and medical mayhem indeed.
I just keeping shaking my head over these "mandates" of the short-acting "vaccine" -- will they be in place forever? Will I /never/ be able to travel to Canada? Will unvaccinated people /never/ be able to enter the United States? Never? ("Did you get the shot 15 years that did nothing?") Will people 25 years from now have to go find the 2019 version of the "COVID" vaccine-- will it still be produced? Or will it be updated to the 2035 version? Will that be acceptable? Will college students (and visitor to the Vermont State house) still be taking PCR tests every day? Will they still test positive? When will this panic ever end?
I see this a little differently Mike. It will be interesting (or terrifying) to see who’s right. I think in spite of all of the bumbling bureaucrats, C19 will continue to weaken and people will be sick to death of hearing about it before the 2022 elections. Candidates need to be clear and honest about what they bring to the table and they need to campaign the old fashioned way. They need to knock on doors and have public rallies to ask for votes. Tech gods aren’t going to allow any dissenting voices so we can’t use social media as a tool. Mail in voting cannot be allowed ever again on the scale it was done last year. The only avenue left to us will be to vote against tyrants in 2022 and to insist on having lawyers and poll watchers to ensure an honest election. But I expect the powers to be to string out fear and confusion as long as possible so they can tie it all around Trump’s neck if he decides to run in 2024.
I really feel like we have a bleak future ahead of us if Pelosi wins next year and another Dem president is elected in 2024 so it behooves us to stand up and push back. It’s past time to pop corn and watch the show. We’re in it, like it or not.
My friend in Buffalo and I talk daily. I don’t know how they can stand the tyranny of the government. I’ve never been so grateful to live in the South.
Look at Knoxville, Tennessee. Knox County. No state income tax, reliably red and the University of TN is there. Enough activity to keep you from getting bored. Four seasons and plenty of outside activities. I also love the little town of Jonesboro, TN. Washington County.
The towns of Maryville and Louisville are also nice. Suburbs of Knoxville.
My problem for folks is that so much of the scrimmage line has been moved the last 2 years. Even if the Supreme Court rules against the Mandate, which it is not at all clear they will do, but if they do, it will come with language of why THIS mandate is struck down.. and folks will take another run at it. There is too much money, impetus the the power structure for the next decade is on the line, maybe longer. Exhibit A: Phizer just announced that it is going straight for a 3 jab protocol for young kids, who are for all intents and purposes at no risk for this. Every front is doubling down.
Between abortion, gun control laws, and this mandate, the STORY generated should the constitution ACTUALLY get upheld (instead of SCOTUS law making in the past) will super motivate the left. The ruling should be what they should be, but the narrative and story of what that means , why, etc.. has got to be worked on hard by conservatives and constitutionalists. This is clearly a weak point, arguing only the facts, law, etc, with no motivating reason why these are good and just and needed for a real society that looks anything like America… and even that is not longer a good enough story, actually.
Not sure I’m that pessimistic, but that’s what I mean by moving the line of scrimmage. The new normal is moving constantly, the right just stops things from moving forward, it never returns things to where they have been, which is tragic.
Thank you for these posts Jeff! I am in Florida and very thankful for it these days... I am also in healthcare and this was another heart stopping moment when I read about the 5th Circuit Court last night stopping the injunction block. It is the most frustrating thing to be in a ping pong ball situation over livelihood. Who can stop these communistic overreaching thugs in office?
When the virus does not exist, neither does COVID... During the the peak of the media fear campaign, the susceptible masses were programmed to react to every sneeze as a sign of Covid - too often followed by ER trips and testing, testing, testing... When Nancy Pelosi purchased a $22 Million dollar mansion on the coast of Florida she demonstrated to her supporters that she was more fearful of Newsom's California mandates than Global Warming and rising sea levels in Florida.
They seriously should not “allow” her to relocate there. She probably is going to set up operatives to teach them how to steal the vote like they do in Cali. She needs to stay in the mess if the state she and her Gruesome created. God help us.
Well. I’d say I’m going to hold off believing anything yet. How many times has a politician used their aides to deny something to the press for weeks and months, then finally reveal they actually are doing what they denied. Did she buy the house? Does she plan to move to Florida? Her aide says no. But I think we have a case of a possible lying liar 🤥…because that’s what they are best known for. So, we’ll see.
The 6th Circuit: “The COVID-19 pandemic has wreaked havoc across America, leading to the loss of over 800,000 lives, shutting down workplaces and jobs across the country, and threatening our economy.”
Even if it were the purview of courts to rule on points of emotion rather than law, this argument fails to support their decision as it is not the virus that is causing the problems they list but rather the insane reaction to the virus by government entities. The issue they are ruling on is one of those insane reactions.
Regarding the Africa Omicron issue, Alex Berenson discusses one of the left's lame excuses, that cases are low because Africa has a younger population, here:
As for these prophylactic treatments, according to the September 2021 definition from the CDC (I couldn't find a newer definition) "Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases." So, yeah, these treatments, along with what many of us already do to support and build the immune system, seem to qualify as "vaccines".
The fact that they are under EU is very concerning - EUs have seen some questionable efficacy and safety results.
Also look at how they dishonestly and self-servingly redefined "herd immunity". Now the definition ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY involves vaccination. Under the new definition, there is NO SUCH THING as herd immunity achieve with the help of naturally-acquired immunity.
Once again, the ONLY reason to do this was to protect the EUAs, which protects the drug companies' profits, which eventually make their way into the pockets of politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists, and medical board bigwigs.
You couldn't find a *newer* definition, but here's the one that existed before the corrupt, dishonest CDC redefined "vaccine" in order to protect the EUAs, which protects the drug companies' profits, which eventually make their way into the pockets of politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists, and medical board bigwigs.
"Vaccine: A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose."
How many of today's vaccines meet the new definition of vaccine?
All of them
How many of today's vaccines meet the old definition of vaccine?
All of them.....................................except the Chinese virus vaccines.
I wondered about that. I did some research (googling) and found that Evusheld is nothing at all like the nRNA jabs. Evusheld is a monoclonal antibody cocktail designed for pre-infection use as a prevention against infection. Post infection treatment with monoclonal antibodies have been very effective. Evusheld is designed for people with moderate to severe immune compromise due to a medical condition or immunosuppressive medications, as well as those individuals for whom COVID-19 vaccination is not recommended. Clinical trials show EvuSheld showed a statistically significant reduction (77% at primary analysis, 83% at median six-month analysis) in the risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 compared to placebo, with protection from the virus continuing for at least six months.
Of course there are always risks from any type of medical treatment, but at least monoclonal antibody technology has been around since the mid 1970's, and fully licensed since 1986.
Repost........ The manipulation of all Americans is an issue, but dims in comparison to the facts being revealed now that show that our own Government has been planning for years to develop a deadly corona virus that was release on us and the World. Then they ran fake negative evaluation testing and passed laws to keep proven safe and effective early treatment drugs, like HCQ and Ivermectin, off the market so the FDA could pass emergency use for their spike protein injections. Then they blocked the ability of doctors, hospitals and old people homes from access to these cheap worldwide proven early treatment drugs, and in doing so probably causing the death of 85% of 800,000 that they say died from Covid19. All so they could play God and steal $billions with mRNA injections and killing nearly 700,000 Americans. The proof is America has the highest death rate in the World, and it caused more deaths worldwide than all 20 century wars combined. That is what the headlines should be and what everyone should be pissed off about. These people need to be removed from power and the FDA, NIH, CDC need total restructuring...now. It makes little difference if it is greed, power, ineptitude , or insanity driving this genocide. Our own health care system has failed us.....to put it mildly.
Using your guidance, I now have an approved RA from the FC mandate.
I am upset that I needed to do it in the first place, but after praying about it, I decided to do it. I will not take the injection. This is OUR fight for God, Country, and Liberty.
Just to completely take a hard right turn....I saw a shirt yesterday with George Washington saying: "Me and my homies would be stacking the bodies by now." I like.
Hey Jeff - I wish I found your writings a couple months ago! You are so extremely helpful to me and many of my coworkers who were in the crosshairs of the Federal Contractor Vaccine Mandate. Then, coworkers at some of our sites were under the OSHA Vaccine Mandate. I work for a major Dow 20 company that treated us horribly, unethically, and probably violated many laws in doing so. On the legal analysis that you provide - this is actually one of the most useful parts of your writing - so please keep it up and go into a little more detail if possible. We love it and need it!
Aaron Gonzalez
I agree that any honest assessment of the facts would lead SCOTUS to send the ETS back to the pit from whence it came.
Unfortunately that carries limited comfort for me, because most of our pandemic response has not been characterized by an honest assessment of the facts. If facts and logic were the determinants of this issue so far, we would not even be in this position.
I'm just praying that the appeal to SCOTUS bucks the general trend.
'Astrazeneca’s Evusheld, is an antibody cocktail that works BEFORE you are infected." That doesn't sound like a treatment. It sounds like another "vaccine" coming to you from the fine folks at pharma. AND these have been authorized under EUA, which means that long term safety studies are lacking. Please be careful before running out and volunteering to inject yourself with these miracle ("non-vaccine") magic bullets.
Unlike the so-called "vaccines", these antibody cocktails do not expose you to the toxic spike protein, much less trick your own cells into manufacturing that toxic spike protein.
Regeneron's monoclonal antibody cocktail has also been shown to offer long-lasting protection, but for some reason, the FDA hasn't authorized it for use as a prophylactic.
A friend in Virginia recently had covid, went to the hospital, they gave him what he described as a cocktail, and felt great the next day, better than he had before covid. Apparently it's not just preventive, if we're talking about the same thing.
Covid. Bad sick.
Bingo
Do whatever you want. How many times are you going to reply to the same post? Seems a bit overzealous.
Thanks Mike. Who needs doctors when we have you to consult.
I could see that coming a mile away and I'm not describing anything to you. "It's mostly in his head." I see. You're a mind reader as well. You haven't the slightest clue who this guy is.
Evushield claims to be a NON-VACCINE"
Evusheld (AZD7442) Long-Acting Antibody Cocktail Description
"AstraZeneca Evusheld AZD7442 is a Long-Acting antibody combination (non-vaccine) modified to provide long-lasting protection up to 12 months potentially. AZD7442 is a combination of tixagevimab (AZD8895) and cilgavimab (AZD1061), derived from B-cells donated by convalescent patients after the SARS-CoV-2 betacoronavirus."
https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/vaccines/evusheld-azd7442-long-acting-antibody-cocktail
How can somebody trust the produce of the same or similar company, a part of a big pharma, proven to be all about lies? This is question for Jeff too. I've been enjoying C&C posts for few months now, but ... Can you be half-right in what you half-believe? Is it a half-lie or propaganda?
I agree. Even if this proves to be a perfectly safe wonder drug, we won't really know for many years, will we? The vaccines have proven these companies cannot be trusted. The experience of pediatric trial participant Maddie DeGray is all I need to know. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92Qw-u80L4k
Its appalling to me that there is never any discussion about the morality or legality of OSHA itself. Its just accepted as a given that the fed gov of the US or any state or local gov for that matter has any authority to dictate to a private group how they conduct business ( they dont). THe whole thing rests on a fundamentally flawed premise. And the premise itself is disingenuous because the original intent of the formation of OHSA might have ostensibly been to ensure "workplace safety" but the real impetus and subtext behind and beneath ALL of these initiatives, programs, and regulations are to get votes for a certain pol so that pol can retain and augment power. Since there are far more workers than employers and one needs 51% to win an election. Nixon and other like him could grandstand and propagandize about "workplace safety" and further their careers by "promising" to protect workers from those big bad greedy unfair bosses. WHen we read this opinion and we are struck by the ignorance and ideology masquerading as serious ethical philosophizing we have to remember that foundation of OSHA itself was borne out of class warfare, politics, grandstanding, economic ignorance and power lust. Even the name is a smokescreen . It should be called the marxist class warfare agency.
Tammy K Clark and Kristen Meghan Kelly are both PPE and OSHA specialists who have called out OSHA and the Federal government on this very thing. They have written a peer reviewed paper on all aspects of these OSHA violations and mandates.
11/8/2021 - Florida Gov. DeSantis Press Conference - Filing Divorce Papers From Biden, OSHA and Unconstitutional Mandates
“No cop, no firefighter, no nurse, nobody should be losing their job because of these jabs – we must stand up for people and protect their jobs and livelihoods. What the federal government is doing is wrong. It is wrong to kick people out of work; it is wrong to try to micromanage businesses; and it is wrong to deprive key industries of people that we need. Most importantly, what they are doing is unconstitutional and we have a responsibility to stand up for the constitution and protect Floridians. I called a special session of the Florida Legislature to address this, and today I am proud to roll out our agenda to Protect Florida Jobs. These may be the strongest protections for both private and public-sector employees anywhere in the country. I want to thank Speaker Sprowls and President Simpson for stepping up to make this possible.” - Governor Ron DeSantis
https://rumble.com/vox2d9-nobody-should-lose-their-job-because-of-jab-mandates.html
They appeared on the Highwire a few times and Jeff discussed OSHA in Nov 18th Blog - https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/-coffee-and-covid-thursday-november-007
OSHA, believe it or not, has helped worker safety, because before then it was up to the good graces of crooked ownership of companies.
The issue is that they got regulatory capture, like the fda and epa.
It's not the agencies that are broken, but the political system that allows for companies to have more say than the workers....
nope ... disagree... you are committing Bastiat's fallacy of the seen and unseen...
There needs not be an OSHA to ensure workplace safety . In fact workplaces would be much more efficient and safer with NO OHSA. In a functioning free market workers would know and understand that certain jobs were more dangerous than others. Oil rig workers have high injury rates in order to attract oil rig workers the salaries are much higher. IF oil rig workers think that the work conditions are just recklessly dangerous they will quit. What determines the safety of the work place is the competition in the market among employers and the freedom workers to have to move from job to job. The level of capital accumulation in the economy also is critical. 100 years ago, there was air conditioning, no smoke detectors, no fire supression etc. What allowed these safety technologies to be invented and devleoped and then demanded or wanted by workers? Capital accumulation. What allows for capital accumulation? Free markets, limited gov, low taxes, no regulation( b/c regulatory agencies are ALWAYS captured and corrupted) and sound money? What stands in the way of all of this? OSHA and all the other gov agencies. So what is OSHA there for? To squash competition, protect the status quo and entrench vested interests and buy votes. OHSA and its ilk have make things LESS safe and efficient than they would have been if there was NO OSHA. Its a testament to the power of markets that there have been improvements in the safety of hazardous workplaces DESPITE this massive corrupt fascist regulatory state in which we find ourselves
who invested and mass produced smoke detectors? Did a smoke detector exist in 1890?, 1940? How could something like a smoke detector even come into existence? Through savings , investment, R+D and mass production driven by the profit motive that allowed the mass production of smoke detectors to the point where they were affordable and plentiful that employers could install them in workplaces.
Fire suppression systems, smoke detectors... if there had been an OSHA in 1850 or 1940 and they mandated smoke detectors and fire suppression, well there was none of this tech back then. You are erroneously viewing workplace safety through a modern day lens and applying todays safety standards to conditions decades ago. OHSA and govenment did not invent or mass produce smoke detectors or fire suppresion. Government has no resources of its own, everything it has it has to take from the private sector by FORCE of taxes. THe more gov takes and tried to control the fewer resources the private sector has to accumulate capital and save and invest in mew technology like safety equipment .
Maybe there was a company that spent the money to buy some of the earlies smoke detectors. ANd they installed them. THey were expensive. They let the workers know that they had a "SAFER" factory. So some workers were willing to work there but maybe for less money in exchange for the safer environment? Other workers understood that other jobs and places like a coal mine were more dangerous, but they were willing to work there.
You are assuming that a political agency like OSHA will be able to know all the aspects of the market and judge what safety tech or practices people want or what is most needed, a group like OSHA can never know this. Meanwhile agencies like OSHA are ALWAYS captured by the groups they are ostensible created to regulated.
I
workers and families are not destroyed by corporate greed. Workers and families are employed by corporations and earn a living that they otherwise would not be able to earn. When the industrial revolution started in EUrope and america why did poor rural people and familes move to the cities to work in factories? Why would these people relocate from what you probably consider buccolic sunshine and lollipop life in the coutryside to sweat away in some dingy dangerous factory? because the factory work was a BETTER deal.
Noone forced british rural folk and German peasants to move to cities and work in factories. THe corporations that spung up offered these people more money and a BETTER working condition than they had in the country. Imagine if you were a rural British farmer. That was a life of toil and marginal starvation in 1850. Now imagine you could work INDOORS!?
Also a lot of these factories were making goods for the masses, so those "greedy capitalists" were actually manufacturing goods for these same working class people to consume that made their lives better. ANd that same dynamic continues to this day. The " greed" or profit motive that you mistakenly and ignorantly criticize is actually what built the middle class and is the basis for the prosperity that we enjoy in the West. A prosperity that is UNDERMINED and destroyed by agencies like OSHA
There needs not be an OSHA to ensure workplace safety . In a functioning free market workers would know and understand that certain jobs were more dangerous than others. Oil rig workers have high injury rates in order to attract oil rig workers the salaries are much higher. IF oil rig workers think that the work conditions are just recklessly dangerous they will quit. What determines the safety of the work place is the competition in the market among employers and the freedom workers to have to move from job to job. The level of capital accumulation in the economy also is critical. 100 years ago, there was air conditioning, no smoke detectors, no fire supression etc. What allowed these safety technologies to be invented and devleoped and then demanded or wanted by workers? Capital accumulation. What allows for capital accumulation? Free markets, limited gov, low taxes, no regulation( b/c regulatory agencies are ALWAYS captured and corrupted) and sound money? What stands in the way of all of this? OSHA and all the other gov agencies. So what is OSHA there for? To squash competition, protect the status quo and entrench vested interests and buy votes. OHSA and its ilk have make things LESS safe and efficient than they would have been if there was NO OSHA. Its a testament to the power of markets that there have been improvements in the safety of hazardous workplaces DESPITE this massive corrupt fascist regulatory state in which we find ourselves
It's charming to read the views of people who think government agencies are here to protect us. That is such a sweet and comforting view of the world. The government is here to help us!
The reality is . . . giant global corporations write the laws, which are passed unread by Congress.
The same happens with agency mandates such as the rules that OSHA promulgates. It's not about worker safety, as should be obvious -- but weirdly isn't obvious to some people. It's about firming up the control of the oligarchy-- making the CFR regulations so extensive (many books worth) and difficult to apply that ONLY a giant corporation can be in compliance.
Thank you Pascal20 for your support in this debate. Its actually WORSE than just that. because once again... its all the hidden things that would or could have been done had OSHA and the swamp of other so called regulatory agencies had not ever been established and sucked the productive time and capital away from the private sector.
Think about what we are facing with the CDC and NIH. These group have monopolized health research and funding. They are lead by people with a certain worldview and ideology . They have been shown to be corruptible and corrupted, and frequently wrong about many things.
What would have prevented this? --- well.. competition, free market....
if there was NO taxpayer funded politicized medical research then ALL research would be private and only those projects that had the best chances of serviing humanity with the best quality , lowest cost medicines and medical services would be produced. But instead we have this crony miasma of federal agencies.
OSHA is no different.
Once again fallacy ... Bastiat. just because I dont think government can or should do a thing, doesnt mean that I am opposed to that thing. I am FOR safety. Clearly... just like I think there is a role for vaccines. But workplace safety is a spectrum and cannot be mandated by politicians and bureaucrats. Complicated societal and technological problems cannot ever be solved by the application of force and violence ( LAWS). Someone who might be left leaning or liberal- progressive minded ( like you?) often seem to have no conception of this. SO when I make a cogent argument as to exactly how and why a politized bureaucratic organization can never make workplaces safety and actually hinder the progressive improvement in working conditions that only a free market can bring, you resort to name calling... cancelling me by calling me names like "right-wing nut".
Ensuring that workers have a decent wage or standard of living is a laudable goal as well so YOU might be in favor of a state level or federal level minimum wage law. But the problem is that the minimum wage laws actually result in the disemployment of the least skilled , most vulnerable members of the workforce. THe min wage laws actually protect the higher skilled and unionized workers at the expense of the poor disadvantaged people and make unemployment worse! So min wage laws result in MORE unemployment among the MOST vulnerable and least skilled. ANd OSHA makes workplaces less safe than they would be if there was no OSHA.
AOC is not capable of winning in an unrigged eletction.
Whats up with J&J?
Great post.
My greatest concern around the Supreme Court reticence is that truth (if at all) may come too late. If millions of people are forced to get the jab, what benefit to the parties and those in whose interest these cases serve (other than future policies) is a later ruling? The time is NOW!
What do you think about Jacobson being (at least tacitly) overruled in Casey? It was a string cite but clearly the Court recognized an evolved understanding of privacy and bodily autonomy since Jacobson was decided (whatever I may think of Casey otherwise). How can people continue to rely on Jacobson? How will the Conservative Supreme Court Justices thread the needle of overturning Roe while also overruling Jacobson? (or will they merely distinguish it on State vs Federal grounds?).
One thing I disagree with Jeff on -- this is not merely a difference in federalism from Jacobson. This is a fundamental liberty question - the facts of Jacobson are distinguishable NOT ONLY due to federalism but ALSO (and more importantly perhaps) on the fundamental rights of human beings to avoid coercion absent extreme and certain public health interests noted in Jacobson (even if that coercion is direct from the feds or indirect through corporate cronies).
Hopefully this is an opportunity to recognize that large public multinational companies are often acting in a governmental enforcement role even absent administrative edict. Having CEOs make weekly calls with the White House to foster a public policy action -- or worse, a global climate agenda -- or whatever, with large hedge funds acting as the sword to compel that interest is worthy of civil rights protection. As a libertarian/conservative/right-leaning individual, I share the reflex to avoid limiting or forcing private action, but our public companies are no more "private" than OSHA.
From Casey...
"No evolution of legal principle has left Roe's doctrinal footings weaker than they were in 1973. No development of constitutional law since the case was decided has implicitly or explicitly left Roe behind as a mere survivor of obsolete constitutional thinking.
It will be recognized, of course, that Roe stands at an intersection of two lines of decisions, but in whichever doctrinal category one reads the case, the result for present purposes will be the same. The Roe Court itself placed its holding in the succession of cases most prominently exemplified by Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), see Roe, 410 U. S., at 152-153. When it is so seen, Roe is clearly in no jeopardy, since subsequent constitutional developments have neither disturbed, nor do they threaten to diminish, the scope of recognized protection accorded to the liberty relating to intimate relationships, the family, and decisions about whether or not to beget or bear a child. See, e.g., Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678 (1977); Moore v. East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 678 (1977).
Roe, however, may be seen not only as an exemplar of Griswold liberty but as a rule (whether or not mistaken) of personal autonomy and bodily integrity, with doctrinal affinity to cases recognizing limits on governmental power to mandate medical treatment or to bar its rejection. If so, our cases since Roe accord with Roe's view that a State's interest in the protection of life falls short of justifying any plenary override of individual liberty claims. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept. of Health, 497 U.S. 261,278 (1990); Cf., e.g., Riggins v. Nevada, 504 U.S. ____, ____ (1992) (slip. op., at 7); Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210 (1990); see also, e.g., Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952); Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 24-30 (1905)."
Also, I try ought it was notable that the 6th Circuit decision was completely silent on natural immunity.
I note also an excellent point Dr. McCullough made on the recent Joe Rogan podcast -- before you take the jab required by your employer... at least consider the so-called "social contract." What is the return commitment - how long will they ensure your employment? The consequences of your vaccination (whatever they may prove to be) is forever. What of your employment? Might you still be laid off tomorrow?
That doesn't make sense. If you agree to comply and don't, you are in breach and can be fired. Though I doubt any employer would agree to such a thing (unless you are desperately needed and irreplaceable, in which case they might not fire you anyway),
like what? If I have no intention of getting the jab, what condition would possibly be acceptable to me (even if they were to agree)?
And the fact the vaccine does not prevent transmission. So sick of “to help slow the spread…..” from employer memos. Actual MISINFORMATION allowed to go on.
A true Covid Christmas story.
https://markoshinskie8de.substack.com/p/the-gift-of-the-covid-fearing-magi
While Florida’s DeSantis is light years ahead of near commie, Michigan, I do not trust anything that comes out of big pharma. I wish he would make ivermectin and HCQ as readily available as this new prophylactic. My guess is he does not want to piss off the puppet masters who now rule the globe, (or so they believe), and their long reach is powerful. I am also sure this is some deal offered to FLorida so it can be made available to everyone who wants it. Alas, if ivermectin could be as widely distributed, it would be so much cheaper, HCQ was over the counter in many African nations a year ago. Now it’s gone poof, unless you ‘re someone with Lupus, who have used it all through this crisis. In Michigan,pharmacies still can not write scrips for either.
Yep. Gov DeSantis's latest pronouncements confirm a disappointing pattern: Promote expensive treatments (including possibly-risky EUAs) while ignoring inexpensive long-established very safe treatments like Ivermectin, HCQ, D/k2, Zinc. I hate to think "it's the Benjamins." This while his Dept of Health continues to lie about the vaccines & trick folks into injecting themselves and young kids.
Harmful misinformation, nothing on effective, safe, INEXPENSIVE treatments & prevention.:
https://floridahealthcovid19.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/fdoh_covid19_vax_comms_toolkit_for_partner_orgs.pdf
https://floridahealthcovid19.gov/prevention/
https://floridahealthcovid19.gov/treatment/
And: "Effective 11/2/21, CDC authorized the Pfizer vaccine for children 5-11. Contact your pediatrician to discuss vaccinating your child and to schedule vaccination. You may also schedule at pharmacies, county health depts & local clinics...WHO classified a new Variant of Concern called Omicron, and is coordinating with a large number of researchers to better understand it...The most effective way to protect yourself and loved ones from variants is to get vaccinated [false]. As of July, over 99% of new COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations & deaths nationwide are unvaccinated [false]. While it is possible to become infected even if vaccinated it is exceedingly rare [false], and rarer still that vaccinated people require hospitalization or die due to COVID-19. Other mitigation including frequent handwashing, social distancing & wearing a mask in public places also greatly reduce your chance of being infected." -FDOH auto reply
=======
From Jeff: "people who are “Covid naive” should DO SOMETHING. Injected or not, if folks haven’t had Covid, they could take their vitamins, stock up on some ivermectin just in case, and watch Dr. McCullough’s interview on Rogan, where he suggests a simple beta-dyne nose rinse. And of course, at risk people should consider taking advantage of Florida’s new prophylactic GlaxxoSmithKline mAB therapy."
Good advice, but all of us here are already doing that. Why not lobby DeSantis to promote offer low-cost prevention-treatments at the clinics, to benefit tens of millions?
That's great if you're not elderly, fat, etc, and you've nothing better to do for a few weeks. I had an HCQ scrip filled just when Trump started babbling about it, before it quickly sold out & was denied & he screwed the pooch even worse by hogging up 30 million doses in a gvt bank. A few days later my temp went from normal to 103 in an hour so I started the course. Temp back to normal in 2 hours, fever never returned. At 64, nothing like that had ever happened to me. I'm very glad I had HCQ. I now have Ivermectin too and have taken it with great effect.
Yep. Trump's babble-bungling screwed the pooch in many ways, then panicked and jumped on the covid hysteria bandwagon. Still falsely claims the vax is safe and effective.
I'm sure you're right about the deathspirator & remdesivir, but that's no reason not to claim everyone would be fine with tylenol. Many would've survived if given early access to HCQ, IVM, D/k2, Zinc, budesonide etc
Covid deaths are massively exaggerated - fraud. You do know folks have actually died from covid? Your plan to "just" ban covid from death certs would also be fraud.
No it wouldn't be. Lots of attack dogs out here on Substack at the moment. How did you get in, I thought you had to have a visa to leave Twitter?
Starting over. I'm never on Twitter, ignoring your attack. So you're saying there's no such thing as a death from covid? If not, how could banning covid as cause of death not be fraud?
deleted
No I provide value. Rather than fiat.
There is a reasonable ground, and it's not pretending covid doesn't exist.
I don't think you can just call it something else, but we should be able to expose the fraud-exaggeration of covid deaths. Even many commie-libs are getting sick of this, and are increasingly open to the truth. The covid tyrants are about mid-air over the shark.
Thanks for calming me down a bit about the 6th Circuit. But regardless of what eventually happens in court, most of the damage has already been done. When I read the stories of vax victims, people who have already been fired, etc. no court decision is going to restore them to their previous lives. But at least I am bit more optimistic that the Supreme Court will weigh in and hopefully stop this madness and wake people up to the medical totalitarianism that seems to be growing by the day.
So I wonder IF, a big IF, the SC decides against the mandates, do people who have been fired from their jobs have grounds for a possible law suit ?
Good question
The intellectual side of me is finding the mandate issue incredibly interesting to watch play out in real time. The emotional side of me fluctuates among fear, anger, and sadness. Legal and medical mayhem indeed.
Thanks Jeff!
I just keeping shaking my head over these "mandates" of the short-acting "vaccine" -- will they be in place forever? Will I /never/ be able to travel to Canada? Will unvaccinated people /never/ be able to enter the United States? Never? ("Did you get the shot 15 years that did nothing?") Will people 25 years from now have to go find the 2019 version of the "COVID" vaccine-- will it still be produced? Or will it be updated to the 2035 version? Will that be acceptable? Will college students (and visitor to the Vermont State house) still be taking PCR tests every day? Will they still test positive? When will this panic ever end?
It's all so mind-boggle-ingly stupid.
All for a virus less deadly than the flu. We’ve been duped.
I see this a little differently Mike. It will be interesting (or terrifying) to see who’s right. I think in spite of all of the bumbling bureaucrats, C19 will continue to weaken and people will be sick to death of hearing about it before the 2022 elections. Candidates need to be clear and honest about what they bring to the table and they need to campaign the old fashioned way. They need to knock on doors and have public rallies to ask for votes. Tech gods aren’t going to allow any dissenting voices so we can’t use social media as a tool. Mail in voting cannot be allowed ever again on the scale it was done last year. The only avenue left to us will be to vote against tyrants in 2022 and to insist on having lawyers and poll watchers to ensure an honest election. But I expect the powers to be to string out fear and confusion as long as possible so they can tie it all around Trump’s neck if he decides to run in 2024.
I really feel like we have a bleak future ahead of us if Pelosi wins next year and another Dem president is elected in 2024 so it behooves us to stand up and push back. It’s past time to pop corn and watch the show. We’re in it, like it or not.
My friend in Buffalo and I talk daily. I don’t know how they can stand the tyranny of the government. I’ve never been so grateful to live in the South.
Look at Knoxville, Tennessee. Knox County. No state income tax, reliably red and the University of TN is there. Enough activity to keep you from getting bored. Four seasons and plenty of outside activities. I also love the little town of Jonesboro, TN. Washington County.
The towns of Maryville and Louisville are also nice. Suburbs of Knoxville.
Can tell by the way that you write. I feel similar here in NZ. Trouble is it's harder for us to get away.
My problem for folks is that so much of the scrimmage line has been moved the last 2 years. Even if the Supreme Court rules against the Mandate, which it is not at all clear they will do, but if they do, it will come with language of why THIS mandate is struck down.. and folks will take another run at it. There is too much money, impetus the the power structure for the next decade is on the line, maybe longer. Exhibit A: Phizer just announced that it is going straight for a 3 jab protocol for young kids, who are for all intents and purposes at no risk for this. Every front is doubling down.
Between abortion, gun control laws, and this mandate, the STORY generated should the constitution ACTUALLY get upheld (instead of SCOTUS law making in the past) will super motivate the left. The ruling should be what they should be, but the narrative and story of what that means , why, etc.. has got to be worked on hard by conservatives and constitutionalists. This is clearly a weak point, arguing only the facts, law, etc, with no motivating reason why these are good and just and needed for a real society that looks anything like America… and even that is not longer a good enough story, actually.
Not sure I’m that pessimistic, but that’s what I mean by moving the line of scrimmage. The new normal is moving constantly, the right just stops things from moving forward, it never returns things to where they have been, which is tragic.
Thank you for these posts Jeff! I am in Florida and very thankful for it these days... I am also in healthcare and this was another heart stopping moment when I read about the 5th Circuit Court last night stopping the injunction block. It is the most frustrating thing to be in a ping pong ball situation over livelihood. Who can stop these communistic overreaching thugs in office?
When the virus does not exist, neither does COVID... During the the peak of the media fear campaign, the susceptible masses were programmed to react to every sneeze as a sign of Covid - too often followed by ER trips and testing, testing, testing... When Nancy Pelosi purchased a $22 Million dollar mansion on the coast of Florida she demonstrated to her supporters that she was more fearful of Newsom's California mandates than Global Warming and rising sea levels in Florida.
They seriously should not “allow” her to relocate there. She probably is going to set up operatives to teach them how to steal the vote like they do in Cali. She needs to stay in the mess if the state she and her Gruesome created. God help us.
Turns out the story about Pelosi buying the Florida mansion was fake news.
Thought she didn't buy a house there after all?
You're right. I got snookered. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10238989/Nancy-Pelosi-moving-25million-ocean-mansion-Florida.html
Well. I’d say I’m going to hold off believing anything yet. How many times has a politician used their aides to deny something to the press for weeks and months, then finally reveal they actually are doing what they denied. Did she buy the house? Does she plan to move to Florida? Her aide says no. But I think we have a case of a possible lying liar 🤥…because that’s what they are best known for. So, we’ll see.
Funny that the house Pelosi was allegedly buying was at the south end of the same street where Mark Levin has a house on the north end.
Yep
The 6th Circuit: “The COVID-19 pandemic has wreaked havoc across America, leading to the loss of over 800,000 lives, shutting down workplaces and jobs across the country, and threatening our economy.”
Even if it were the purview of courts to rule on points of emotion rather than law, this argument fails to support their decision as it is not the virus that is causing the problems they list but rather the insane reaction to the virus by government entities. The issue they are ruling on is one of those insane reactions.
Regarding the Africa Omicron issue, Alex Berenson discusses one of the left's lame excuses, that cases are low because Africa has a younger population, here:
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/correcting-misinformation
Note that, among other problems with such an argument, it flies on the face of the left's insistence on injecting young and old alike.
As for these prophylactic treatments, according to the September 2021 definition from the CDC (I couldn't find a newer definition) "Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases." So, yeah, these treatments, along with what many of us already do to support and build the immune system, seem to qualify as "vaccines".
The fact that they are under EU is very concerning - EUs have seen some questionable efficacy and safety results.
Also look at how they dishonestly and self-servingly redefined "herd immunity". Now the definition ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY involves vaccination. Under the new definition, there is NO SUCH THING as herd immunity achieve with the help of naturally-acquired immunity.
Once again, the ONLY reason to do this was to protect the EUAs, which protects the drug companies' profits, which eventually make their way into the pockets of politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists, and medical board bigwigs.
Take a look at SimulationCommander's Substack post on the very subject of re-defined words and concepts here: https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/newspeak-is-upon-us
You couldn't find a *newer* definition, but here's the one that existed before the corrupt, dishonest CDC redefined "vaccine" in order to protect the EUAs, which protects the drug companies' profits, which eventually make their way into the pockets of politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists, and medical board bigwigs.
"Vaccine: A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose."
How many of today's vaccines meet the new definition of vaccine?
All of them
How many of today's vaccines meet the old definition of vaccine?
All of them.....................................except the Chinese virus vaccines.
QED
Thats a new definition to cover for the covid jabs failure.
I wondered about that. I did some research (googling) and found that Evusheld is nothing at all like the nRNA jabs. Evusheld is a monoclonal antibody cocktail designed for pre-infection use as a prevention against infection. Post infection treatment with monoclonal antibodies have been very effective. Evusheld is designed for people with moderate to severe immune compromise due to a medical condition or immunosuppressive medications, as well as those individuals for whom COVID-19 vaccination is not recommended. Clinical trials show EvuSheld showed a statistically significant reduction (77% at primary analysis, 83% at median six-month analysis) in the risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 compared to placebo, with protection from the virus continuing for at least six months.
Of course there are always risks from any type of medical treatment, but at least monoclonal antibody technology has been around since the mid 1970's, and fully licensed since 1986.
Repost........ The manipulation of all Americans is an issue, but dims in comparison to the facts being revealed now that show that our own Government has been planning for years to develop a deadly corona virus that was release on us and the World. Then they ran fake negative evaluation testing and passed laws to keep proven safe and effective early treatment drugs, like HCQ and Ivermectin, off the market so the FDA could pass emergency use for their spike protein injections. Then they blocked the ability of doctors, hospitals and old people homes from access to these cheap worldwide proven early treatment drugs, and in doing so probably causing the death of 85% of 800,000 that they say died from Covid19. All so they could play God and steal $billions with mRNA injections and killing nearly 700,000 Americans. The proof is America has the highest death rate in the World, and it caused more deaths worldwide than all 20 century wars combined. That is what the headlines should be and what everyone should be pissed off about. These people need to be removed from power and the FDA, NIH, CDC need total restructuring...now. It makes little difference if it is greed, power, ineptitude , or insanity driving this genocide. Our own health care system has failed us.....to put it mildly.
Haven’t a clue from whom or where you reposted, but the analysis is spot on aging Viking, unfortunately...
Thank you Jeff for all of your work on this.
Using your guidance, I now have an approved RA from the FC mandate.
I am upset that I needed to do it in the first place, but after praying about it, I decided to do it. I will not take the injection. This is OUR fight for God, Country, and Liberty.
Just to completely take a hard right turn....I saw a shirt yesterday with George Washington saying: "Me and my homies would be stacking the bodies by now." I like.