These galling testimonies aside, it’s not surprising why Rochelle Walensky was picked to be CDC Director. On the surface, she’s articulate and presentable. So it’s a real testament as to how far public health has fallen over these last three years that someone in her position would be telling these kinds of falsehoods and defending such atrocious policies.
All the time, money and research sunk into attempts to develop bioweapon countermeasures caused everyone involved to view Covid as a golden opportunity. In fact, governments, pharmaceutical companies and NGOs invested in biodefense research were determined that the Covid genetic vaccines would “succeed” no matter what. They were not trying to murder anyone, but they also did not plan to stop or slow down, regardless of incidental injuries or death.
Vaccine Harms Are Biodefense Plan’s Collateral Damage Read More
Are we going to allow a repeat of what happened during Covid-19, or are we going to exercise critical thinking and our rights as citizens, to put an end to the growing biomedical security state? I choose the latter. We can start by critically examining what we’re being fed by the mainstream media, and by compromised government and public health officials, and refusing to be frightened and manipulated into another over reactive, unconstitutional, disastrous response to a pathogen.
It’s clear now that Scotland’s draconian non-pharmaceutical interventions designed to stop the spread of COVID-19 were a catastrophic failure, imposing a massive cost without any benefits. And those costs continue to accumulate, with drug and alcohol addiction soaring, educational attainment plummeting, hospitals bursting at the seams, and the economy in the doldrums. Sturgeon’s hopeless mismanagement of the pandemic, always trying to out-Ceaușescu Boris, has made everything worse.
Eight leading critics of the United States’s COVID-19 response have called for an investigation of the many failures of policy architects and key decision makers — at institutions ranging from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Food and Drug Administration to universities and hospitals — over their repeated mishandling of the pandemic.
Vaccine mandates hit hard in the late summer and fall of 2021. Get the jab or lose your job. Health care workers and public sector employees had it especially bad. Somehow it seemed right. If you are interacting with the public in a health capacity, you need to be sure you won’t infect anyone. If you are a government employee, surely the government should be able to tell you what you have to take to make everyone else safe.
Many Republican leaders have publicized their opposition to mandates and demanded accountability for pharmaceutical companies. Now, the GOP has the opportunity to affirm its commitment to the justice of the Seventh Amendment and to demand liability for Big Pharma’s most lucrative products.
In the early months of the pandemic, scientists concerned about lockdowns feared “coming out” in public. The GBD partners took one for the B team and did the dirty work. They paid a heavy price for it, including the loss of some personal friendships, but they held their ground. In print, on air, and on social media, Bhattacharya continues to describe lockdowns as “the single worst public health mistake in the last 100 years,” with catastrophic health and psychological harms that will play out for a generation.
Focused Protection: Jay Bhattacharya, Sunetra Gupta, and Martin Kulldorff Read More
People no longer have an emotional connection while speaking when wearing masks. And we can no longer understand each other’s speech. A venue full of masked people is a place lacking in humanity. It is an artificial world based on virtue-signaling and the elevation of appearance over reality, rather than actual human connection.
First, the resort to emotional arguments and moral blackmail generally implies that they have little reasoned argument and evidence to support their case and are deflecting to bluster instead. Second, whenever we are presented with excitable exclamation marks (Saddam Hussein already has weapons of mass destruction (WMD)! He can hit us with WMD in just 45 minutes! Coronavirus could be more cataclysmic than the Spanish flu! The sky is falling!), it is a very good idea to substitute sceptical question marks instead:
The lockdowns did not improve health outcomes. They did devastate economic outcomes. And economics is part of health which in turn is a reflection of the quality of life. The same results pertain however we shuffle the data: adjusting by age, adjusting by population, adjusting by population density. The conclusion is completely undeniable. Lockdowns were a disaster and they achieved nothing in terms of their stated purpose.
The 510,000 figure, which turned the world on its head, was a fantasy number churned out by absurd modeling of a zero-probability event. The main way in which Mr Cummings, and in this respect he is a significantly representative figure, is going dreadfully wrong is that, when judging government policy as a response to emergency, he does not see that the reason why the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak escalated into the public policy catastrophe that it became was the fundamentally flawed Imperial College London modeling on which the government based its response.
