This poll may be the most promising news we’ve seen since Covid began. As lonely as it may sometimes seem being an anti-lockdown activist, these poll results go to show that it’s not just a handful of us who feel as we do—it’s actually billions. In India, especially, an overwhelming majority of respondents agreed that the government took away too much freedom during Covid, which is unsurprising when remembering scenes like these during lockdown.
One of the most nonsensical aspects of continuing COVID-19 vaccine mandates is that individuals who survived the mandates last year – that is, were fortunate enough to be granted religious and/or medical exemptions – have to reapply this year. Did these religious reasons suddenly change without the person complying with the mandate initially? Did these medical reasons that were severe enough to compel a physician to write an exemption suddenly go away?
We live in a time when powerful forces, wielding very powerful new informational weapons, seek to place a wedge between ourselves and practices which have long been essential to the search for self-knowledge, social meaning, and the ability to promote and safeguard human dignity.
This letter lays out comprehensive reasons why the recent U.S. FDA decision authorizing COVID vaccinations in infants and young children must not happen in the UK. The letter is well-sourced and accurate. Let us hope that main-stream media here in the USA and in the UK report on this letter in an unbiased fashion.
The Imperial College authors want us to believe that without the COVID vaccines the world’s total death toll would have risen by at least a third in 2021 (had they included China, their result would have come close to an increase of 50%), and that this rise would have been entirely due to COVID-19. How does this not seem completely ludicrous to anybody with a remnant of common and clinical sense?
There is supposed to be a clear line between medical publishing and propaganda. No less so than in the pages of the Lancet, previously considered a relative bastion of integrity in publishing. Honesty in medical publishing, meaning publication on the basis of transparent rigorous review and impartiality, is of particular importance to medicine and public health. The outcomes of such publications contribute to saving or killing people.
Big Tech platforms openly collude with governments to suppress the speech of their own people, while overtly abusing the legal system and paying massive settlements to conceal the evidence of their collusion. They craft the false illusion of consensus on political issues of their own choosing, a power unprecedented in our democracy and historically held only by the most despotic regimes, promising in every instance to wield it for good, but falling short every time.
It’s useful to think about in terms of what happened in March of 2020. It was then that politicians aggressively took away freedom. The very humans who drive all progress had become a lethal menace to one another, according to politicians and experts. Suddenly eating in a restaurant, trying on clothes in a clothing store, flying on a plane, or merely touching one’s face had life or death qualities.
Fraiman and colleagues have produced the best evidence yet regarding the overall safety of the mRNA vaccines. The results are concerning. It is the responsibility of the manufacturers and FDA to ensure that benefits outweigh harms. They have failed to do so.
In his four years of struggle with what was a terminal cancer, Dr. Zelenko looked death in the eye numerous times. He said that these experiences made him unafraid of the opinions of men. But I think that he had a strength of character that enabled him to get to that point, separate from his own illness, that surely made him unique.
Tribalism and polarization have made our political and medical discourse nasty and divisive. Doctors must be kept above the partisan fray, not forced to take sides and pick a jersey. Our jobs are too important, and we need to be apolitical to maintain credibility with everyone who comes to us seeking treatment. Progress and innovative medical breakthroughs in the future depend on freedom and medical choice now.
To be sure, such high philosophy and clear thinking on representative democracy does not on its own dismantle the beast, but this case did rule against the EPA just as previous decisions have ruled against the CDC. It’s a great start.
The Mighty Gorsuch vs. the Administrative State: Quotes from West Virginia vs. EPA Read More
