Thursday, July 22, 2021
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
Wednesday, July 21, 2021
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.
************************************************
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.
******************************************
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)
*************************************
Sunday, July 18, 2021
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/
Saturday, July 17, 2021
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
Friday, July 16, 2021
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
Tuesday, July 13, 2021
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.
*****************************************
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.
***************************************
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.
******************************************
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)
*************************************
Monday, July 12, 2021
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.”
*************************************
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.”
************************************
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)
*************************************
Wednesday, July 07, 2021
Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccines work against 'more lethal and infectious' Lambda variant which has now been spotted in 31 countries
Pfizer and Moderna's Covid vaccines are both effective against the troublesome Lambda variant, scientists believe. The mutant strain has now been spotted in 31 countries — and some doctors fear it is more transmissible than any existing versions.
But in a glimmer of hope, academics in New York say data suggests the variant is still susceptible to vaccines.
New York University Grossman School of Medicine researchers found antibodies triggered by MRNA jabs still neutralised the Lambda variant in laboratory studies.
It is not proof the jabs definitely work in thwarting the strain — but the scientists are confident.
Both Pfizer's and Moderna's vaccines are based on mRNA technology, which had never been used to make jabs until the Covid pandemic.
The mutant strain caught the attention of World Health Organization bosses after it was spotted in the UK, US and Germany.
Thought to have originated in Peru last summer, it quickly spiralled and now makes up 80 per cent of the South American country's cases.
Doctors monitoring its growth fear it spreads easier than other strains, including the Indian version that has caused havoc across the world.
But coronavirus-tracking scientists are puzzled about the true transmissibility of the variant, given it was first spotted in Britain and February and has yet to take off.
They have yet to uncover any proof the variant is actually any more contagious than existing strains, including Delta or 'Delta Plus'. Experts told MailOnline the variant is no reason to cancel or delay Freedom Day in the UK on July 19.
Others also insist there is no evidence to suggest it is deadlier, despite some doctors linking its spread to Peru having the world's worst Covid mortality rate.
The new study, published in a preprint on BioRxiv, offers more hope the variant may not be any more dangerous than other strains already circulating.
Researchers tested samples of the Lambda variant against vaccine-elicited antibodies and ones triggered by powerful drugs — the experimental therapy given to President Donald Trump during his hospital stay with Covid last year.
It showed while the variant 'showed a partial resistance' to the antibodies created by the vaccines, the resistance 'is not likely to cause a significant loss of protection against infection'.
The New York University study authors wrote: 'The results suggest that the vaccines in current use will remain protective against the lambda variant and that monoclonal antibody therapy will remain effective.
'The findings highlight the importance of wide-spread adoption of vaccination which will protect individuals from disease, decrease virus spread and slow the emergence of novel variants.'
Australia became the latest country to detect Lambda, it was revealed today. But the case also dates back several months.
The variant was detected in a traveller stuck in hotel quarantine in New South Wales in April, according to the national genomics database AusTrakka.
There is no evidence to suggest the strain has already started to spread among the community in Australia, officials say.
The strain, also known to experts as C.37, is a 'variant of interest' because of its high transmissibility.
Professor Pablo Tsukayama, of Cayetano Heredia University in Lima, said the strain had 'exploded' in the country and was now responsible for 82 per cent of cases.
Professor David Livermore, an infectious disease expert at the University of East Anglia, said the New York University study indicates there is 'no good reason for special concern' around the variant.
He told MailOnline it is unlikely the variant is as transmissible as some have said, because it would have overtaken the Delta variant in the UK if that was the case.
Professor Livermore said: 'Clearly we need to keep an eye on new variants. But, so far, there is no evidence of major spread of Lambda outside Peru itself and Chile.
'Peru has the highest Covid death rate worldwide, however it now has a falling trend of cases and deaths and the Brazilian "Gamma" variant is more prevalent elsewhere in South America.
'So I’m underwhelmed by claims that it’s a "sudden new threat", or is "running riot" there.
'I have seen press assertions that Lambda "might" evade vaccines, but can find no evidence to support this claim in the scientific literature — rather [this study] indicates that it is neutralised by both the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, with only a small reduction in binding.
'What’s more, if did escape vaccines and was highly transmissible, why has it failed to expand in the UK whereas the vaccine-covered "Delta" Indian variant has expanded so strongly in recent weeks?
'In short, it needs watching, but no good reason for special concern. It is very definitely not a reason to delay the UK’s Freedom Day.'
University of Queensland virologist Kirsty Short said more research was needed before classifying Lambda as more infectious than the Delta variant.
'It's very preliminary,' said Dr Short told the ABC. 'It's a good starting point, but I certainly wouldn't infer anything from that into the clinic.'
The mutant strain carries the mutation L452Q, which scientists say makes it more transmissible. It is similar to the L452R mutation in the Delta and Epsilon variants which researchers believe make it more infectious.
The strain only accounts for 0.3 per cent of infections in the US and less than 0.1 per cent in Britain.
*************************************
More evidence COVID-19 vaccines work: Just 0.039% of 19.5 million fully immunized Californians later contracted the disease
A small number of Californians who were fully vaccinated against COVID-19 later tested positive for the virus.
These so-called 'breakthrough' cases occur when people contract the disease 14 days or more after receiving their second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccine or the one-shot Johnson & Johnson jab, and which officials say are not surprising.
Out of 19.5 million people in California who completed their vaccine series, just 7,553 have gotten sick with the virus - meaning a breakthrough case rate of 0.039 percent.
Among those 7,553 people, most had mild COVID-19 cases. Only 62 died from the virus.
While these numbers reinforce how well the vaccines work, limited reporting on breakthrough cases leaves scientists with questions such as which variants are more likely to cause those breakthroughs.
The Covid vaccines currently in use in the U.S. - Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson - are all extremely good at protecting people against the coronavirus.
These vaccines have lived up to their promise from clinical trials, allowing millions of Americans to go mask-free, travel, and otherwise return to normal life.
Still, in rare cases, people do get infected with the coronavirus after completing a vaccine regimen.
These rare cases are called breakthrough cases. Scientists track these breakthroughs as a way to continuously examine how well the vaccines work.
Recent data from California adds more evidence to that trend.
As of June 30, the state has reported 7,553 breakthrough cases out of 19.5 California residents who are fully vaccinated.
That amounts to one breakthrough case for every 2,583 vaccinated people, or a breakthrough case rate of 0.039 percent.
'The way we should think about these cases is that they're very rare,' Dr George Rutherford, an epidemiologist at the University of California, told CalMatters.
Out of those 7,553 cases, 584 fully vaccinated Californians went to the hospital with a COVID-19 infection.
The California Department of Public Health notes, however, that many of those people could have been hospitalized for reasons unrelated to Covid but were tested for Covid upon admission.
Data on hospitalization are also missing for about half of California's breakthrough cases.
Only 62 of those Californians with breakthrough cases died with Covid. But again, some of those deaths may have been from other primary causes.
Nationwide, fewer than 5,000 people have been hospitalized with or died from Covid after being fully vaccinated.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report 4,427 breakthrough hospitalizations and 879 deaths, as of June 28.
Between January 1 and April 30, the CDC reported 10,262 breakthrough cases - at a time when over 100 million Americans had been fully vaccinated.
Starting in May, however, the agency has only investigated and reported those breakthrough cases that lead to hospitalization and death.
The CDC made this decision in order to focus on investigating more severe breakthrough cases, as opposed to those that result in mild symptoms or no symptoms.
But some experts have said it is still important to track mild breakthrough cases, in order to look for trends - and determine whether any new variants are causing the breakthroughs.
Most state public health agencies have followed the CDC's lead and are not tracking breakthrough cases, according to a recent analysis by the Rockefeller Foundation.
California's public health agency is tracking breakthroughs in its state by matching positive test records with vaccination records.
The state has not released sequencing information on its cases, however. It's unknown how many of those 7,553 people may have been infected with the Indian 'Delta' variant.
Studies thus far have shown that the Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson vaccines all work well against the Delta variant.
But without more information on the variants behind breakthrough cases - and with the Delta variant spreading rapidly across the U.S. - it is difficult for scientists to closely monitor the situation.
***************************************
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)
*************************************
Saturday, July 03, 2021
Johnson & Johnson's one-shot COVID-19 vaccine is highly effective against the Indian 'Delta' variant even after eight months
The American drug giant said there was only a small drop in potency against the highly transmissible variant compared to earlier versions of the virus.
The findings - in line with how other vaccines have fared against the mutant strain - will reassure the more than 12.4 million Americans who have been jabbed with J&J's shot.
There had been concerns that the rapid rise of the Delta variant in the US - where it makes up 26.1 percent of cases - could derail the country's hugely successful vaccine rollout.
But the fact that the UK has managed to keep deaths and hospital rates low, despite the variant accounting for 99 percent of cases in the country, has given confidence that the crisis can be kept under control in America.
It also means that the majority of the world's approved coronavirus vaccines have now been shown to be highly effective at preventing serious illness from the strain.
The findings were detailed in a press release published by the New Brunswick, New Jersey-based firm on Thursday night.
Experts took blood samples from eight volunteers who participated in early-stage trials of the vaccine.
The samples were then exposed to the Delta variant and tested for antibody levels.
They found that levels of neutralizing antibodies only fell by 1.6-fold when tested against the Delta variant compared to the original strain.
'Today's newly announced studies reinforce the ability of the Johnson & Johnson Covid-19 vaccine to help protect the health of people globally,' said J&J Chief Scientific Officer Dr Paul Stoffels in a statement.
'We believe that our vaccine offers durable protection against COVID-19 and elicits neutralizing activity against the Delta variant.'
'This adds to the robust body of clinical data supporting our single-shot vaccine's ability to protect against multiple variants of concern.'
In fact, the study found that neutralizing antibodies level fell more steeply against other variants, including 3.6-fold against the Beta variant, which originated in South Africa, and 3.4-fold against the Gamma variant, which originated in Brazil.
The levels were still high enough to be effective, but encouraging because these variants are far less widespread in the U.S.
What's more, a sub-study conducted by Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center looked at 20 volunteers and found that immune responses were still strong after eight months.
This included T-cells generated by the vaccine such as CD8+ T-cells, which seek out and destroy virus-infected cells.
People had more of these antibodies eight months after being jabbed than they did 28 days after having the vaccine, it found.
'Current data for the eight months studied so far show that the single-shot Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine generates a strong neutralizing antibody response that does not wane' said Dr Mathai Mammen, global head of research and development at J&J's Janssen vaccine arm, in a statement.
'Rather, we observe an improvement over time. In addition, we observe a persistent and particularly robust, durable cellular immune response.'
Covid is now more like a 'bad cold' thanks to the effect of vaccines, a top epidemiologist has claimed after data showed symptoms of the disease are becoming milder across the board despite rising cases.
King's College London's Covid symptom study estimated there were 25,210 new cases every day in the UK last week, up by almost a third (31 per cent) from the previous seven-day spell.
It said there was a 50 per cent increase in the number of partially or fully vaccinated people catching the virus — but in most cases their symptoms were mild. More than 80 per cent of infections were among the unvaccinated.
Professor Tim Spector, who leads Britain's biggest Covid surveillance study, said people catching the virus after being vaccinated suffered a milder form of the disease similar to a cold, with sneezing emerging as a new symptom.
'While rates of Covid infection are high, it's reassuring to see vaccinations protecting the vulnerable and deaths remain very low,' he said.
ZOE Covid study data shows symptoms are more mild and are similar to those of a bad cold, with a runny nose, headache and a sore throat among the top symptoms for all groups. Sneezing has also emerged as a symptom among partially and fully vaccinated people.'
An earlier trial by J&J found that a single dose of its vaccine was 85 percent effective at preventing severe disease from Covid. It also reduces the risk of being hospitalized or dying from the virus among all age groups.
However, J&J stressed that its vaccine provides protection against all if the so-called 'variants of concern'.
In the U.S., 200 million shots have been ordered, but only around 21.4 million have been delivered to states and 12.4 million have been administered.
The company has been plagued by several setback, including contamination problems at a Baltimore factory that helps manufacture the shot and pause after links to rare blood clots.
In April. the Johnson & Johnson vaccine was paused for 10 days after six women under the age of 50 developed CVST,.
This figure was later updated to include 28 people, including one 45-year-old woman who died.
J&J doses are expected to arrive in the UK sometime this autumn after getting approval from the medicines regulator in late May.
The vaccine can be given to people aged 18 and over and is likely to be used as a booster jab for care home residents ahead of winter because it can be easily stored and transported at fridge temperatures.
The UK's Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) will issue advice on exactly who should receive the Belgian-made jab before its officially deployed.
There is a chance it could be restricted in younger age groups because of its link to extremely rare blood clots.
Like AstraZeneca's Covid vaccine, which is not being used in under-40s in Britain for the same reason, the J&J shot uses adenovirus technology to stimulate the immune system.
This appears to trigger a devastating immune overreaction in a tiny number of people, mostly young and healthy.
Trials have shown the vaccine - which US regulators approved in February - to be 67 per cent effective at blocking Covid symptoms from earlier forms of Covid. Other studies have shown it is even better at preventing patients falling severely ill.
No10's Vaccine Taskforce originally secured 30million doses of the vaccine last year, based on predicted demand at the time.
But because of the huge success of UK's vaccination program, ministers reduced their order to 20m.
In April, the European Medicines Agency ruled that the jab should come with a clear warning about a serious blood clotting disorder. It made the same recommendation for AstraZeneca's jab.
In April, the firm itself asked Europe to pause the roll-out of the jab to allow experts to probe the clot cases thoroughly. It later concluded the risk was rare and urged all countries to keep using it.
Officials insist the disorder - the same as the one seen in AstraZeneca's vaccine - is extremely rare but seems to be happening slightly more often in young people who have been vaccinated.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9748533/Johnson-Johnson-vaccine-effective-against-against-Indian-Delta-variant.html
Friday, July 02, 2021
Pfizer and Moderna COVID Vaccines May Provide ‘Persistent’ Protection: Study
The COVID-19 vaccines developed by Moderna and the Pfizer-BioNTech alliance both may provide lasting protection against the virus, researchers have said in a new study.
The peer-reviewed study, published on June 28 in Nature, found that the messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines made by Moderna and the Pfizer-BioNTech team induced a “persistent” response within secondary lymphoid tissues, “enabling the generation of robust humoral immunity.”
The effect was most pronounced in people who had been previously infected with the CCP virus, with the vaccines also found to produce high levels of neutralizing antibodies against three emerging variants of the virus.
The implication of the findings is that people who received the mRNA vaccines may be protected over the long term—for years or, potentially, for the rest of their lives.
The study didn’t look into other COVID-19 vaccine technologies, such as Johnson & Johnson’s, which, instead of mRNA, uses a modified adenovirus to deliver genetic information from the CCP virus to human cells to produce an immune response.
The study’s lead author, Dr. Ali Ellebedy, an immunologist at Washington University in St. Louis, told The New York Times that he doesn’t think the immune response would be as strong with non-mRNA-based vaccines.
It follows a separate study suggesting that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines—as well as the one produced by AstraZeneca—are broadly effective against the highly contagious Delta and Kappa strains of the virus.
While the Oxford University study, of which a peer-reviewed pre-proof has been published in Cell (pdf), found that both the convalescent and vaccine blood sera had a reduced ability to neutralize the Delta and Kappa variants as compared to “ancestral Wuhan related strains,” there was “no evidence of widespread antibody escape” as seen with the Beta (B.1.351, formerly “South Africa”) variant, “suggesting that the current generation of vaccines will provide protection against the B.1.617 lineage.”
However, the researchers noted that the reduced ability of the vaccine and convalescent sera to neutralize the Gamma and Kappa variants “may lead to some breakthrough infections.”
The World Health Organization’s chief scientist said recently that the Delta strain is becoming the globally dominant version of the disease.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently added a warning about the risk of developing heart inflammation to information about the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines. Health officials have said that the vaccine’s benefits outweigh the risks of developing heart inflammation.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/pfizer-and-moderna-covid-vaccines-may-provide-persistent-protection-study_3877571.html
Saturday, June 26, 2021
Leftists motivated by 'malicious envy'
Chien-An Lin, Timothy Bates
Abstract
While theory predicts fairness motivates support for redistribution, tests have yielded near-zero effects. Here we propose the relevant evolved fairness motive operates within the community sharing relation, experienced as a unity motive to treat “all as one and none as more than one”. Study 1 (N = 403) supported this model, with a moderate (𝛽 = .15 CI[.06, .23]) significant effect of a communal fairness measure on support for redistribution, incremental to effects of compassion, envy, and self-interest. Study 2 (N=402) replicated with larger effect (𝛽 = .25 CI[.17, .33]). As distribution involves means as well as ends, we tested support for redistribution by coercive means. In both study 1 and 2, support for coercion was predicted by “ends justify the means” intuitions (instrumental harm: 𝛽 = .21 CI[.12, .31)] and .16 CI[.08, .25]). Communal fairness also predicted willingness to coerce (𝛽 = .15 CI[.05 .24] and .32 CI[.23 .41]). These five psychological motives accounted for 45% of support for redistribution, suggesting considerable value for political, economic, evolutionary, and ethical theory.
https://psyarxiv.com/3jq4c/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)