Doctors Raise Awareness on Ivermectin Treatment for COVID-19

In an effort to help end the pandemic, an international coalition of medical experts is holding worldwide events Saturday to raise awareness about the effectiveness of ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19.

Organizers of the World Ivermectin Day say doctors and supporters of the inexpensive FDA-approved drug will host free online and public events in over a dozen countries.

Two nonprofits—Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance and the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD) group—who have been campaigning for the off-label use of ivermectin to prevent and treat COVID-19 say the event’s focus is to let more people know that the antiparasitic drug can treat COVID-19, possibly end the pandemic, and help eliminate fear of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

“We have an incredibly positive and uplifting message to share: ivermectin treats and prevents COVID and it is the key to unlocking the never-ending cycle of pandemic peaks and personal restrictions and will help restart economies,” Dr. Tess Lawrie, cofounder of the BIRD group said in a press release.

Lawrie is also a co-author of a peer-reviewed meta-analysis study published in the American Journal of Therapeutics that found ivermectin to be effective against COVID-19, the disease caused by the CCP virus. Lawrie and her team concluded with a moderate level of confidence that ivermectin reduced the risk of death by an average of 62 percent, at a 95 percent confidence interval of 0.19-0.73, especially when prescribed early.

FLCCC Alliance also conducted their own review of 18 randomized controlled trials on COVID-19 treatment with ivermectin. They found “large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance.” The authors also said that studies on the prevention of COVID-19 reported significantly reduced risks of the disease with regular use of the drug.

Members of the FLCCC Alliance have developed various protocols for the prevention and early treatment of COVID-19, instead of having patients wait until they develop a severe illness to receive treatment at the hospital. These treatment protocols including one for the management of long COVID are being used globally.

The current standard protocol for COVID-19 positive patients is to isolate at home, avoid dehydration, rest, and take over-the-counter medications for fever, headache, cough, and body pain.

According to updated guidance from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 and who are at high risk of disease progression, are recommended to take a monoclonal antibody if hospitalization or supplemental oxygen is not required.

Despite evidence showing ivermectin may treat all stages of COVID-19 and reduce death and hospitalization as a result of its anti-viral and anti-inflammatory properties, the FDA has not approved its use, saying that the drug isn’t an anti-viral. The federal regulator issued a warning that people should not take ivermectin intended for horses as the larger doses may be harmful to humans.

The NIH has not changed its neutral stance on the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19, while the World Health Organization (WHO) does not recommend the use of the drug except in a clinical study. Both organizations cite insufficient data for not making a recommendation.

Unprecedented Censorship

Online discussions of ivermectin have faced an unprecedented level of suppression with doctors claiming that their videos are being taken down or their LinkedIn accounts closed.

Lawrie said she has experienced censorship with her work on ivermectin, claiming that her videos about the drug have been removed and posts censored on social media.

“I have experienced a lot of censorship ever since I started doing work on ivermectin (never before),” Lawrie told The Epoch Times via email. “I have had my post of my published peer-reviewed scientific manuscript removed from LinkedIn.”

She also said that many people have informed her that their accounts would be restricted or censored “if they post the work my company has produced on ivermectin or interviews that I have done.”

LinkedIn did not reply to a request for comment.

Dr. Mobeen Syed, chief executive officer of Drbeen Corp, an online medical education, said YouTube took down three of his videos on ivermectin within 24 hours.

“[Third] book burnt in 24 hours. @Youtube @TeamYouTube continue to burn books,” Syed said on Twitter on July 11. “This video was important to keep people safe who are using ivermectin regardless of what YouTube thinks.”

YouTube did not reply to The Epoch Times inquiry on clarification of which terms or conditions Syed’s videos had violated.

Ivermectin is not the only topic being suppressed or blocked by Big Tech firms. Social media posts about the lab leak theory that the CCP virus escaped from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, and information that goes against the narrative about the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine has also been censored.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki suggested at a White House briefing that people should be banned from all social media platforms if they post misinformation online about COVID-19 vaccines, alleging that this type of information was “leading to people not taking the vaccine.” Psaki’s suggestion has drawn widespread condemnation.

Regardless of the suppression of ivermectin around the world, people have found unique ways to get the information out. Social media posts of lawn signs have appeared in Manitoba, Canada with a simple message that reads, “Ivermectin treats COVID-19” along with the FLCCC website listed

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/doctors-raise-awareness-on-ivermectin-as-treatment-for-covid-19-to-help-end-the-pandemic_3916366.html

**************************************

The Pope is a Catholic after all

He has been so liberal in many ways that his new Canons are a most refreshing reaffirmation of traditional Catholic morality

Pope Francis has made the most extensive revisions to Catholic Church law in four decades, insisting that bishops take action against clerics who sexually abuse minors and vulnerable adults, commit economic fraud or ordain women.

In many ways, the changes published on Tuesday integrate piecemeal reforms that have been made over the years to address clergy sexual abuse and financial scandals that have compromised the credibility of the hierarchy in the eyes of rank-and-file faithful.

The new provisions, released on Tuesday after 14 years of study, were contained in the revised criminal law section of the Vatican's Code of Canon Law, the in-house legal system that covers the 1.3 billion-member Catholic Church and operates independently from civil laws.

What are the new provisions?

The most significant changes are contained in two articles, 1395 and 1398, which aim to address shortcomings in the church's handling of sexual abuse.

The law recognises that adults, not only children, can be victimised by priests who abuse their authority.

The revisions also say that laypeople holding church positions, such as school principals or parish economists, can be punished for abusing minors as well as adults.

The Vatican also criminalised priests "grooming" minors or vulnerable adults to compel them to engage in pornography – the update is the first time church law has officially recognised as criminal the method used by sexual predators to build relationships with victims they have targeted for sexual exploitation.

The new law, which is set to take effect on December 8, also removes much of the discretion that long allowed bishops and religious superiors to ignore or cover up abuse, making clear that those in positions of authority will be held responsible if they fail to properly investigate or sanction predator priests.

A bishop can be removed from office for "culpable negligence" or if he does not report sex crimes to church authorities, although the canon law foresees no punishment for failing to report suspected crimes to police.

While the church has historically prohibited the ordination of women and the ban has been reaffirmed by popes, the 1983 code says only in another section that priestly ordination was reserved for "a baptised male".

The revised code specifically warns that both the person who attempts to confer ordination on a woman and the woman herself incur automatic excommunication and that the cleric risks being defrocked.

Kate McElwee, executive director of the Women's Ordination Conference, said in a statement that while the position was not surprising, spelling it out in the new code was "a painful reminder of the Vatican's patriarchal machinery and its far-reaching attempts to subordinate women".

Reflecting the series of financial scandals that have hit the Church in recent decades, other new entries in the code include several on economic crimes, such as embezzlement of church funds or property or grave negligence in their administration.

What prompted the changes?

Ever since the 1983 code first was issued, lawyers and bishops have complained it was inadequate for dealing with the sexual abuse of minors since it required time-consuming trials.

Victims and their advocates, meanwhile, argued the code left too much discretion in the hands of bishops who had an interest in covering up for their priests.

The Vatican issued piecemeal changes over the years to address problems and loopholes, most significantly requiring all cases to be sent to the Holy See for review and allowing for a more streamlined administrative process to defrock a priest if the evidence against him was overwhelming.

The Vatican has long considered any sexual relations between a priest and an adult as sinful but consensual, believing that adults are able to offer or refuse consent purely by the nature of their age.

But amid the #MeToo movement and scandals of seminarians and nuns being sexually abused by their superiors, the Vatican has come to realise that adults can be victimised if there is a power imbalance in the relationship.

Monsignor Juan Ignacio Arrieta, secretary of the Vatican's legal office, said the new version would cover any rank-and-file member of the church who is a victim of a priest who abused his authority.

Pitfalls in the new code

The law does not explicitly define which adults are covered, saying only an adult who "habitually has an imperfect use of reason" or for "whom the law recognises equal protection".

Arrieta said the Vatican chose not to define precisely who is covered but noted that the Vatican previously defined vulnerable adults as those who even occasionally are unable to understand or consent because of a physical or mental deficiency or are deprived of their personal liberty.

The Reverend Davide Cito, a canon lawyer at the Pontifical Holy Cross University, said the broadness of the law "allows it to protect many people" who might not necessarily fall under the strict definition of "vulnerable" but are nevertheless deserving of protection.

In a novelty aimed at addressing sex crimes committed by laypeople who hold church offices, such as the founders of lay religious movements or even parish accountants and administrators, the new law says laypeople can be punished if they abuse their authority to engage in sexual or financial crimes.

Since these laypeople cannot be defrocked, penalties include losing their jobs, paying fines or being removed from their communities.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-02/pope-francis-church-law-priests-sexual-abuse-adults/100183472

******************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS

*************************************

Israeli company is set to become first in the world to launch clinical trials of an ORAL COVID-19 vaccine

Oravax Medical, a subsidiary of Jerusalem-based Oramed Pharmaceuticals, has received a green light to begin the study from the Institutional Review Board at Sourasky Medical Center in Tel Aviv.

The team is now waiting for approval from the Health Ministry, which is expected within a few weeks.

Oramed CEO Nadav Kidron told The Jerusalem Post that an oral vaccine would be faster, cheaper and easier to manufacture than vaccines that are injected.

What's more, it could be easily distributed to low-and middle-income countries. 'An oral COVID-19 vaccine would eliminate several barriers to rapid, wide-scale distribution, potentially enabling people to take the vaccine themselves at home,' he said. 

'While ease of administration is critical today to accelerate inoculation rates, an oral vaccine could become even more valuable in the case that a COVID-19 vaccine may be recommended annually like the standard flu shot.' 

The technology is the same that the company is using to develop insulin capsules for type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients Nadav Kidron told The Jerusalem Post.  Kidron explained the trials are initially being conducted as a 'proof of concept' rather than testing efficacy. 

Researchers are recruiting 24 unvaccinated volunteers  with half receiving one pill and the other half two pills.

The team will analyze safety and then take participants' blood samples to measure antibody levels.

If results prove successful, the trial will move into Phase III when the capsules will be tested against a placebo.  

'The idea here is that we want to show proof of concept: that it works for people,' Kidron told The Jerusalem Post.

'I pray and hope that we will. Imagine that we could give someone an oral vaccine and they are vaccinated. This would be a revolution for the entire world.' 

The Oravax vaccine targets three proteins on the virus rather then the single spike protein that the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines target. 

Kidron says this should help the pill be much more effective against variant, which often have mutations on the spike protein.

'This vaccine should be much more resistant to COVID-19 variants,' he told The Jerusalem Post. 

'Even if the virus gets through one line, there is a second line, and if through the second line, there is a third.' 

The pill can be shipped in refrigeration cooler and even be stored at room temperature, unlike other COVID-19. 

What's more, it would not need to be administered by a health professional, making it easy to distribute in schools, offices  and other businesses.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9815309/Israeli-company-set-launch-clinical-trials-ORAL-Covid-vaccine.html

Brigham Young University Hawaii Contradicts Student’s Doctor, Says She Must Receive Vaccine or Find Another School, Despite Her Serious Medical Condition

An incoming freshman with a neurological disorder has been told she will need to receive a mandatory COVID-19 vaccine to pursue her studies, despite her doctor warning the school of the risks due to her condition.

BY EVELYN RAE

Olivia Sandor, who suffers from Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS), an auto-immune disease that paralyzed her from the waist down, was set to start at the this fall, when an announcement was made June 16 that all students would be required to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.

When the school announced its new policy, BYUH’s assistant to the president said that students with religious or medical reasons can apply for an immunization exemption and that each case and circumstance would be reviewed to see if the student qualified.

Due to her unique and life-threatening circumstances, Olivia provided the university with a medical exemption in which her doctor notified the school of the risks she faced if she were to take the vaccine.

The letter read:

Olivia has been a patient of mine for many years. In January of 2019, she received an influenza vaccine and within a couple of years developed Guillain Barre Syndrome and was very ill for a couple of months.

Because of her history I believe a COVID vaccine or another influenza vaccine will endanger her health and possibly her life. I believe she should avoid those vaccines indefinitely.

After waiting three weeks, Olivia received a letter from the university informing her that her exemption had been denied.

The university’s response read:

After careful consideration of your request for a medical exemption, we reget that we cannot accommodate your request. Due to our unique location, diverse student population, and daily interaction with international tourists at the Polynesian Cultural Center, we must take extra precautions to protect our campus and community.

We recommend that you come when you can be fully vaccinated or consider attendance at one of our other church universities.

With the help of her parents, Olivia appealed again to the university, pleading with them to understand her medical circumstances.

The university responded again to Olivia, denying her request a second time, and providing two references from university doctors who had never treated her, assuring her the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines would be safe for her to take.

“She should not get the J&J vaccine, but the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines would be OK,” the email from the university said in contradiction to the advice of the doctor treating Olivia’s condition.

“It states that the mRNA vaccines (i.e. Moderna) haven’t shown any association with triggering GBS. She should be fine to get the Moderna vaccine.”

Olivia told Caldron Pool that attending BYUH had been her dream and that she had turned down a $200,000 scholarship to enrol at the university.

In a post on social media, Olivia detailed her experience, saying, “I’m sharing this today to shed light on how the COVID-19 vaccine is affecting me and my life and to help others not feel so alone… I may not know why this is all happening now, but I have faith that there is a reason.”

Olivia is one of a number of students who have expressed concerns about the mandatory vaccine policy adopted by BYUH.

https://caldronpool.com/university-contradicts-students-doctor-says-she-must-receive-vaccine-or-find-another-school-despite-her-serious-medical-condition/

FDA to Add Warning About Neurological Disorder Linked to Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 Vaccine

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on July 12 said it will add a warning label to Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine that it is linked to a rare neurological disorder known as Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), while J&J confirmed it is “in discussions” with federal agencies.

“The FDA is announcing revisions to the vaccine recipient and vaccination provider fact sheets for the Johnson & Johnson (Janssen) COVID-19 Vaccine to include information pertaining to an observed increased risk of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) following vaccination,” an FDA spokesperson told The Epoch Times on July 12.

The benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks, the agency said.

That determination was made “based on an analysis of Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting (VAERS) data” which found “there have been 100 preliminary reports following vaccination with the Janssen vaccine after approximately 12.5 million doses administered,” the spokesperson said. “Of these reports, 95 of them were serious and required hospitalization.”

As of now, the FDA noted, although available data suggest there is an association between the J&J vaccine and an increased risk of GBS, this is “insufficient to establish a causal relationship.”

The spokesperson added that the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines don’t present a similar risk.

Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the CDC told The Epoch Times that the federal health agency is monitoring reports of GBS.

“Every year in the United States, an estimated 3,000 to 6,000 people develop GBS,” said a CDC spokesperson, adding that “it is typically triggered by a respiratory or gastrointestinal infection. <font style="background-color:yellow; font-weight:bold;">Most people fully recover from GBS.”</font>

According to the CDC, GBS is a neurological disorder in which the body’s immune system damages nerve cells and causes muscle weakness. In some cases, the disorder can cause paralysis, says the Mayo Clinic, which noted that most people with the condition must be hospitalized.

J&J, in a statement on Monday, confirmed it has “been in discussions with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and other regulators about rare cases of the neurological disorder, Guillain-Barré syndrome, that have been reported following vaccination with the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine.”

“The chance of having this occur is very low,” the statement added, “and the rate of reported cases exceeds the background rate by a small degree.”

GBS has been linked as a rare side effect to various vaccines, including one that was developed to combat the swine flu in 1976, according to the UK National Health Services website.

Earlier this year, the CDC and FDA recommended halting usage of the J&J vaccine after reports of blood clots emerged among some individuals who had received it. Weeks later, the two agencies said that the vaccine could again be used, but with an FDA warning.

“This pause was essential to our ability to inform the public, inform physicians, and acquire more data for presentation and for analysis,” Dr. José Romero, chairman of the CDC’s Committee of Immunizations, said in April. The vote was 10–4 in favor of recommending the vaccine to adults who are 18 or older. There was one abstention.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/cdc-investigating-cases-of-neurological-disorder-after-johnson-johnson-covid-19-vaccine_3898348.html

****************************************

Democratic Party Won’t Admit It’s Become Party of Wealth

How often during the last year of wokeness have middle- and lower-class Americans listened to multimillionaires of all races and genders lecture them on their various pathologies and oppressions?

University presidents with million-dollar salaries virtue signal on the cheap their own sort of “unearned white privilege.”

Meghan Markle and the Obamas, from their plush estates, indict Americans for their biases.

Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Khan-Cullors Brignac decries the oppressive victimization she and others have suffered—from one of her four recently acquired homes.

Do we need another performance-art sermon on America’s innate unfairness from billionaire entertainers such as Beyonce, Jay-Z, or Oprah Winfrey, or from multimillionaire Delta or Coca-Cola CEOs?

During the 1980s cultural war, the left’s mantra was “race, class, and gender.” Occasionally we still hear of that trifecta, but the class part has increasingly disappeared. The neglect of class is ironic given that a number of recent studies conclude class differences are widening as never before.

Middle-class incomes among all races have stagnated, and family net worth has declined. Far greater percentages of rising incomes go to the already rich. Student debt, mostly a phenomenon of the middle and lower classes, has hit $1.7 trillion.

States such California have bifurcated into medieval-style societies. California’s progressive coastal elites boast some of the highest incomes in the nation. But in the more conservative north and central interior, nearly a third of the population lives below the poverty line—explaining why 1 of every 3 American welfare recipients lives in California.

California’s heating, cooling, gasoline, and housing costs are the highest in the continental United States. Most of these spiraling costs are attributable to polices embraced by an upper-class elite—in Silicon Valley, Hollywood, and marquee universities—whose incomes shield them from the deleterious consequences of their utopian bromides. The poor and middle classes have no such insulation.

So why are we not talking about class?

First, we are watching historic changes in political alignment.

The two parties are switching class constituents. Some 65% of the Americans making more than $500,000 a year are Democrats, and 74% of those who earn less than $100,000 a year are Republicans, according to IRS statistics. Gone are the days of working people automatically voting Democratic, or Republicans being caricatured as a party of stockbrokers on golf courses.

By 2018, Democratic representatives were in control all 20 of the wealthiest congressional districts. In the recent presidential primaries and general election, 17 of the 20 wealthiest ZIP codes gave more money to Democratic candidates than to Republicans.

Increasingly, the Democrats are a bicoastal party of elites from corporate America, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, the media, universities, entertainment, and professional sports. All have made out like bandits from globalization.

Democrats have lost much of their support from working-class whites, especially in the interior of the country. But they are also fast forfeiting the Hispanic middle class and beginning to lose solidarity among middle-class African Americans.

The Democratic Party does not wish to admit it has become the party of wealth. All too often its stale revolutionary speechifying sounds more like penance arising from guilt than genuine advocacy for middle-class citizens of all races.

The wealthy leftist elite has mastered the rhetoric of ridicule for the lower-middle classes, especially struggling whites. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden wrote off their political opponents as supposedly crude, superstitious, and racist, smearing them as “clingers,” “deplorables,” “irredeemables,” and “chumps.”

Class is fluid; race is immutable. So by fixating on race, the left believes that it can divide America into permanent victimizers and victims—at a time when race and class are increasingly disconnecting.

The wealthy of all races are the loudest voices of the woke movement. Their frequent assumptions of  “victimhood” are absurd.

Americans who struggle to pay soaring gas, food, energy, and housing prices are berated for their “white privilege” by an array of well-paid academics, media elite, and CEOs.

Note that the woke military is the brand of admirals, generals, and retired top brass on corporate boards, not of the enlisted. It’s multimillionaire CEOs who bark at the nation for their prejudices, not saleswomen or company truck drivers.

America is a plutocracy, not a genocracy. Wealth, not race, is the factor most likely to ensure someone power, influence, and the good life.

In the pre-civil rights past, race was often fused to class, and the two terms were logically used interchangeably to cite oppression and inequality. But such a canard is fossilized. And so are those who desperately cling to it.

The more the elites scream their woke banalities, the more they seem to fear that they, not most Americans, are really the privileged, coddled, and pampered ones—and sometimes the victimizers.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/07/15/democratic-party-wont-admit-its-become-party-of-wealth

The Effects of Vitamin D and COVID-Related Outcomes

As early as November 2020, it was known that there were striking differences in vitamin D status among people who had asymptomatic COVID-19 and those who became severely ill and required intensive care unit (ICU) care. In one study, 32.96 percent of those with asymptomatic cases were vitamin D deficient, compared to 96.82 percent of those who were admitted to the ICU for a severe case.

COVID-19 patients who were deficient in this inexpensive and widely available vitamin had a higher inflammatory response and a greater fatality rate. The Indian study authors recommended “mass administration of vitamin D supplements to populations at risk for COVID-19,” in a study published in Scientific Reports, but this hasn’t happened, at least not in the United States.

As of April 21, the date the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) last updated its COVID-19 treatment guidelines/vitamin D page, the agency stated, “There are insufficient data to recommend either for or against the use of vitamin D for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19.” As you’ll see in the paragraphs that follow, however, the evidence for its use is strong.

Vitamin D Therapy Reduces COVID’s Inflammatory Storm

Vitamin D has multiple actions on the immune system, including enhancing the production of antimicrobial peptides by immune cells, reducing damaging pro-inflammatory cytokines, and promoting the expression of anti-inflammatory cytokines. Cytokines are a group of proteins that your body uses to control inflammation.

If you have an infection, your body will release cytokines to help combat inflammation, but sometimes, it releases more than it should. If the cytokine release spirals out of control, the resulting “cytokine storm” becomes dangerous and is closely tied to sepsis, which may be an important contributor to the death of COVID-19 patients.

Many COVID-19 therapeutics are focused on viral elimination instead of modulating the hyperinflammation often seen in the disease. In fact, uncontrolled immune response has been suggested as a factor in disease severity, making immunomodulation “an attractive potential treatment strategy,” wrote researchers from Singapore in a study published in Nutrition.

In one study published in Scientific Reports in May, researchers investigated the effects of Pulse D therapy—daily high-dose supplementation (60,000 IUs) of vitamin D—for eight to 10 days, in addition to standard therapy, for COVID-19 patients deficient in vitamin D. Vitamin D levels increased significantly in the vitamin D group—from 16 ng/ml to 89 ng/ml—while inflammatory markers significantly decreased, without any side effects.

“Vit.D acts as a smart switch to decrease the Th1 response and pro-inflammatory cytokines while enhancing the production of anti-inflammatory cytokines in cases of immune dysregulation. It is pertinent to note that SARS-CoV-2 virus activates Th1 response and suppresses Th2 response,” they wrote.

They concluded that Pulse D therapy could be safely added to COVID-19 treatment protocols for improved outcomes.

Vitamin D3 Reduces COVID-19 Deaths, ICU Admissions

Another group of researchers in Spain gave vitamin D3 (calcifediol) to patients admitted to the COVID-19 wards of Barcelona’s Hospital del Mar. About half the patients received vitamin D3 in the amount of 21,280 IU on day one plus 10,640 IU on days 3, 7, 15, and 30. Those that received vitamin D fared significantly better, with only 4.5 percent requiring ICU admission compared to 21 percent in the no-vitamin D group.

Vitamin D treatment also significantly reduced mortality, with 4.7 percent of the vitamin D group dying at admission, compared to 15.9 percent in the non-vitamin D group.

“In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, calcifediol treatment significantly reduced ICU admission and mortality,” the researchers wrote in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. In response to the findings, British MP David Davis tweeted:

“This is a very important study on vitamin D and Covid-19. Its findings are incredibly clear. An 80 percent reduction in need for ICU and a 60 percent reduction in deaths, simply by giving a very cheap and very safe therapy – calcifediol, or activated vitamin D … The findings of this large and well-conducted study should result in this therapy being administered to every COVID patient in every hospital in the temperate latitudes.”

At one point, the United Kingdom’s National Health Service was offering free vitamin D supplements to people at high risk from COVID-19, but they also state, like the U.S. NIH, “there is currently not enough evidence to support taking vitamin D to prevent or treat COVID-19.”

While their guidance does urge Britons to take a vitamin D supplement between October and March “to keep your bones and muscles healthy,” it only recommends a dose of 400 IUs a day, which is easily 20 times lower than what most people require for general health and optimal immune function.

Dose matters when it comes to COVID-19 recovery. In a randomized clinical trial in Saudi Arabia, researchers compared daily supplementation with either 5,000 IUs or 1,000 IUs oral vitamin D3 among patients with suboptimal vitamin D levels hospitalized for mild to moderate COVID-19. Those in the 5,000 IUs group had a significantly shorter time to recovery for cough and loss of the sense of taste compared to the 1,000 IUs group.

According to the researchers, “The use of 5000 IU vitamin D3 as an adjuvant therapy for COVID-19 patients with suboptimal vitamin D status, even for a short duration, is recommended.”

Hospitalized With COVID-19? Ask for Vitamin D

The evidence continues to grow that treatment with vitamin D leads to significantly better outcomes for people hospitalized with COVID-19. In another example from Spain, hospitalized COVID-19 patients who received vitamin D3 had a mortality rate of 5 percent, compared to 20 percent for those who did not. The researchers explained:

“The protective effect of calcifediol [activated vitamin D] remained significant after adjustment for multiple confounder factors related to severity disease even after selecting those subjects who were older (≥65 years) and had worse oxygen saturation levels at admission (<96 percent).”

Similarly, 76 consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at Reina Sofia University Hospital in Córdoba, Spain, were randomized to receive either standard care or standard care plus vitamin D3 to rapidly increase vitamin D levels.

Of 50 treated with vitamin D, only one person was admitted to the ICU. Of 26 who were not treated with vitamin D, 13 (50 percent) required admission to the hospital. Researchers noted, “Calcifediol seems to be able to reduce the severity of the disease.”

Further: “Of the patients treated with calcifediol, none died, and all were discharged, without complications. The 13 patients not treated with calcifediol, who were not admitted to the ICU, were discharged. Of the 13 patients admitted to the ICU, two died and the remaining 11 were discharged.”

In a previous review, the researchers explained that vitamin D has favorable effects during both the early viraemic phase of COVID-19 as well as the later hyperinflammatory phase, including for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a lung condition that’s common in severe COVID-19 cases, which causes low blood oxygen and fluid buildup in the lungs.

“Based on many preclinical studies and observational data in humans, ARDS may be aggravated by vitamin D deficiency and tapered down by activation of the vitamin D receptor,” they wrote in a study published in The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology “Based on a pilot study, oral calcifediol may be the most promising approach.”

Even regular “booster” doses of vitamin D, regardless of baseline levels, appear to be effective in reducing the risk of mortality in people admitted to the hospital with COVID-19, particularly for the elderly.

“This inexpensive and widely available treatment could have positive implications for the management of COVID-19 worldwide, particularly in developing nations,” researchers from the United Kingdom noted.

Low Vitamin D Levels May Increase Death Risk

A systematic review and meta-analysis published in the Journal of Endocrinological Investigation included 13 studies involving 2,933 COVID-19 patients. Vitamin D was a clear winner, with use in COVID-19 patients significantly associated with reduced ICU admission and mortality, along with a reduced risk of adverse outcomes, particularly when given after COVID-19 diagnosis.

When it comes to data to support the use of vitamin D for COVID-19, 87 studies have been performed by 784 scientists. The results show:

53 percent improvement in 28 treatment trials
56 percent improvement in 59 sufficiency studies
63 percent improvement in 16 treatment mortality results

A number of clinical trials are also underway, looking further into the use of vitamin D for COVID-19, including one by Harvard Medical School researchers investigating whether taking daily vitamin D reduces COVID-19 disease severity in those newly diagnosed as well as reducing the risk of infection in household contacts.

‘A Simple and Inexpensive Measure’

Some positive advances have already occurred that could make this potentially lifesaving strategy more widely used. The French National Academy of Medicine issued a statement in May 2020, referring to the use of vitamin D as a “simple and inexpensive measure that is reimbursed by the French National Health Insurance” and detailing the importance of vitamin D for COVID-19.

For COVID-19 patients over 60, they recommend vitamin D testing and if deficiency is found, a bolus dose of 50,000 to 100,000 IU. For anyone under the age of 60 who receives a positive COVID-19 test, they advise taking 800 IUs to 1,000 IUs of vitamin D per day. A vitamin D review paper published in the journal Nutrients in April 2020 recommends higher amounts, however, stating:

“To reduce the risk of infection, it is recommended that people at risk of influenza and/or COVID-19 consider taking 10,000 IU/d of vitamin D3 for a few weeks to rapidly raise 25(OH)D concentrations, followed by 5000 IU/d.

“The goal should be to raise 25(OH)D concentrations above 40-60 ng/mL (100-150 nmol/L). For treatment of people who become infected with COVID-19, higher vitamin D3 doses might be useful.”

The best way to know how much vitamin D you need is to have your levels tested. Data from GrassrootsHealth’s D*Action studies suggest the optimal level for health and disease prevention is between 60 ng/mL and 80 ng/mL, while the cutoff for sufficiency appears to be around 40 ng/mL. In Europe, the measurements you’re looking for are 150 to 200 nmol/L and 100 nmol/L, respectively.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/the-effects-of-vitamin-d-and-covid-related-outcomes_3896844.html

************************************************

Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine ‘Significantly Less’ Effective Against Delta Variant: Israeli PM

Israel’s top officials are warning that Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine is “significantly less” effective at combating the “Delta” variant of the CCP virus.

“We do not know exactly to what degree the vaccine helps, but it is significantly less,” Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett told reporters and cabinet members on July 17. He didn’t elaborate.

The Delta strain, which was first identified in India, now makes up a significant portion of the new COVID-19 cases in the United States and the United Kingdom, according to health officials.

Bennett said that in “Britain, in recent days, we have seen a jump in the number of children who are being hospitalized on a daily basis.”

“This is a development that we are aware of; we are dealing with it rationally and responsibly,” he said.

For months, Israel has relied heavily on administering Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, which uses mRNA technology. Officials have said that more than 5.7 million Israelis have received at least one dose of the vaccine.

Pfizer officials didn’t immediately respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment about Bennett’s claims.

The Delta variant, meanwhile, has prompted concerns that governments around the world may reimpose strict lockdowns or face-mask requirements in a bid to curb the spread of the virus. For months, officials in the United States and elsewhere promised that mass vaccination campaigns would bring an end to the months-long lockdowns and other COVID-19-related requirements. Now with the rise of Delta infections among vaccinated individuals, it’s unclear what the next steps will be.

COVID-19 is the illness caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

Lockdowns have been flagged as being ineffective in several recent studies. One conducted by the University of Southern California and the RAND Corp. found that shelter-in-place (SIP) orders didn’t actually save lives.

“We use an event study framework to quantify changes in the number of excess deaths after the implementation of a SIP policy. We find that following the implementation of SIP policies, excess mortality increases,” the researchers wrote in a working paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

In the UK, researchers with several top universities said that about five times as many children died from suicide or related trauma than from COVID-19. They specifically concluded that lockdowns are far more detrimental to children’s health than the virus itself.

According to anonymously sourced reports, Israel is considering a new lockdown due to the variant.

During his remarks on July 17, Bennett said that “our goal is to allow routine life to continue with adjustments to the coronavirus,” although it’s not clear whether that includes lockdowns.

“We all hope to see a slowdown, but the facts at the moment are that there isn’t a slowdown—not here and not around the world,” he said.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-significantly-less-effective-against-delta-variant-israeli-pm_3906825.html

******************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS

http://awesternheart.blogspot.com.au/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

*************************************

Mask Mandate for Children Is Not Backed by Science: New Jersey Senators

New Jersey senators held a hearing last week to explore whether the science supports forcing children to wear face masks in schools amid growing concerns regarding the efficacy and negative effects of these masks.

Scientists testified about the effectiveness of masks in preventing the spread of COVID-19, a disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus. Health professionals and parents talked about the impact of masks on children’s health and well-being.

The participating lawmakers asserted that wearing masks by children does little to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and may harm children psychologically, emotionally, developmentally, and physically.

The requirement to wear masks in almost all public places in New Jersey was lifted by Governor Phil Murphy in May, but the mandate to wear masks for children in schools remained in place, justified by the lack of a COVID-19 vaccine for children under 12.

Mask Effectiveness for Children

There have not been any randomized clinical trials on children to assess the benefits of wearing masks, but different countries responded differently to the pandemic, said Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, and a biostatistician and epidemiologist.

“During the first wave [of the COVID-19 pandemic] in the spring of 2020, most large Western countries closed their schools for longer or shorter time periods, including more states in the U.S. The one exception was Sweden, which kept schools and daycare open from ages 1 to 15, for which there are 1.8 million children.”

At that time, there was no mask-wearing, no social distancing, and no COVID-19 testing for children in Sweden, Kulldorf said at the hearing, but there was more cleaning than normal in schools and daycare facilities and children who got sick were sent home.

Despite this lack of restrictions, “none of these 1.8 million children died [of COVID-19],” Kulldorf emphasized.

“COVID is primarily spread through adults. When children do get infected … they typically get it from an adult. And it’s very unusual to get transmission from children to adults.”

The risk of COVID-19 infection for teachers is the same or slightly lower than the average in other professions, Kulldorf said. “There’s no purpose of wearing masks, either for the benefit of the children or for the benefit of teachers. There’s no public health reasons to do that.”

“I think in the United States, for this whole pandemic, there have been about 350 reported COVID deaths among children. And we don’t know exactly how many of those are due to COVID versus how many are with COVID because [the] CDC hasn’t done that evaluation.”

Kulldorf said that the number of child deaths due to influenza is between 200 and 1,000 every year depending on the severity of influenza.

“Every one of these deaths is tragic,” Kulldorf said, but “for children, [mask] doesn’t particularly give them any protection from COVID.”

 Adverse Effects of Masks

“There was ample evidence for adverse effects of children wearing masks and they should not be forced to wear them,” said Maria Crisler, a clinical scientist with specialty experience in microbiology.

According to a study conducted in April, 68 percent of more than 25,000 children participating in the study “had problems wearing face coverings” and the content of carbon dioxide inhaled by them was several times higher than the acceptable norm, Crisler testified.

Due to the high intake of carbon dioxide, children sampled for the study experienced symptoms such as irritability, headache, difficulty concentrating, reluctance to go to school or kindergarten, malaise, impaired learning, drowsiness, or fatigue, Crisler said.

The issue of mask-wearing is even more critical for children than for adults because anatomical differences make a child more vulnerable than an adult to injury from oxygen deprivation and high intake of carbon dioxide, the clinical scientist explained.

“There are physiological changes within 45 seconds of wearing a mask to the brain, from the heart, the lungs, the kidneys, and the immune system.”

Moreover, microbes can concentrate on the outside of masks because microbe carrying droplets are trapped in masks and can be re-inhaled, Crisler said in her presentation. “Without a mask exhaled droplets and aerosol dry quickly. … The longer the mask is used, the more bacteria are exhaled through it.”

“The outside of surgical mask—the ones that the children are mostly wearing to school—tested in hospitals, found more concentrated microbes on the outside of the masks themselves than in the environment.”

A study performed by a lab of the University of Florida showed that several types of microbes were present on masks, Crisler noted, emphasizing that the study was non-scientific.

Crisler also mentioned that natural solutions to protect children “begin with diet and exercise,” as poor diets and lack of rest are among factors contributing to disease and immune dysfunction.

Dr. Paul Alexander, a professor of evidence-based medicine at McMaster University in Canada and a former COVID pandemic advisor at the Trump Administration, pointed out that there is no clear evidence that masks are effective but there are reports and evidence that wearing masks is potentially harmful.

“You’re accumulating carbon dioxide behind the mask, you’re not getting proper oxygen, etc. And you have reports across the world of damage,” Alexander said adding, the “WHO [World Health Organization] put out a report … stating children under six years old, should not be masked, under no condition.”

Alexander also said that cases of asymptomatic transmission of COVID-10 which drove the lockdowns and school closures as well as reinfections are very rare.

“When we look at the evidence, we can’t find clear indications, actual evidence, cases, where asymptomatic spread is a real concern or reinfections, recurrent infections is a real concern. And we can argue each case that you present as flawed interpretation.”

Jacqueline Tobacco, a member of the Board of Education in Middletown, New Jersey, testified that her son attended a school without wearing a mask since September after a long fight and a lawsuit that she had filed.

“He has successfully attended school all year—schools have been open in Middletown—and never was quarantined, never got COVID,” Tobacco sad.

She won the race for a seat on the Board of Education after campaigning on a platform against the lockdowns and against the mask mandates and became a board member in January.

Erin Pain, a school nurse, testified that wearing masks can harm children psychologically, developmentally, and physically.

She saw many children experiencing anxiety and severe fear. Pain told senators the story of a girl who came to see her because she vomited in class. That girl got really nervous when she saw people wearing masks and the thought occupied the child’s mind to the point that she felt sick in her stomach and threw up.

Another girl who Pain saw was hysterically crying because she forgot to bring her mask to school and was afraid that she would bring COVID home. “I had to spend 15 minutes with her to calm her down just to get her to go into class,” Pain said.

A child’s development may also be impacted by wearing a mask, Pain explained. “Children learn by recognizing facial cues … and [their learning] is hindered by wearing a face mask.”

When their teacher smiles at them, children know that they got the right answer or did a good job, Pain continued.

“Developmentally, these kids are suffering. They’re having a really hard time, especially the hearing impaired and the special needs children who are having a severely difficult time wearing these masks,” she said.

The nurse also saw face rashes, sore throat, canker sores related to wearing masks. Children sometimes wear the same mask for several days, touch them, and sometimes forget to wash their hands after using the bathroom, or flip them inside out, Pain said.

The CDC recommends washing cloth mask whenever it gets dirty or at least daily.

New Jersey state Sen. Michael Doherty, a Republican, said after all testimonies were given, “We heard today that masks cause harm and there’s no benefit. And there’s a lot of science to back that up. It’s causing irreparable harm to our children. And the science is very clear to me.”

“It was really important to hear the science,” said Republican New Jersey Sen. Kristin Corrado.

“We have legislation [introduced] … that would prohibit any school or school bus from mandating that children wear masks in school or on the bus. We also have legislation that would prohibit masking mandated at daycares and summer camps. Parents should be the only ones making medical decisions for their children. And let’s be clear, wearing a mask is a medical decision, that should never be made by” the government of New Jersey, Corrado said at the conclusion of the hearing.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/mask-mandate-for-children-is-not-backed-by-science-new-jersey-senators_3903570.html

*****************************************

The Democrats Tried To Trick Them, But TEXAS Did It Anyway!

The quorum needed to approve bills in Governor Greg Abbott’s special session agenda by the Republican-led House was denied by the Democrats.

According to the reports, 51 Texas Democrat House members and eight Texas Democrat Senate members fled the state to subvert democracy.  Meanwhile, The Texas Senate passed a voter integrity bill.

According to the National Review report:

“Senators voted 18-4 along party lines to approve the legislation. Eight Senate Democrats announced that they too had fled to Washington, D.C., on Monday, with a ninth expected to arrive Monday evening,” National Review reported. “However, with 22 out of 31 members present, the Senate kept a quorum and was able to pass the measure.”

“Horrible” and “misleading” and was creating a “false national debate coming out of Washington,” that’s how Sen. Bryan Hughes (R-Mineola)  described Democrats’ criticism of the voter integrity laws.

The National Review report continues:

The bill itself aims to mandate that voters write their driver’s license or other identification number on absentee ballots, bans state officials from sending out unsolicited mail-in ballots, and bans 24-hour and drive-in voting.

Initially, the bill limited early voting on Sundays before elections to begin at 1 p.m., a provision Democrats claimed was intended to curtail “souls to the polls” voting drives for black churchgoers. However, the provision was struck from the legislation last month.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott told Fox News on Monday that the Democrat lawmakers who fled the state would be arrested the moment that they step back into Texas.

“Isn’t that the most un-Texan thing you’ve ever heard? Texans running from a fight? They’re quitters,” Abbott told Fox News. “It’s like during a football game or baseball game, taking their equipment when they’re way behind and just leaving the field. That is not the way that Texas, Texans do things.”

“We have special sessions that last 30 days, and the governor calls them and I will continue calling special session after special session, because over time it’s going to continue until they step up to vote,” Abbott continued. “The thesis that they are operating under is completely false, because what the Texas law does, doesn’t hinder anybody’s ability to vote. And in fact, interestingly, what Texas is seeking to do is to add additional hours to vote. Texas has 12 days of early voting and the hours of which will be expanded. And we will ensure that hours are expanded on Election Day also. So their entire thesis is completely wrong. And compare early voting in Texas with early voting that we have in Delaware. Texas has 12 days of early voting. Delaware has zero days of early voting. Why am I picking on Delaware? Because that is where the President himself voted in the last election. And if anybody wants to talk about voter suppression, they should be talking about Delaware, not Texas.”

Abbott noted that the lawmakers were effectively “using a filibuster to flee the state of Texas to plead with the president to do away with the filibuster in Washington, D.C.,” which he noted was “hypocrisy on its face.”

“What the law is, it’s in the Constitution, and that is the house, the State House of Representatives who were here in the Capitol in Austin right now, they do have the ability to issue a call to have their fellow members who are not showing up to be arrested, but only so long as that arrest is made in the state of Texas,” Abbott said. “That’s why they have fled the state. Once they step back into the state of Texas, they will be arrested and brought to the Texas Capitol, and we will be conducting business.”

https://thepatriotnation.net/the-democrats-tried-to-trick-them-but-texas-did-it-anyway/

The Ruling Class Poses the Very Authoritarian Dangers It Claimed Trump Did

President Donald Trump’s greatest sin was threatening the power and privilege of the Ruling Class.

For that, it will never stop seeking to bludgeon him, those seeking to carry his mantle, or their tens of millions of supporters—those icky, intransigent, irredeemables, judged as such because they refuse to submit.

In so doing, it has shown that it presents the very authoritarian threat it claimed he did.

The Ruling Class raved that Trump was a tyrant, madman, and traitor in part because it believed it needed to delegitimize him to neutralize a threat to the racket it has had going at the expense of the American people for too long, but also in part because he really broke them.

One need not play armchair psychiatrist to see both elements at play in the latest revelation, in an endless stream of them, of the opinion of Trump held by one of his senior-most military officials.

That the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—a man who proved the point that Wokeness has infected our national security apparatus when he recently divulged that he considered understanding “white rage” to be part of his job description—harbored fever dreams of Trump as Hitler, says far more about him, and his ilk, than it does about Trump.

Needless to say, such comments are neither made in good faith—coming from someone who had publicly opposed the president previously—nor do they seem to be rooted in any sort of rigorous, fact-based argument.

But let’s for a moment entertain them. For starters, were Trump everything his political adversaries accused him of being, he would have sought to exploit the coronavirus tragedy to usurp maximum power, ruling by fiat, controlling speech under the guise of health and public safety, seeking to manipulate 2020 election laws to maximize his odds of victory, and so on.

Instead, even as pressure mounted to act unilaterally in response to the coronavirus, Trump largely respected federalism—redounding to the benefit of the millions who lived in the few states that remained relatively free during the pendency of the crisis—and dramatically reduced regulations to enable a vaccine to get to market in record time.

It was his political adversaries in the public health bureaucracy, in Congress, across state and local governments, and in the hysteria-fomenting, hyper-politicized media, who acted like the authoritarians they accused Trump of being—all while conspiring to take him down.

This is to say nothing of course of the myriad ways Trump reduced centralized power during his Oval Office tenure, from the bevy of initiatives he undertook in defense of American life and liberty, to his related tax and de-regulatory policies, judicial appointments, and beyond.

Trump, who on many issues arguably acted in a restrained manner, and ranks among the most checked, sabotaged, and stymied presidents in American history, yet who was still able to implement such a conservative agenda, was anything but the dangerous autocrat his adversaries slandered him as.

The Woke, unhinged insubordinates, who evidently sat atop the ranks of every aspect of the federal bureaucracy, including in the armed forces, posed an infinitely greater threat to our values, principles, and institutions by flouting the consent of the governed.

Stated differently, the Ruling Class, led by a determined cadre of vitriolic and vindictive zealots in the national security, intelligence, and law enforcement apparatuses who weaponized their powers against domestic political foes and violated their fundamental rights, presented a far graver danger to America than the commander in chief they undermined.

And that danger was made most acute by the rank insubordination in the very areas of government that it cannot be tolerated: those devoted to defending American life and limb.

For this cadre, Trump’s greatest crimes were a willingness to end blood-and-treasure-sapping military boondoggles; to ask basic, commonsense questions about whether the status quo was really in America’s national interest—to look upon the conventional wisdom with skepticism; to dispense with diplomatic niceties and dubious deals driven by illusions of Utopic progressive globalism and greed, and to grapple with foreign powers as they were, not as we wished them to be.

This was simply intolerable because it would have put much of the Ruling Class out of business.

The danger presented by those who resisted Trump continues today as the executive branch mobilizes, in coordination with major corporations, to pursue the up to half the country that Trump represented in a “Woke War on Wrongthink” that could well eviscerate liberty and justice.

In working to smear, target, and criminalize up to millions of intransigent Deplorables, treating such political dissenters as dangers to society, our Ruling Class is emulating the bogeyman it warned of who never materialized over the last four years.

Is there any silver lining?

In recent weeks, with the FBI tweeting that Americans ought to report on their friends and family if they suspect signs of (ill-defined) extremist radicalization, reports that “Biden allied groups” are seeking to “work with SMS carriers to dispel misinformation about vaccines that is sent over social media and text messages”—on top of the Biden administration’s door-to-door vaccination effort—and with President Biden delivering a speech in which he called defenders of election integrity subversionists, claiming they were assaulting democracy, and comparing them to Confederates, it is hard to remain optimistic.

Yet the demagoguery, the manufactured hysteria of the Ruling Class, and the tyrannical lengths to which it believes it must go to impose its will—using civil rights-imperiling force and coercion rather than persuasion—would seem to betray weakness, or at least an admission that too many Americans are not buying what it’s selling.

When everything is insurrection, subversion, and racism, nothing is insurrection, subversion, and racism.

When everything that does not comport with the Official Regime narrative is cast as misinformation, nothing is misinformation.

The Ruling Class doth protest too much.

But unfortunately for our country, in its desperation to perpetuate and grow its power, freedom-loving Americans will bear the brunt as it lashes out in uniquely disturbing and dangerous ways.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/the-ruling-class-poses-the-very-authoritarian-dangers-it-claimed-trump-did_3903950.html

****************************************

Federal Judge Declares Obama-Era DACA Program Illegal

A Texas federal judge on Friday ruled that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), an Obama-era policy that shields certain illegal immigrants from being deported, is unlawful and blocked new applications from being filed.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen argued that the policy goes against the Constitution because Congress never provided the executive branch authorization to grant deportation reprieves to illegal immigrants in the United States. DACA, which was established in 2012 by President Barack Obama’s administration, has granted an estimated 800,000 individuals protection.

After arguing that the Department of Homeland Security violated the Administrative Procedure Act, Hanen ruled that DHS now needs to stop approving new DACA applications. The order doesn’t affect the status of current DACA recipients, the judge wrote.

“Congress has not granted the Executive Branch free rein to grant lawful presence outside the ambit of the statutory scheme,” wrote Hanen (pdf), who was appointed by former President George W. Bush. “It is not equitable for a government program that has engendered such significant reliance to terminate suddenly,” he also wrote in ordering that the status of people currently in DACA doesn’t change and they can continue to seek renewal of their status.

“This consideration, along with the Government’s assertion that it is ready and willing to try to remedy the legal defects of the DACA program, indicates that equity will not be served by a complete and immediate cessation of DACA,” the judge wrote.

Illegal aliens in the United States who were 30 years or younger received protection from the program. In order to receive DACA protection, they must have arrived in the country by 2007 before they turned 16, and they also had to be a student or a graduate with no serious criminal record, among other requirements.

The Obama administration and Democrats often referred to the young illegal immigrants as “Dreamers” after the Dream Act, which would have granted them an easier path to becoming American citizens, failed to pass in Congress about a decade ago.

Later, the Trump administration attempted to rescind DACA in 2017, which drew significant criticism from Democrats and triggered a mainstream media-driven pressure campaign that painted the administration as heartless. President Donald Trump wrote at the time that DACA “gives the President of the United States far more power than EVER anticipated.” Before that, he described it as an illegal amnesty program that only serves to boost Democrats’ chances of winning elections.

The Supreme Court ultimately blocked Trump’s attempt to do away with the program in 2020, which led to the Trump administration’s attempts to block new applications under DACA. Another judge rejected the administration’s bid and ordered DACA’s restoration.

Hanen ruled on a lawsuit that was brought by Texas, which was joined by Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, and West Virginia. The states argued that the program is tantamount to federal overreach.

The ruling is sure to put more pressure on Congress and the Biden administration to try and pass a permanent law. This comes as nearly 190,000 illegal immigrants were apprehended along the U.S.-Mexico border in June. If such a bill is proposed, amid the significant surge of illegal immigrants, Republicans likely won’t support it.

DACA supporters are expected to appeal Hanen’s decision

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/federal-judge-declares-obama-era-daca-program-illegal_3905492.html

Stunning backflip as WHO chief admits it IS too soon to rule out Covid-19 leaked from a Wuhan lab - and demands China be held to account

The head of the World Health Organisation (WHO) has said there had been a 'premature push' to rule out a potential link between the coronavirus pandemic and a lab leak.

The body's director general Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus acknowledged it was premature to rule of the theory that the virus might have escaped from a Chinese government laboratory in Wuhan.

He also said WHO was now urging China to be more transparent as scientists continue to search for the origins of the coronavirus.

Dr Ghebreyesus's comments come just weeks after he suggested that Beijing had not cooperated fully with investigations and called on China to help solve the origin of the virus out of 'respect' for the dead.

In a rare departure from his usual deference, the WHO director-general said getting access to raw data had been a challenge for the international team that travelled to China earlier this year to investigate the source of Covid-19.   

Dr Tedros said that the UN health agency based in Geneva was 'asking China to be transparent, open and co-operate, especially on the information, raw data that we asked for at the early days of the pandemic'. 

'I was a lab technician myself, I'm an immunologist, and I have worked in the lab, and lab accidents happen,' Dr Tedros said. 'It's common.'       

In recent months, the idea that the pandemic started somehow in a laboratory - and perhaps involved an engineered virus - has gained traction, especially with US President Joe Biden ordering a review of American intelligence to assess the possibility in May.

China has struck back aggressively, arguing that attempts to link the origins of Covid-19 to a lab were politically motivated and suggesting that the virus might have started abroad.

At WHO's annual meeting of health ministers in the spring, China said that the future search for Covid-19's origins should continue - in other countries.

Most scientists suspect that the coronavirus originated in bats, but the exact route by which it first jumped into people - via an intermediary animal or in some other way - has not yet been determined.

It typically takes decades to narrow down the natural source of an animal virus like Ebola or Sars.

Dr Tedros said that 'checking what happened, especially in our labs, is important' to nailing down if the pandemic had any laboratory links.

'We need information, direct information on what the situation of this lab was before and at the start of the pandemic,' the WHO chief said, adding that China's co-operation was critical.

'If we get full information, we can exclude (the lab connection).' 

Last month, President Biden ordered agencies to 'redouble their efforts to collect and analyse information' and report back in 90 days.

According to Mr Biden, the intelligence services are currently split over the two possible sources for the virus that swept the planet over the past year, killing millions of people.

Mr Biden said that in March he asked for a report on the origins of the virus, including 'whether it emerged from human contact with an infected animal or from a laboratory accident.'

It came amid claims that three researchers at the Wuhan lab were hospitalised with Covid-19-like symptoms in November, a month before China said it discovered the first cases of the virus.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9792483/WHO-head-admits-soon-rule-link-Covid-19-lab-leak.html

LinkedIn Deletes Account of mRNA Vaccine Pioneer Who Questioned Risks of COVID-19 Shots

Dr. Robert Malone, who identifies himself as the inventor of mRNA vaccines, said that LinkedIn recently deleted his account after he made comments about mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and questioned whether they’re appropriate to give to certain groups of people.

“My business pays for linked in premium. I have been deleted,” Malone wrote on Twitter this week. “Purchased a service from linked in to promote my company. This is very different from the YouTube or Twitter terms. This arbitrary and capricious action has damaged our business, and we deserve to be compensated.”

It appears his personal account was removed earlier this week without warning or explanation from LinkedIn, a subsidiary of Microsoft, said his wife, Jill Malone.

“He was given no notice, no warnings,” she told Just the News. “He has a 10-15 year old account—has never even had a warning. 6,000 followers.”

Malone explained on Wednesday that the “historic record of what I have done, stated, figured out (and when) etc. over time is a key part of establishing my credibility and track record as a professional.” But despite this, the account “has been erased completely and arbitrarily without warning or explanation,” he added.

In a subsequent tweet, Malone produced an email from a LinkedIn representative, who said that his account violated the firm’s user agreement because he posted “misleading or inaccurate information” about vaccines and COVID-19.

“[LinkedIn] has provided a list of my thoughtcrimes. An amazing document,” Malone wrote.

Recently, Malone’s claims to Fox News and other news outlets about giving vaccines to individuals under the age of 18 were flagged by several so-called “fact-checking” sites. Malone told NTD’s “The Nation Speaks” in late June that heart inflammation reports shift the risk-benefit ratio for children.

“Vaccines save lives. These vaccines have saved lives,” Malone said, adding that believes the risks associated with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna outweigh the benefits among children.

Speaking to Fox News, Malone said, “I can say that the risk-benefit ratio for those 18 and below doesn’t justify vaccines, and there’s a pretty good chance that it doesn’t justify vaccination in these very young adults.”

LinkedIn’s move to ban Malone is the latest attempt by a Big Tech firm to curb what they describe as “misinformation” regarding COVID-19 vaccines. Recently, Twitter locked Harvard Medical School epidemiologist Martin Kulldorff’s account after he expressed a skeptical viewpoint on whether masks actually provide protection.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/linkedin-deletes-account-of-mrna-vaccine-pioneer-who-issued-warning-about-risks_3884669.html

*****************************************

San Francisco Target, Walgreens Stores Forced to Close Early Due to Rampant Theft

Target and Walgreens recently stepped up security efforts in several California cities in the midst of a wave of theft and crime, and, according to the companies, they will be closing earlier.

A spokesperson for Target confirmed that stores in San Francisco are now closing early and are moving hours from 7 or 8 a.m.–10 p.m. to 9 a.m.–6 p.m. A financial district store will close as early as 5 p.m. on Saturday, according to the company’s website.

The reason why, according to a spokesperson for the corporation, is because of an increase in shoplifting.

“For more than a month, we’ve been experiencing a significant and alarming rise in theft and security incidents at our San Francisco stores, similar to reports from other retailers in the area,” the spokesperson told KPIX-TV over the weekend. “Target is engaging local law enforcement, elected officials, and community partners to address our concerns.”

The spokesperson then said that “with the safety of our guests, team members and communities as our top priority, we’ve temporarily reduced our operating hours in six San Francisco stores.”

Other than San Francisco, Los Angeles and Sacramento have also been hit hard by organized retail crime in recent months, says the California Retailer’s Association. Due to the increase in thefts, a number of stores have been forced to close early or are permanently shutting down.

Walgreens, has already closed several San Francisco stores or reduced hours due to thefts. Managers in some locations have told security guards not to physically engage with individuals who are shoplifting.

“I don’t have any intention of getting stabbed for $60 worth of stuff,” security guard Kevin Greathouse told KGO-TV. “It’s going to be lawsuits, obviously they don’t want ourselves or anybody else to get injured while we’re out here attempting to make these apprehensions and leave it to law enforcement.”

Target’s decision to reduce hours doesn’t come as a surprise, said Rachel Michelin, president of the California Retailers Association, “because we’ve seen other retailers close in San Francisco.”

“I’m actually proud of the fact that they are trying to hold on and keep the stores open,” she added. “There comes a point—with what we have shared with the elected leaders of the city—where these types of decisions have to be made,” said Michelin. “The bottom line is when these employees don’t feel safe coming to work. That’s when they have to take these drastic measures.”

San Francisco is No. 5 in the nation for retail theft, while Los Angeles is No. 1, according to the Retailers Association.

Some police groups have blamed local district attorneys for enabling criminal behavior because of lax bail reform laws.

San Francisco Police Officers Association head Tony Montoya last month criticized District Attorney Chesa Boudin for enabling “criminals-first” policies. Others, including Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon, have faced similar pushback.

“Chesa Boudin has made it clear that you’re more likely to get a stern talking-to than a cell when it comes to most crimes committed in our city and the criminals know it, are taking advantage of it, and we’re all suffering because of it,” Montoya said in a statement.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/san-francisco-target-walgreens-stores-forced-to-close-early-due-to-rampant-theft_3886377.html

***************************************

Wikipedia Co-founder Warns: ‘Wikipedia Is More One-Sided Than Ever’

Larry Sanger, a co-founder of Wikipedia, warned that the online encyclopedia is “more one-sided than ever” in light of the website’s entries for Black Lives Matter, the 2020 election, former President Donald Trump’s two impeachments, and other contentious topics.

Sanger, in particular, took issue with how some Wikipedia entries are sourced.

“In short, and with few exceptions, only globalist, progressive mainstream sources—and sources friendly to globalist progressivism—are permitted,” he wrote in an article on his website.

Several centrist news outlets such as The Daily Telegraph, The Wall Street Journal, and The Weekly Standard are sometimes allowed to be sourced, he said, but Wikipedia editors are “careful never to leave the current Overton Window of progressive thought.”

Unlike Facebook and Twitter, which take more top-down approaches to content moderation, Wikipedia, which turned 20 years old earlier this year, largely relies on unpaid volunteers to handle issues around users’ behavior, editing entries, and other aspects of the site’s management.

Wikipedia has 230,000 volunteer editors who work on crowdsourced articles and more than 3,500 “administrators” who can take actions such as blocking accounts or restricting edits on certain pages, according to a Reuters article.

Sanger suggested that Wikipedia’s editors have “systematically purged conservative mainstream media sources” because its editors “do not want what they dismiss as ‘misinformation,’ ‘conspiracy theories,’ etc., to get any hearing. In saying so, they (and similarly biased institutions) are plainly claiming exclusive control over what is thinkable. They want to set the boundaries of the debate, and they want to tell you how to think about it.”

Sanger noted that Wikipedia has banned Fox News’ political reporting, the New York Post, and the Daily Mail from being used as sources.

According to a Wikipedia page on the sources that can be used, other conservative websites such as Breitbart, The Blaze, The Daily Wire, The Gateway Pundit, and Newsmax are also banned.

“Many mainstream sources of conservative, libertarian, or contrarian opinion are banned from Wikipedia as well, including Quillette, The Federalist, and the Daily Caller,” he added. “Those might be contrarian or conservative, but they are hardly ‘radical’; they are still mainstream. So, how on earth can such viewpoints ever be given an airing on Wikipedia? Answer: often, they cannot, not if there are no ‘reliable sources’ available to report about them.”

“It is not too far to say that Wikipedia, like many other deeply biased institutions of our brave new digital world, has made itself into a kind of thought police that has de facto shackled conservative viewpoints with which they disagree,” Sanger wrote in a conclusion on his website. “Democracy cannot thrive under such conditions: I maintain that Wikipedia has become an opponent of vigorous democracy.”

But democracy, he argued, “requires that voters be given the full range of views on controversial issues, so that they can make up their minds for themselves.”

“If society’s main information sources march in ideological lockstep, they make a mockery of democracy. Then the wealthy and powerful need only gain control of the few approved organs of acceptable thought; then they will be able to manipulate and ultimately control all important political dialogue,” Sanger said.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/wikipedia-co-founder-warns-wikipedia-is-more-one-sided-than-ever_3887650.html

******************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS

http://awesternheart.blogspot.com.au/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

*************************************

People Who Recover From COVID-19 at ‘Very Low Risk’ of Reinfection: Study

People who have contracted COVID-19 and recovered should know that the risk for reinfection is very low, a doctor said after the publication of a study he worked on.

Researchers analyzed records from Curative, a clinical laboratory based in San Dimas, California, that specializes in COVID-19 testing and has been conducting routine workforce screening during the pandemic. None of the 254 employees who had COVID-19 and recovered became reinfected, while four of the 739 who were fully vaccinated contracted the disease.

“The big takeaway was that if you are not vaccinated, and were not previously infected, one, you have a very high risk of getting infected—24 percent of employees over a year tested positive. However, on the flip side, if you were vaccinated or previously infected, your risk was near zero,” Dr. Jeffrey Klausner, clinical professor of preventive medicine and medicine at the University of Southern California’s Keck School of Medicine, told The Epoch Times.

Klausner and Dr. Noah Kojima of the University of California–Los Angeles’s Department of Medicine joined with Curative workers to analyze the records. They released a pre-print, or pre-peer-reviewed version of the study online last week.

Researchers found that of the 4,313 employees who weren’t previously infected or fully vaccinated, 254 became infected.

The findings add to the growing body of research that indicates that people who had COVID-19 and recovered enjoy a similar level of protection as those who have gotten a vaccine, following a study in the United Kingdom and one by Cleveland Clinic researchers.

“It should give confidence to people who have recovered that they are at very low risk for repeat infection, and some experts including myself believe that protection is equal to vaccination,” Klausner told The Epoch Times. “And we’re trying to update policy such that people who have recovered have the same privileges and access as people who are vaccinated.”

According to federal guidance, vaccines should be administered to people irrespective of whether they’ve had COVID-19.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has said officials are aware of evidence suggesting natural immunity among those who have been infected, but it hasn’t altered its recommendations to incorporate that evidence.

“We do not comment on non-CDC authored papers. We continually evaluate the science that leads to our guidance, and if it needs to be changed, we will base that on our own research and studies,” a spokesman told The Epoch Times in an email last month.

The limitations of the new study, which has been submitted to a journal and is being peer-reviewed, include the possibility that employees could have tested positive for COVID-19 outside of the routine screening, or employee testing program.

The group plans to conduct more analysis on the Curative data.

Dr. David Boulware, professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota, told The Epoch Times via email that the study “adds to the body of literature that generally healthy adults <65 years old with prior COVID-19 infection are generally not at risk of recurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection in short term after initial symptomatic infection.”

Boulware, who wasn’t involved in the research, noted that the median age of those tested was 29 years old and very likely included few people 65 years old or older, or many people without immune system problems.

“Thus, this may not apply to elderly persons or persons with substantial co-morbidities—but does likely apply to adults 18–65 years of age without major medical problems,” he said, adding that because the follow-up time period of those studied was relatively short, the paper doesn’t give insight into longer-term protection.

“Long term protection is more unknown, which is why persons with prior infection still are recommended to receive at least 1 vaccine dose, but there is not any urgency to receive the vaccine (and waiting ~3 months likely would be fine),” he said.

Klausner said that besides bolstering the idea of natural immunity, the study shows that vaccination in the workplace is important.

“We need to continue to promote workplace vaccination requirements. Businesses have the authority and have the ability and have the legal power to require employees to get vaccinated,” he said. “And I think our study supports that benefit.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/people-who-recovered-from-covid-19-as-protected-as-the-vaccinated-study_3894590.html

*************************************

Leftist racism takes a hit

The Biden administration’s plan to distribute post-pandemic farm loan relief to non-white farmers was hit with another legal defeat on Thursday.

District Court Judge S. Thomas Anderson of the Western District of Tennessee issued a preliminary injunction to halt the U.S. Department of Agriculture from moving forward with the loan payment plan that excluded white farmers and ranchers.

“The Court finds that Plaintiff has shown a substantial likelihood that he will prevail on his claim that Section 1005 violates his right to equal protection under the law,” the decision states. “Absent action by the Court, socially disadvantaged farmers will obtain debt relief, while Plaintiff will suffer the irreparable harm of being excluded from that program solely on the basis of his race.”

On behalf of Tennessee farmer Rob Holman and Wyoming rancher Leisl Carpenter, the Mountain States Legal Foundation and the Southeastern Legal Foundation challenged the program’s constitutionality on equal protection grounds.

In a recent op-ed explaining why she sued, Carpenter said as a sixth-generation rancher, "Biden’s law is seemingly designed to racially humiliate Americans like me.

"To qualify under the bill, an applicant or his farm needn’t have experienced racial discrimination," she continued. "There is not even a requirement that the applicant have suffered any direct economic loss due to the lockdowns. Skin color is the most important consideration."

After this latest defeat, the Biden administration may finally take a hint.

So far the White farmers and ranchers challenging the program are batting 1.000 against the Biden administration.

On July 1, U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor in the Northern District of Texas issued a preliminary injunction blocking the USDA from implementing the program, a week after U.S. District Court Judge Marcia Morales Howard in the Middle District of Florida did the same.

Those orders were more sweeping than the temporary restraining order delivered June 10 by a federal judge in Wisconsin on behalf of 12 White farmers. (The Washington Times)

“What’s it going to take for the Biden-Harris Administration to comply with the Constitution?” said MSLF General Counsel William E. Trachman in a statement. “Now that their discriminatory farming and ranch debt relief has been enjoined by another court as a violation of the equal protection clause, the writing is on the wall.? It’s time to treat all of us like Americans, regardless of our skin color.? The pandemic didn’t discriminate when it hurt farmers and ranchers last year, and the government shouldn’t discriminate now.?Racial segregation was wrong before, it’s wrong now, and will be wrong forever.”

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2021/07/09/judge-blocks-biden-administrations-racist-farm-relief-plan-n2592277

************************************

Sean Penn And Conan O’Brien Blast ‘Soviet’ Cancel Culture

Superstar actor and notorious liberal Sean Penn and Late Night comedian Conan O-Brien have now both decided they have had enough with the radical left.

As The Daily Wire reports:

It seems even Hollywood’s most notorious left-wing activists are waking up to the dangers of cancel culture.

In the July 5 episode of the podcast, “Conan O’Brien Needs a Friend,” the recently retired host of “Late Night with Conan O’Brien” asked veteran actor Sean Penn about the trend of destroying careers for past political incorrectness.

“Empathy is a very important word and also forgiveness,” said O’Brien. “We found that someone did something in 1979 that is now not appropriate. They’re dead to us.” O’Brien went on to describe cancel culture as “very Soviet,” saying, “People can also be forgiven. If they even need forgiving. What happened to that?”

Penn agreed with O’Brien, calling the practice “ludicrous.”

If liberals like Penn and O’Brien are already fed up with ultra-woke discourse, how does the rest of America feel?

https://americanupdate.com/celebrity-news/sean-penn-and-conan-obrian-blast-soviet-cancel-culture/

*******************************************

Helen Keller Dissed In TIME Magazine Feature: ‘Just Another … Privileged White Person’

TIME magazine featured a comment from a left-wing disability activist who dissed Helen Keller as “just another, despite disabilities, privileged white person.”

Keller became both deaf and blind at 19 months old, and with the help of teacher Anne Sullivan, learned how to read and speak.

“[T]o some Black disability rights activists, like Anita Cameron, Helen Keller is not radical at all, ‘just another, despite disabilities, privileged white person,’ and yet another example of history telling the story of privileged white Americans,” TIME reported Tuesday.

“Critics of Helen Keller cite her writings that reflected the popularity of now-dated eugenics theories and her friendship with one of the movement’s supporters Alexander Graham Bell,” TIME added. “The American Foundation for the Blind archivist Helen Selsdon says Keller ‘moved away from that position.'”

The attack on Keller over her race was included in a piece from the magazine, which leans Left politically, that emphasized Keller’s socialist and radical left-wing leanings as an adult.

If students learn anything about Keller as an adult, TIME said, “they don’t learn that she co-founded the American Civil Liberties Union in 1920; that she was an early supporter of the NAACP, and an opponent of lynchings; that she was an early proponent of birth control.”

“Some of the reason schools don’t teach much about Keller’s adult life is because she was involved in groups that have been perceived as too radical throughout American history. She was a member of the Socialist Party, and corresponded with Eugene Debs, the party’s most prominent member and a five-time presidential candidate,” the magazine gushed. “She also read Marx, and her associations with all of these far-left groups landed her on the radar of the FBI, which monitored her for ties to the Communist Party.”

Politicos online reacted to the slight against Keller. “You’ve got to be kidding me,” said Mary Vought. “The woke mob is now going after Helen Keller for being white. Never mind the advancements she worked to achieve for those with disabilities.”

“This is INSANE,” wrote Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz. “Woke Lefties are now attacking Helen Keller?? As ‘just another, despite disabilities, privileged white person’??”

“There are many adjectives one can use to describe the extraordinary Helen Keller,” he added. “‘Privileged’ is not one of them.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/helen-keller-dissed-in-time-just-another-privileged-white-person

***************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS

http://awesternheart.blogspot.com.au/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

*************************************