Friday, November 26, 2021

New Covid variant circulating in South Africa has one particularly concerning feature

The emergence of a concerning new Covid variant in South Africa has many scientists worried — in particular for its mutations in one specific area.

Deakin University epidemiologist Professor Catherine Bennett said the B. 1.1.529 variant spreading rapidly in South Africa was a standout for the sheer number of mutations it contains but also for where many of these were located.

“Usually a new variant only has a handful of important mutations,” she told

While there may be other minor changes, the major ones generally change things like the virus’ transmissibility for example.

In comparison to the handful of major mutations in other variants, the latest version had more than 50 mutations and Prof Bennett said this is “unusual”. “More than 30 are in the spike region alone,” she said.

Mutations in the spike region are particularly significant because this is where the virus attaches to human cells, it’s also that part of the virus that vaccines focus on.

If the variant is different enough from other previous versions of the virus, our body’s immune system may fail to recognise it or remember how to fight it off, even if the person has been vaccinated or has had Covid before.

The World Health Organisation said in this variant there were at least 10 mutations linked to the receptor-binding domain on the protein spike. This compared to two for Delta or three for Beta.

“The concern is that when you have so many mutations, it can have an impact on how the virus behaves,” WHO technical lead on Covid-19, Maria Van Kerkhove, said at a virtual press briefing. “It will take a few weeks for us to understand what impact this variant has on any potential vaccines.”

Prof Bennett said the variant was so new, the WHO is yet to give it a name, although it is scheduled to do this on Friday, with many expecting it will be called “Nu” if the organisation continues to follow its Greek alphabet pattern.

WHO will also consider whether to declare it a variant of “interest” or “concern”, which pose an increased risk to global public health and should be monitored.

Prof Bennett said in determining whether B. 1.1.529 was a variant of concern, authorities would consider how transmissible it is, whether it causes more severe illness and whether it is vaccine resistant.

She said it was important for people not to get too alarmed whenever there was a new variant because others that looks concerning had later been “flushed out by Delta”. “It’s going to take a lot for another variant to replace Delta,” she said.

The other good news is that B. 1.1.529 also a “strange signature” that makes it possible to detect using normal PCR testing.

This means the variant can be identified in anyone who gets tested for Covid, including returning travellers, and they can be asked to isolate in order to stop it from spreading in Australia.

Why is B. 1.1.529 so different?

One of the theories around why the new variant has so many mutations is it may have developed in someone who was immunocompromised.

“This shows you that a mutation can take off in one person, and that’s the problem, it’s always a risk,” Prof Bennett said.

But she said it was still unclear whether this was the case and it could still have developed in the community and built up mutations as it was spread from one person to the next.

Prof Bennett said in general the more the virus spread the more likely it was that mutations would develop as they generally happen while the virus is replicating itself.

“There is a misreading of the RNA and it ends up with the virus being a bit different,” she said.

Mutations are not always bad, with some believing that Japan’s Covid outbreak may have died out because the virus mutated itself to an evolutionary dead end.

“We don’t know how things will play out,” Prof Bennett said. “We are learning all the time about the level of mutation a virus can tolerate before it becomes less competitive or less fit.”

Globally she said it was important for people to be vaccinated and not leave pockets of people who could be infected and then develop these mutations. “The more infections you have, the more viral replication there is and mutations happen,” she said.

No surprise it developed in South Africa

Only 24 per cent of South Africa’s population is fully vaccinated and the World Health Organisation also expressed concern recently about the low rate of vaccinations among health workers in the region.

Just 27 per cent of health workers in Africa are protected, leaving the bulk of the workforce susceptible.

Prof Bennett said South Africa had recently beaten its biggest wave of infections yet, bringing this under control in September.

But on Wednesday, the number of daily infections hit 1200, up from 106 earlier in the month.

So far the new variant seems to have become dominant mainly in one province so it was unclear whether it would overtake Delta, which had previously been driving infections in the country.

Prof Bennett said the virus could be more widespread in Africa than the figures show, with the possibility that many had also not been diagnosed or treated. The country also has a high number of people living with HIV, which compromises people’s immune systems.

“I wouldn’t be surprised that is where we see variants arise, like we saw in India too,” she said.

A new era of surveillance

As new variants like B. 1.1.529 emerge, the way the world manages Covid could change once again.

“This is moving into a new era, which is all about surveillance,” Prof Bennett said.

The United Kingdom has already closed its border to people travelling there from South Africa but Prof Bennett said there were other options.

She said Australia could screen people as they entered the country for variants and then ask them to quarantine if they tested positive or were on a plane with someone who was infected.

If outbreaks of these variants were detected in the country, health authorities could prioritise the management of these including through contact tracing.

“I think that’s what we’ll see,” she said. “Not jumping at every single case but focusing on variants of concern at the borders and internally to make sure it doesn’t have a chance to take off”


The forgotten Covid jab that might have no side effects in kids: Novavax vaccine set to become fourth approved shot

The Novavax Covid vaccine, which may be just days away from approval in the UK, could be safer for children than the UK's current jabs, experts say.

It is hoped that the US shot — which uses tried and true vaccine technology and is manufactured in Teeside — could reduce hesitancy and boost uptake in children.

The UK Government already has 60million doses of Novavax on order and trials show it is 96 per cent effective in adults.

But crucially it was shown to cause less side effects compared to those triggered by Pfizer, Moderna or even AstraZeneca's vaccines.

The vaccine, known scientifically as NVX-CoV2373, would be the first protein-based jab approved in the UK, if given the green light.

Protein-based jabs are already given to children to protect against the flu, meningitis and hepatitis.

Experts told MailOnline approval of the vaccine could pave the way for the jab being rolled out to children, as well as encouraging the vaccine-hesitant to come forward.

Final study data was submitted to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) last month and approval is expected in days.

Other injections against Covid already approved in the UK are either viral vector vaccines that are made from a common cold virus (AstraZeneca), or an mRNA vaccine made from enzymes (Pfizer and Moderna).

Novavax's contains proteins that mimic the spikes on the coronavirus, causing the body to produce antibodies to fight the infection.

If the body encounters coronavirus in the future, the body is primed to fend it off.

The injection is administered in two doses 21 days apart. Unlike the other jabs that need to be stored at ultra-cold temperatures, Novavax can be kept in a normal fridge for up to three months.

How does the vaccine work?

The Novavax vaccine works like other vaccines by teaching the immune system to make antibodies to the coronavirus spike protein.

Researchers inserted a modified gene into a virus, called a baculovirus, and allowed it to infect insect cells.

Spike proteins from these cells were then assembled into nanoparticles which, while they look like coronavirus, cannot replicate or cause Covid-19. These nanoparticles are then injected into the body via the vaccine where the immune system mounts an antibody response.

If the body encounters coronavirus in the future, the body is primed to fend it off. The vaccine is given as two doses.

Are there advantages of the Novavax vaccine?

Yes. While the jabs from Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna need to be kept at ultra-low temperatures, the Novavax jab is stable for up to three months in a normal fridge.

How effective is the vaccine?

According to results of phase III trials, the jab offers 100 percent protection against severe disease, including all hospital admission and death.

It is 86 percent effective against the Alpha (Kent) variant and 100 percent effective in preventing cases caused by the original strain of the coronavirus.




Thursday, November 25, 2021

Trump-Haters May Have Revived Trump’s Presidential Hopes

The American political establishment appears to be sleepwalking toward the still almost unbelievable likelihood of the return to the presidency of Donald Trump.

One of the most implacably anti-Trump journalists in Washington, RealClearPolitics’ A.B. Stoddard, wrote in RCP on Nov. 22 that the Democrats were likely to “blow up,” be badly defeated in the mid-terms, and were underdogs in 2024, where their most likely opponent is President Trump.

She didn’t connect the last two dots, but someone so antagonistic to Trump cannot be contemplating the future she envisioned without a sense of revulsion, if not terror.

What seems to be happening is one of the great political ironies of living memory. Trump, the unlikeliest major-party presidential candidate in history, was practically the only notable person who saw the depths of the unhappiness of half of America in 2016.

He astounded almost everyone by being nominated and elected, and was the subject of an unprecedented sand-bag job from the national political media, the D.C. governmental establishment, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Hollywood, the academy, major league sports, and was falsely accused of being a Kremlin agent by former intelligence directors, dragged through the muck of the Trump-Russia collusion nonsense for most of his term, and subjected to two spurious impeachments, one after he had left office.

His reelection was opposed by 95 percent of the media, he was de-platformed by the oligarchic social media cartel, and outspent two to one. Ultimately, a great deal of creative (and constitutionally questionable but never judicially judged) changes in voting and vote-counting in swing states, supposedly to accommodate the COVID pandemic was deployed against him, and with over 40 million harvested votes, he would still have won if only about 55,000 votes had flipped in Pennsylvania and any two of Arizona, Georgia, or Wisconsin.

Despite the close and questionable election result, it was almost universally assumed by his more fervent detractors like Ms. Stoddard that he was a dreadful aberration who had gone and would not be back. The astounding irony is that, after six years of this colossal political donnybrook, Trump is the likely early favorite for the next election and the winner of this great single warrior combat.

The context for the Trump phenomenon is that after the halcyon Reagan-Bush Sr. years of great prosperity and the victorious and bloodless end of the Cold War, official contentment was so general that for only the second time in history, (after Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe, 1801-1825), there were three consecutive two-term presidents.

The White House and Congress changed hands at intervals, but the political class was the same and overwhelmingly liberal, and drifting steadily to the left. In the twenty years from early-Clinton to late-Obama, official policy moved roughly half way from the political center toward what was the far left in 1993 when Bill Clinton was inaugurated.

Only Donald Trump, the flamboyant land developer, golf club owner, and reality television star, who polled constantly, changed parties seven times in 13 years, and invented the technique of massively promoting his name as a celebrity brand and then translating it into the world’s highest elective office, detected a seismic erosion of public support for what had effectively become a bipartisan national unity government of gradual leftward policy movement.

Only he saw that tens of millions of working and lower middle class families considered that their jobs were being shipped overseas to cheap labor while the profits that accrued from that labor was not being repatriated to the United States.

Trump’s candidacy was treated with immense mirth by the complacent political establishment of both parties when it was announced in June 2015. As all will recall, the political establishment was struck dumb by his election: it was inconceivable that Trump could be legitimately elected and so the vast effort supported by almost all of the national political media was immediately launched to challenge the election result.

Trump weathered the relentless wall-to-wall assault on him by being a rather successful president: illegal immigration and unemployment were almost eliminated, oil imports ended, and for the first time in any serious jurisdiction, the lower twenty percent of income-earners were gaining income in percentage terms more quickly than the top ten percent.

Trump had identified the challenge posed by China and had begun the imposition of a general Western response to China. This departed from the confidence of previous American administrations that if concessions and preferments were merely heaped upon China, it would voluntarily become a compliant member of the rules-based international community.

In fact, China was emboldened by that pre-Trump approach to ever more provoking behavior, culminating in facilitating the spread of the coronavirus from China to the world while unconscionably delaying appropriately serious warnings of the gravity of this illness. Democratic candidate Joe Biden assured his followers: “The Chinese aren’t our enemies…They won’t eat our lunch.”

It was only COVID and the alteration of the electoral system in several key states that enabled Trump’s removal from office. After adhering for approximately one week to a bipartisan policy of fighting the coronavirus, the Democrats seized their opportunity to terrify the country with visions of a Black Plague and with demands that Trump “follow the science” (which was far from unanimous), and lock down the country in order to ensure an economic depression that the Democrats could exploit.

The Democrats declined to criticize the extreme factions of Black Lives Matter and other entities that rioted all summer in 2020 across the country, supposedly in response to the horrifying death of African-American George Floyd when detained by white Minneapolis police, recorded by cell phone cameras. The whole chaotic summer was represented as inevitable in Donald Trump’s America.

The judiciary at all levels conveniently declined to hear any of the challenges to the integrity of the electoral system that had been changed in the swing states, but not by the state legislatures as the Constitution requires.

Presumably, the judiciary did not wish to incur the immense controversy of potentially reversing the result of a presidential election. From this dubious and hair’s-breadth victory, the unrepentant but severely frightened bipartisan political establishment torqued themselves up to blind faith that Trump would not be seen again and briefly resumed their former complacency.

The new administration has been unprecedentedly incompetent even to those of us who feared the worst—millions of illegal migrants, sky-rocketing crime, inflation, and deficits, a very unresponsive president reduced to insipid pleadings to China and OPEC, a completely unfeasible vice president, a shambles in COVID policy, and in Afghanistan the worst and most humiliating fiasco in the history of the U.S. armed forces since General Hull surrendered Detroit to the Canadians and British in 1812.

Sophisticated military hardware worth $85 billion was abandoned to the incoming Taliban terrorist-tainted government. The response of the Democrats and their media allies to this shambles is to construe every disagreement as racist, as in their disgraceful misrepresentation, from Biden down, to acquitted Wisconsin murder defendant Kyle Rittenhouse as a white supremacist vigilante.

In over-reacting to Trump, a successful president, the Trump-haters largely delivered the great Democratic Party to a riffraff of socialists and are tied to a ludicrously inept regime that has little chance of avoiding Donald Trump’s electoral revenge: himself back again or a candidate he supports.

The long era of complacent bipartisanship that Trump assailed in 2016 now seems likely to perish in 2024. We are in the midst of a unique interlude in American history as the Trump-haters await the consequences of their actions with mounting consternation.


For Democrats, the Word Is 'Transform'

They are addicted to change -- to dislike of everything in America

Remember when Joe Biden ran for president in what commentators called the "centrist" lane of the Democratic primaries? The idea was that a "moderate" like Biden, unlike rival Bernie Sanders, would not push radical plans to completely change American society. That would reassure non-progressive Democrats, and independents, too, that Biden would be a safe choice for president. They didn't want to remake the world. They just wanted things to get better.

You could see the difference in the Democratic debates. To take one example, at a debate in November 2019, Sanders urged people to join him "if you want to be part of a movement that is not only going to beat Trump but transform America." Biden's pitch was much more modest; beating Trump and going back to the old ways were enough. "Let's take back this country," Biden said, "and lead the world again."

Now Biden is president and pushing vast, multi-trillion-dollar spending projects, the latest of which is the Build Back Better Act, a $2.2 trillion behemoth passed last week by Democrats (and Democrats alone) in the House of Representatives. And the old Biden centrist act is nowhere to be found. Now, the word the White House and Democrats on Capitol Hill have chosen to describe the president's agenda is "transform" -- just like Bernie used to say.

The White House frequently sends out emails headlined "What They Are Saying," which collect quotes from Democratic politicians and interest group leaders praising Biden's actions. Now, they are praising the Build Back Better Act. The praise has a certain similarity.

A "What They Are Saying" email listing statements from "LGBTQI+ Leaders" calls Build Back Better a "transformational bill" that will make a "transformative investment" to "transform the lives of millions of Americans."

An email with the comments of "Women and Family Advocates" says the bill has "transformational initiatives" that will make "transformative investments" to effect a "historic transformation" that will "transform the lives of children and families."

An email from "Black Leaders" says the "transformational bill" will make a "transformative investment" that will "transform our nation for decades to come."

An email from "Young Leaders" calls BBB a "transformative bill," while "Gun Violence Prevention Leaders" hail Biden's "transformational" agenda.

You get the idea. But no one is more on board for the Biden transformation than Democrats in the House, where party members seem to disagree only on whether the bill should be called "transformational" or "transformative." Speaker Nancy Pelosi calls it "transformative." Rep. John Yarmouth calls it "transformational." Rep. Raul Grijalva chooses "transformative." Rep. Mark Takano, "transformational." Rep. Jerry Nadler, "transformational." Rep. Adam Smith, "transformational." Rep. Judy Chu, "transformational." Rep. Pramila Jayapal, "transformative." Rep. Brenda Lawrence, "transformational." Rep. Louis Frankel, "transformational." Rep. Barbara Lee, "transformational." Rep. Mike Quigley, "transformative." Rep. Joe Neguse, "transformational." Rep. Ayanna Pressley, "transformational." Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon, "transformational." Finally, Rep. Richard Neal, choosing not to take a side in that debate, says simply that BBB will "transform our country."

When Sanders pledged to "transform" the United States, he envisioned mind-boggling expenditures -- say, $10 trillion -- that would touch every aspect of American life. He didn't win the White House, but he won the argument. During Biden's presidency, Congress has passed a $1.9 trillion COVID relief bill (that had little to do with COVID relief) and a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill, and now the House has passed the $2.2 trillion Build Back Better Act. In the end, Biden is likely to win about $5 trillion in extra spending just this year -- about half of what Sanders wanted, but still mind-boggling. And it will touch every aspect of American life.

Finally, when it comes to rhetoric, there's no doubt Sanders has won a smashing victory. The Biden White House sounds like Bernie Sanders. The Democratic leadership sounds like Bernie Sanders. The party's interest groups sound like Bernie Sanders. You could say that the old socialist senator, once an outsider and lone voice, has managed to, yes, transform his party.




Wednesday, November 24, 2021

CDC data confirm disturbing stats about covid vax and children

Recently, the CDC opened the door for children under the age of 12 to be vaccinated.

However, reports are surfacing about serious risks to children from what is an unnecessary medicine. Children are poor transmitters of COVID and are at minimal risk of serious illness when they do get it. The science proves that they do not need to be vaccinated.

New data speaks to an ugly truth. Data from the CDC and Big Pharma say more children will die from getting the COVID vaccine than the shot will save. Despite children being virtually unaffected, medical bureaucrats are still saying they must be vaccinated.

The entire scientific community has either gone completely insane or totally corrupt. We’re leaning towards the latter. Again, nothing should be lost on the billions of dollars at stake from just the volume of vaccine doses required for children alone.

They are playing with the lives of our children. The corrupt mainstream media have no interest in covering these alarming stories. They kowtow to the wishes of the liberal left. The liberals want citizens to conform; the fake news puppets chime along, singing the narrative.

One step towards total societal conformity is to hand over your personal health decisions to the government. That is a key motivating factor behind mandates. The crooked mainstream media are all on board with these unconstitutional orders.

The data released within the CDC’s Guidance document defines 21 things that a health economics study addressing vaccines must do. The final FDA risk-benefit analysis for vaccinating children between 5 and 11 years of age violated over half of the risk benefit models.

Despite an overwhelming amount of evidence against giving children the shot, the CDC is still promoting the policy. There is an astounding wealth of scientific proof these shots are not necessary.

Again, individuals who may be immune-compromised, especially the very elderly, may warrant a COVID shot.

Furthermore, there is even stronger proof that the CDC and Big Pharma are manipulating the narrative to force kids to get vaccinated. There is a vaccine research-grade known as the Number Needed to Vaccinate (NNTV).

NNTV is something that Big Pharma will not discuss. It undermines their profits. When talking about the NNTV for the COVID vaccine, the truth is obvious. Data from the Pfizer clinical trials shows for every single life saved, the COVID vaccine killed four people from heart attacks.

The statistics for children are even more startling. The CDC’s own data indicate 170 children have died from COVID-related illnesses since the pandemic started. The estimates for deaths caused by the COVID vaccine in kids could reach as high as 5,000.

When we review the NNTV numbers for children and the COVID vaccination, the results are the worst in the history of vaccinations. There is absolutely zero evidence that children need a COVID shot.

Kids are being coerced into getting “the jab”. The CDC is tricking kids, and their parents, into compliance. It has nothing to do with protecting their health. It is about exercising power and control over the public. Unfortunately, it’s also about money, big money.


AstraZeneca jab 'may be shielding UK from Europe's coronavirus crisis'

The UK could be weathering the spike in coronavirus cases better than Europe because of T-cell protection stimulated by the AstraZeneca vaccine, the pharmaceutical giant's boss has suggested.

Pascal Soriot, chief executive of AstraZeneca, told the BBC that T-cell responses stimulated by the jab were effective in protecting elderly people from COVID-19.

"T-cells do matter, particularly as it relates to the durability of the response, especially in older people," Mr Soirot said.

"This vaccine has been shown to stimulate T-cells to a higher degree in older people. "So we have not seen many hospitalisations in the UK, a lot of infections for sure. "But what matters is are you severely ill or not, are you hospitalised or not."

Mr Soirot claimed this could be because the AstraZeneca vaccine, jointly developed with Oxford University, was rolled out to the older population in the UK, while other jabs were used in many European countries.

He said that COVID-19 vaccines stimulate an antibody response and a T-cell reaction. While antibodies decline over time, T-cells are more resistant and last longer, Mr Soirot said.

Britain recorded a higher number of cases than most EU countries during the northern summer and they have remained high, with 44,917 announced on Monday.

The death rate, within 28 days of patients testing positive for coronavirus, is 132 a day in the UK, according to UK government data.


An Australian state gives hope of beating the virus

Victoria has emerged as the real-world example of living with Covid with a drop in hospitalisations despite high case numbers.

Just one fifth of Covid patients in the state’s hospitals are vaccinated, with more than 80 per cent requiring treatment unvaccinated.

Hospitalisation rates for Covid-19 in Victoria have more than halved in a month, despite the state dropping almost all lockdown restrictions.

There were 851 people in hospital with Covid in Victoria on October 18 and on Tuesday it was just 303.

Of those 97 in intensive care, including those who have recovered from Covid-19 but still need ongoing treatment.

That’s an overall drop of more than 64 per cent, as the state hits a sweet spot of high vaccination, strong immunity and warmer weather which has reduced cases across the globe.

Of those in hospital in Victoria on Tuesday, 77 per cent were not fully vaccinated – and 80 per cent of those in intensive care were not vaccinated.

Victorians aged 12 and over are 89.3 per cent fully vaccinated, with more than 93.5 per cent having one dose.

The state has continued to record the most Covid cases in the country with 827 in the community yesterday and on October 18 there were 1903 new local cases.

Leading epidemiologist Professor Tony Blakely said Australia has no choice but to live with COVID-19, as Victoria becomes the testing ground of how to reopen with high case numbers.

Victoria had its “freedom day” last week even though it recorded 1,160 coronavirus cases on the same day.

During Melbourne’s lockdown the case numbers were a daily marker of the mood – with case numbers of more than 10 flattening the mood of the city.

But Premier Daniel Andrews, who had enforced the world’s longest lockdown on Melbourne, dropped his ambition for zero Covid-19 cases as vaccination rates improved.

Professor Blakely, of the University of Melbourne, said Victoria was in a sweet spot of high vaccination rates and immunity, but that was likely to wane as winter approached next year.

There were 827 cases in Victoria on Tuesday, and sadly, 19 people died with the illness. Of those who died, only two were fully vaccinated.

The cases in Victoria are now overwhelmingly among younger, unvaccinated people, who generally do not need hospital treatment.

Britain’s Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health had “made clear” that “the overwhelming majority of children and young people still have no symptoms or very mild illness only.”

Australian Federal Health Department figures provided to the Courier Mail show that only 2.5 per cent of children who contracted Covid-19 attended hospital.


Where Biden’s Federal Vaccine Mandate Stands

Yesterday was the deadline for all federal employees to be fully vaccinated for COVID.

Joe Biden’s COVID vaccine mandate issued earlier this year was actually a three-pronged approach at strong-arming Americans into getting the jab. Biden’s mandate set three different compliance deadlines, with the first one affecting all federal workers having just past yesterday, November 22.

The next full compliance deadline that applies to all medical and healthcare workers that engage with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, as well as all federal contractors, is January 4.

And the third group, also with a compliance deadline of January 4, are workers in private companies with 100 or more employees via a new rule from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

Individuals from all three targeted groups have been joined by at least 27 states in raising lawsuits against the Biden administration. Of these suits, the ones raised against Biden’s OSHA mandate targeting private companies appear to have the best chance at succeeding.

As we recently noted, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals was chosen by lottery to hear all the cases affecting some 84 million Americans, and that court maintained a stay issued by the Fifth Circuit Court against the OSHA mandate on private employers until a final ruling is delivered.

The Sixth Circuit’s stay, however, does not cover federal employees, healthcare workers, or federal contractors. These workers are still under Biden’s mandate and will be required to comply or face possible termination. The White House says more than 90% of federal workers “have had at least one shot.”

Republican-run states have led the way against Biden’s abuse of power, contending that his vaccine mandate — especially in targeting private businesses — is an infringement of the Tenth Amendment. Bolstering this argument is the fact that several states, the most recent example being Florida, have passed laws barring business from mandating that their employees receive or their patrons provide proof of COVID vaccination.

“The Biden Administration has repeatedly expressed its disdain for Americans who choose not to get a vaccine, and it has committed repeated and abusive federal overreach to force upon Americans something they do not want,” asserts Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. “The federal government does not have the ability to strip individuals of their choice to get a vaccine or not. If the President thinks his patience is wearing thin, he is clearly underestimating the lack of patience from Texans whose rights he is infringing.”

Of course, the Biden administration doesn’t see it that way, and today it once again petitioned the Sixth Circuit to lift its stay on the OSHA mandate. The White House dubiously contends that “Congress charged OSHA with addressing grave dangers in the workplace, without any carve-out for viruses or dangers that also happen to exist outside the workplace.” Lack of defined parameters does not equate to permission to exceed congressionally instituted limits.

Preserving Americans’ freedoms should always take precedent over loudly voiced political concerns for “safety.” The true spirit of America is not found in “safety first” diktats, but rather in the indelible words of Patrick Henry: “Give me Liberty, or give me death.”




Tuesday, November 23, 2021

New research suggests Delta strain ‘drove itself to extinction’ in Japan

Incredible new data out of Japan has left experts convinced the nation of 125 million has successfully eradicated the Delta variant of Covid-19.

New research out of Japan’s National Institute of Genetics suggests the strain drove itself towards a “natural extinction” there after several mutations led to it being unable to make copies of itself.

The tightly-packed Japanese population has been on high alert since the beginning of the pandemic, especially after the highly-transmissible Delta variant broke through its borders in 2021.

During the peak of its fifth wave, Japan was recording around 26,000 cases per day as countries around the globe, including Australia, reintroduced strong lockdowns to squash the Delta curve.

But in November, the nation has seen an amazing recovery, recording under 200 cases in recent weeks and on Friday registered its first day without a Covid death in 15 months.

The nation’s capital Tokyo, the world’s largest city home to 40 million people, recorded just 6 new cases on Monday.

According to a “potentially revolutionary” theory put forward by Professor Ituro Inoue, a genetics expert, the Delta variant simply accumulated too many mutations to the virus’s error-correcting protein called nsp14.

Prof Inoue says the virus struggled to repair the errors in time and ultimately caused its own “self-destruction”.

When the Delta variant first emerged, the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention declared it to be more than twice as contagious as previous variants, warning it could cause more severe illness in unvaccinated people.

The general assumption was the Delta strain would have a far more vibrant genetic diversity than the original Alpha that took the world by storm in 2020.

However, according to Prof Inoue’s research, the opposite was found to be true.

“We were literally shocked to see the findings,” Inoue told The Japan Times.

“The Delta variant in Japan was highly transmissible and keeping other variants out. But as the mutations piled up, we believe it eventually became a faulty virus and it was unable to make copies of itself. Considering that the cases haven’t been increasing, we think that at some point during such mutations it headed straight toward its natural extinction.”

While some experts have attributed the downturn in cases to the country’s 76.2 per cent vaccination rate and strong adherence to mask wearing, Prof Inoue believes new infections would still be on the up if the Delta strain were still “alive and well”.

“If the virus were alive and well, cases for sure would increase, as masking and vaccination do not prevent breakthrough infections in some cases,” he said.

Professor Takeshi Urano, a researcher at Shimane University’s Faculty of Medicine, weighed in on Prof Inoue’s findings, claiming the breakthrough discovery could be used in “promising” new medical treatments.

“Studies have shown that a virus with a crippled nsp14 has a significantly reduced ability to replicate, so this can be one factor behind the rapid decline in new cases. The nsp14 is virus-derived, and the chemical agent to curb this protein could become a promising medicine, with development already underway.”

Japan declared its state of emergency over in early October, reopening society after a period of heavy restrictions. It now boasts one of the lowest infection rates of any developed nation for, but Prof Inoue warns it is not immune to potential new strains.

“There’s clearly a threat,” he said.

“We have been all right because there was a Delta variant. Other variants snuck in little by little but Japan’s Delta was keeping them away. But because there’s nothing now to keep them at bay, there’s room for new ones to enter as the vaccines alone would not solve the problem.

“In that sense, I think the quarantine measures for immigration control are very important because we never know what comes in from foreign countries.”

Prof Inoue’s research could also shine a light on the similar disappearance of SARS in Japan in 2003.

Conducting an in vitro experiment, researchers caused mutations in nsp14 in the virus that causes SARS, eventually finding the virus could not replicate itself after it completed several mutations. However, Prof Inoue says it’s still just a hypothesis, as no genome data exists.

“No genome data exists, so it’s just a hypothesis, but because it has disappeared, it will never see the light of day again,” he said.

At the moment, the Japanese expert says it’s still too optimistic to believe the Covid-19-causing SARS-CoV-2 virus will experience a similar decline globally.

“The chances are not zero, but that seems too optimistic for now as we’re unable to get hold of any such evidence, though we have looked at various data of other countries,” he said.


Sweden used to be a sanctuary for refugees. No longer

The once-reviled Sweden Democrats are no longer alone in criticizing Muslim immigration. The whole political spectrum has swung their way

Earlier this month, Swedish Minister of Finance Magdalena Andersson delivered her maiden speech as head of the Swedish Social Democratic Party and thus, the presumptive successor to longtime Prime Minister Stefan Lofven. Andersson began, predictably enough, by celebrating the triumph of the Swedish welfare state over the neoliberalism of the “grinning bankers on Wall Street”. Then, in a turn that shocked some loyal party members, Andersson directly addressed the country’s 2 million-odd refugees and migrants.

“If you are young,” she said, “you must obtain a high school diploma and go on to get a job or higher education.” If you receive financial aid from the state, “you must learn Swedish and work a certain number of hours a week.” What’s more, “here in Sweden, both men and women work and contribute to welfare.” Swedish gender equality applies “no matter what fathers, mothers, spouses, or brothers think and feel.”

In 2015, Swedes took immense pride in the country’s decision to accept 163,000 refugees, most from Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. “My Europe takes in refugees,” Lofven said at the time. “My Europe doesn’t build walls.” That was the heroic rhetoric of an all-but-vanished Sweden. The Social Democrats now deploy the harsh language only far-right nativists of the Sweden Democrats party used in 2015. Indeed, a social democratic organ recently noted with satisfaction that since “all major parties today stand for a restrictive migration policy with a strong focus on law and order”, the refugee issue is no longer a political liability.

Five years ago, I wrote a long article about the tide of refugees arriving in Sweden with the inflammatory title (which I was not consulted on) “The Death of the Most Generous Nation on Earth”. Sweden plainly hasn’t died since then, and last week, I contacted many of the people I spoke to then with the expectation of issuing a mea culpa and acknowledging that social democracies have more resilience than I was prepared to acknowledge.

I was, it turned out, wrong about being wrong.

Sweden had opened itself to the desperate people fleeing Middle Eastern civil wars and tyranny not because, like Germany, it had a terrible sin to expiate but rather out of a sense of universal moral obligation. Their Europe did not build walls. But, of course, the actual Europe of 2015 did just that, leaving very few countries — above all, Germany and Sweden — to bear the burden of what I then called “unshared idealism.”

Nevertheless, Sweden’s leaders, like Germany’s, were prepared to shoulder that burden. Loyal social democrats, I found, were confident, almost complacent, about Sweden’s ability to integrate vast numbers of barely literate Afghan children and deeply pious and conservative Syrians, just as they had with cosmopolitan Bosnians and Iranians in past years. “A strong state can take care of many things,” the head of Sweden’s Left Party reassured me.

Swedes have learned since 2015 that even the most benevolent state has its limits. In recent years, the country has suffered from soaring crime rates. According to a report by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, over the last 20 years, Sweden has gone from having one of the lowest to one of the highest levels of gun violence in Europe — worse than Italy or eastern Europe. “The increase in gun homicide in Sweden is closely linked to criminal milieux in socially disadvantaged areas,” the report said.

Gangs — whose members are second-generation immigrants, many from Somalia, Eritrea, Morocco, and elsewhere in North Africa — specialize in drug trafficking and the use of explosives. Crime has become the number one issue in Sweden; before she said a word about migration, Andersson boasted that her party added 7000 new police officers, built more prisons, and drafted laws creating 30 new crimes. She decried “those who claim that it is certain cultures, certain languages, certain religions that make people more likely to commit crimes” — yet her own government has substantiated those claims.

It’s hardly surprising that newcomers lag behind Swedes on every index of well-being, but the gap is very large. In a recent book, Mass Challenge: The Socioeconomic Impact of Migration to a Scandinavian Welfare State, Tino Sanandaji, an economist of Kurdish origin who has become a leading critic of Sweden’s migration policies, writes “foreign-born represent 53% of individuals with long prison sentences, 58% of the unemployed, and receive 65% of social welfare expenditures; 77% of Sweden’s child poverty is present in households with a foreign background, while 90% of suspects in public shootings have immigrant backgrounds.” Figures like these have become widely known; the number of Swedes who favor increased migration has dropped from 58% in 2015 to 40% today.

Sweden is no longer a welcoming country and does not wish to be seen as one. In June 2016, the country revised its longstanding policy to deny refugees permanent asylum; those admitted were given temporary permits of either three months or three years, figures dictated by the minimum permissible under European Union rules. The law was meant to be a temporary response to the crisis of the previous fall, when the country literally ran out of places to put asylum-seekers; it has since been renewed.

Last year, the country accepted only 13,000 refugees, the lowest number in 30 years. A recent study written by a senior Swedish migration official concludes that Norway and Denmark, both notoriously inhospitable to refugees, are “increasingly seen as positive examples of how to deal with refugees and international migration”.

Social Democrats are hardly alone in their shift to the right. The center-right Moderate Party now works with the Sweden Democrats on migration issues, though they are not formally affiliated. Diana Janse, a diplomat and former government official who is running for Parliament as a moderate, complains the ruling party has kept the Sweden Democrats at the margins of Swedish politics by what she calls “brown-smearing — labeling party members as fascists or ‘Brownshirts.’” Janse held a much less sympathetic view of the right-wing party when we spoke six years ago. The Sweden Democrats have held steady at around 20 percent in polls and in Parliament; the number almost certainly would have grown had many factions in the center of the spectrum not adopt the party’s rhetoric on migration. “What was extreme in 2015 is mainstream today,” Janse put it.




Monday, November 22, 2021

IQ and autism

There is an interesting video about IQ by Edward Dutton below. Ignore his manic introduction. I have noted his work before. His interest in IQ has, regrettably, made him something of an outcast in academe. Last I heard he was teaching at a university in sub-arctic Finland, which is a long way from his origins in Northern England.

In the video below he presents the Baron-Cohen theory of an association between autism and a very high IQ. He does not define the high IQ group precisely but he includes Mensa members in his coverage so he is apparently discussing people in the top 2% of IQ and perhaps some a bit lower than that. Since I am a former Mensa member and organizer, I am inclined to see him as talking inter alia about me.

And I do fit his major claim about high IQ: That high IQ is associated with autism. I am clearly a high-functioning autistic. I have outlined the evidence for that elsewhere. And many of the things that he says of high IQ people are indeed recognizable in me and by me. So I think there is considerable truth in his generalizations.

There are however some problems with his presentation. The largest problem is that there are a wide range of autistic behaviours, Some people are severely disabled by it and some, like myself, suffer only mild limitations. And not all autistics are highly intelligent, though they do often have some unusual "gift" in some way. My gift is to do even the hardest adademic tasks at lightning speed. I wrote my Ph.D. dissertation in 6 weeks, among other things.

Another problem is of the chicken and egg variety. Does autism cause high IQ or does high IQ cause autism? Dutton seems to think that what makes you highly intelligent also makes you autistic. Maybe -- but there are surely SOME high IQ people who are not autistic. That is obviously a testable proposition but I am not aware of anyone who has tested it

There is some obvious truth in it however. A high IQ person does see the world very differently from Joe Average and that must create social difficulties. And social difficulties are the hallmark of autism. My own social skills are certainly not the best but I have had a rather nice time with the ladies over the years so they cannot be too bad. Many good memories.

So I think Dutton is right in seeing autism as the characteristic ailment of high IQ people but I strongly doubt that all highly intelligent people are autistic. Dutton does tend to overgeneralize.

There is however a research literature in support of his ideas


Vaccinated English adults under 60 are dying at twice the rate of unvaccinated people the same age

And have been for six months. This chart may seem unbelievable or impossible, but it's correct, based on weekly data from the British government.

Alex Berenson

The brown line represents weekly deaths from all causes of vaccinated people aged 10-59, per 100,000 people.

The blue line represents weekly deaths from all causes of unvaccinated people per 100,000 in the same age range.

image from,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/

I have checked the underlying dataset myself and this graph is correct. Vaccinated people under 60 are twice as likely to die as unvaccinated people. And overall deaths in Britain are running well above normal.

I don’t know how to explain this other than vaccine-caused mortality.

The basic data is available here, download the Excel file and see table 4:


It's evidence of white racism when a white teen kills two white men who were attacking him?

Accusations of racism from the Left have long been nothing more than vile abuse, devoid of any real meaning or evidence

Kyle Rittenhouse has said that he supports the Black Lives Matter movement and insisted that his case had nothing to do with race, as protests continue over his acquittal in Kenosha, Wisconsin and elsewhere.

'This case has nothing to do with race. It had nothing to do with race, had to do with the right to self-defense,' Rittenhouse told Fox News host Tucker Carlson in an interview filmed on Sunday.

'I'm not a racist person, I support the BLM movement and peacefully demonstrating,' the teen added in an advance clip of the interview, which is set to air on Monday night.

The teen spoke out as protests continued across the country over the not-guilty verdict, including in Kenosha, where marchers denounced the trial's outcome as racist.

In a partial transcript of the interview provided to, Rittenhouse also slammed the prosecution in his case, after a jury agreed he acted in justifiable self-defense in acquitting him of all charges.

'I believe there's a lot of prosecutorial misconduct, not just in my case but in other cases,' said Rittenhouse. It's just amazing to see how much a prosecutor can take advantage of someone.'

The case has polarized the nation, with furious accusations from the left that both Rittenhouse and the acquittal are racist, although he and the people who were shot were all white.


America's inflation crisis is even worse than you think

Unless you’ve been living under the world’s biggest rock over the past six months, you know that the United States is experiencing unprecedented inflation.

The consumer price index (CPI), the most popular index measuring inflation, shows the price of consumer products and services jumped 6.2 percent from October 2020 to October 2021 — the fastest 12-month increase in nearly 31 years.

CPI data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveal that virtually every aspect of the U.S. economy has been impacted by the inflation. The price of milk has increased 17 percent. Egg prices have risen 42 percent. Energy service prices have increased more than 11 percent.

But as bad as the widely reported CPI inflation figures are, a closer evaluation of key industries reveals that for millions of families, especially those seeking to purchase higher-priced items such as a car or home, inflation is having an even worse impact than the CPI’s topline figures show.

For example, Kelley Blue Book reported in October that the average price of a new car has increased by $5,000 since the end of 2020. A new motor vehicle now costs an average of $45,000 — the highest figure ever recorded.

Even car brands once considered a bargain by consumers have become far too costly for many working families. The average cost of a new Honda in September 2021 was $35,310, and the mean sales price of a car produced by Toyota was $40,778.

Perhaps worst of all is the increase in the cost of new homes. In the fourth quarter of 2019, just prior to the start of the coronavirus pandemic, the average sales price of a home sold in the United States was $384,600. In the third quarter of 2021, the average sales price of a home was $454,300 — nearly $70,000 more.

It’s difficult to understate the historic nature of these figures. The average sales price of a home in the second quarter of 2021 was 17.65 percent higher than it had been 12 months earlier, the third largest year-over-year increase recorded since 1963 and the biggest price jump since 1973, nearly 50 years ago.

Although the day-to-day cost increases of milk, gasoline, eggs, meat and other items are important and are undoubtedly putting a strain on Americans’ wallets, the most important inflationary pressures are occurring in the parts of the economy with higher-priced goods and services.

The inflation crisis is pricing millions of Americans out of the housing market and making it virtually impossible for many families to afford vital items like a car. As a result, key markets are cooling at a time when economic growth is desperately needed. Auto sales, for example, dropped by 7.3 percent from August to September.

It’s vital for consumers to remember that even if inflation soon matches historical norms, the damage that is occurring now will not be reversed without a strong deflationary period, an unlikely outcome that would invite its own set of economic problems.

The reasons for the incredibly high amounts of inflation that have occurred in recent months are not a mystery. Governments’ decision to impose widespread coronavirus lockdowns, coupled with more than a year of government handouts and disincentives to work, created vast supply-chain problems that will take months, if not years, to completely fix.

Further, the decisions made by the Federal Reserve, Congress and the Biden and Trump administrations to print and distribute trillions of dollars over the past year and a half are causing the cost of everything to rise, an outcome that was predictable and avoidable.

Had the Federal Reserve and federal government chosen to target relief to those truly in need during the height of the pandemic, rather than do the financial equivalent of helicopter-drop piles of cash throughout the entire economy, much of the present inflation crisis could have been prevented.

Instead, the Biden administration and Democrats in Congress appear committed to doubling down on this failed approach, an argument best illustrated by Biden’s “Build Back Better” monstrosity.

If passed in its current form, the Build Back Better plan would require the government to spend $1.75 trillion on a slew of government programs and numerous unnecessary handouts, swelling the U.S. budget and requiring hundreds of billions of additional printed dollars, regardless of whether Democrats are successful in achieving their plan to impose jobs-killing tax increases on businesses.

The Biden administration and Democrat-controlled Congress are causing America to slowly but certainly commit economic suicide. The only hope the United States has to reverse course is a widespread, firm backlash against the irresponsible policies that created the present crisis in the first place. A good place to start would be a total rejection of the Build Back Better bill now under consideration in Congress.




Sunday, November 21, 2021

A "housekeeping" note

The internet is a very changeable place.  Articles and pix that are up there today may have vanished tomorrow.  Blogspot is unusually good in that regard.  Blog posts of mine back to 2002 are still up there.  

So pictures are the big weakness there.  Some of the pictures I put up were not hosted by blogspot so have disappeared.  That is not much of a big deal as very few people are likely to go back to read my old posts.  The posts will normally be accessed via Google searches only.

So I have gone through my posts here back to the beginning of 2019 and replaced all missing posts by backups.  I do have backups for all my posts.  So in the most unlikely event that anyone is interested in pictures before 2019, I will gladly supply the missing pic


Analysis of first Covid-19 cases suggests Wuhan market was origin of outbreak and WHO report was wrong

New research has put forward “strong evidence” that a Wuhan market was the source of the Covid-19 pandemic and suggests the World Health Organisation may have got a crucial timeline wrong.

The study from University of Arizona evolutionary biology Professor Michael Worobey was published in the prestigious journal Science and casts doubt on the theory the virus leaked from a Chinese laboratory.

Prof Worobey combed through hospital records, media reports and other data about the earliest Covid-19 cases to investigate the origins of the virus.

He now believes the first known case was a woman who worked as a seafood vendor at the market, not a 41-year-old accountant as suggested by the WHO in its report on the origins of the virus.

He noted the male accountant, who lived 30km south of Huanan Market in Wuhan and had no connection to it, said in a media interview that his symptoms started on December 16, not December 8 as the WHO appears to suggest.

This is backed by hospital records and other data.

The mix-up appears to relate to an earlier medical emergency the man experienced on December 8 which Prof Worobey suggests was actually due to a dental problem.

In a later interview, the man said he believed he had got infected with Covid while in hospital (possibly at the time of his dental emergency) or on public transport on the way home.

This would make a female seafood vendor, who got symptoms on December 11, almost a week earlier, the first Covid case.

Prof Worobey tweeted that his research “dramatically changes the picture put forward by the joint China-WHO study report” which focused on the 41-year-old accountant as being the first case.

He said the man’s case had been used by “lab leak proponents to argue that the virus could not have emerged at the market” as the man had not visited it.

“It has led claims that the pandemic started at the BSL4 facility of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, since it is near where this guy lived and shopped,” Prof Worobey tweeted. “Turns out he just had a dental problem on December 8.”

Prof Worobey said in his paper most early symptomatic cases were linked to Huanan Market, specifically where raccoon dogs were caged and “provides strong evidence of a live-animal market origin of the pandemic”.

Wrongfully identifying the accountant as the first reported case of Covid has been used to discredit the “natural origin” theory that the virus was passed to an animal host before spreading to humans (possibly at the market). Instead it fanned theories the virus was created in a lab and accidentally leaked into the community.

Prof Worobey said he was confident the accountant’s case “loomed large” in US President Joe Biden’s intelligence community review, leading the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to favour the lab leak idea and for other agencies to have “low confidence” in the idea of a natural origin of the virus.

But Prof Worobey said “you can’t explain away the preponderance of early cases linked to Huanan Market”.

“Many have dismissed the idea of the virus emerging at the market by arguing that all the focus by epidemiologists on the market led to lots of cases being identified there, while a vast number of cases elsewhere in the city were missed. This is just not true,” Prof Worobey tweeted.

“The pattern was there in the very first hospitals that noticed the outbreak, *before* epidemiologists even started looking for cases. “And this means that in all likelihood the pandemic started at the market.”

Prof Worobey believes the strength of his article is that it draws on “firsthand accounts” including audio/video recordings of doctors, hospital administrators and patients like Zhang Jixian, Xia Wenguang, Wei Guixian, Chen Honggang, Ai Fen and Yuan Yufeng.

It is not the first time the WHO report has been called into question, with The Washington Post discovering several problems with data, including the wrong virus sequence IDs for three early patients.

The WHO report published in March this year found “no firm conclusion” could be made about the role of the Huanan market to the origins of the Covid outbreak but also that a laboratory incident was “extremely unlikely”.

However, World Health Organisation director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus later backflipped, saying the organisation was premature to rule out that a leak from a lab in Wuhan could have caused Covid-19 pandemic.

He called on China to be more co-operative in the next phase of investigations into the pandemic origins, demanding more access to raw data.


Masks On Airplanes

by Jeffrey Barke, M.D.

I recently traveled across the country to Hillsdale, Michigan. My wife and I sat for five hours each way on airplanes with a mesh mask pressed across our faces. It made the absurdity of the mask mandate we live under both clear and depressing

I am sure most of the passengers on the planes were either COVID-19-vaccinated or COVID-19-recovered. While few speak about the thousands of people who have had COVID-19 and survived, they are turning out to be an important group in the ongoing battle against the virus. I myself am COVID-recovered after a bout with the disease a couple of months ago. I now have natural immunity to the disease.

Forcing someone like me to wear a mask makes no scientific or health sense. There are no studies to show that mask-wearing on an airplane can stop a respiratory viral illness. If that were the case, we would expect pilots always to wear masks while in the cockpit. But they don't. Maybe the recirculated air on airplanes keeps them safe from onboard viruses. Furthermore, if mask-wearing on an airplane were critical to preventing the spread of the disease, why are we allowed to remove our masks for extended periods of time while eating and drinking? I wish someone would pose that specific question to Dr. Fauci.

The requirement to wear a mask when entering or exiting a restaurant, but leaving it off while eating and drinking, also makes absolutely no sense. Do the authorities suppose that the COVID-19 virus stops seeking new hosts to infect only when we are unmasked but not eating or drinking? Do these bureaucratic geniuses really believe that the virus plays fair, observing equivalent rules to those invented by the Marquess of Queensberry for boxing? I think the COVID-19 virus is more likely to play by Fight Club rules!

The CDC recently acknowledged that it does not have any data showing that naturally immune COVID-recovered people can get and spread the disease to others. Despite this, the CDC discriminates against these people by insisting that they be fully vaccinated in addition to wearing a mask to function in society.

Since the CDC is requiring these measures, you would think it would have a mountain of evidence to support such a draconian policy. It doesn't. The science, in fact, shows just the opposite. It shows that natural immunity is strong, durable, and broad-based. Strong means that natural immunity protects against a COVID infection better than immunity produced by a vaccine. It is why we do not see COVID-recovered patients getting COVID again.

While it is common to see COVID-vaccinated people getting COVID and even requiring hospitalization, COVID-recovereds stay healthy. Multiple studies have confirmed that SARS-CoV-2 behaves much like SARS-CoV-1 as well as many other viral illnesses such as chickenpox, measles, mumps, rubella, etc. That is, these diseases provide long-lasting immunity to those who have been infected.

I had chickenpox as a child. I got it because my mom walked my brother and me down the street to a neighbor's house where the kid who lived there had the illness. Our dad, a physician, wanted to have us exposed and to deal with the disease under controlled conditions and when it is mild. This was circa 1970, prior to a chickenpox vaccination being available.

Many scientists expect SARS-CoV-2 — the virus that causes COVID-19 — to behave similarly. COVID-recovered patients appear to be immune to all SARS-CoV-2 variants, including the delta variant. This broad immunity occurs because those who contract COVID-19 have exposure to the entire virus. This is in major contrast to the vaccine, which creates immunity to just the spike protein of the virus, thus limiting the immunity and making it much easier for the virus to break through the vaccine-induced immunity.


Low COVID incidence in Africa

According to the Associated Press, scientists are “mystified” by what’s happening in Zimbabwe as it relates to Wuflu.

A nation with a population of 14.8 million people and a vaccination rate of less than 6 percent recorded a total of 33 COVID deaths.

Now one of my friends who is a world-renown economist argued that Africa doesn’t keep good statistics, implying that most Third World countries aren’t as diligent as the U.S. for example.

However, the AP interviewed a number of people who were shopping in a township outside Harare, almost none of whom were wearing masks. So Zimbabweans don’t seem very afraid of the dreaded Wuflu or any of its cousins, ergo Delta, Lambda, or Mu.

The article references one man who declared that the virus was “gone”. He then asked the reporter, “when did you last hear of anyone who has died of COVID-19?”

In the spirit of the WHO and other Fraudcian ruses, the man that he carries a mask in his pocket because the police demand bribes from people without masks or they are threatened with arrest. Still he declared that he rarely puts it on.

When the coronavirus first emerged last year, health officials feared the pandemic would sweep across Africa, killing millions. Although it’s still unclear what COVID-19’s ultimate toll will be, that catastrophic scenario has yet to materialize in Zimbabwe or much of the continent.

Scientists emphasize that obtaining accurate COVID-19 data, particularly in African countries with patchy surveillance, is extremely difficult, and warn that declining coronavirus trends could easily be reversed.

But there is something “mysterious” going on in Africa that is puzzling scientists, said Wafaa El-Sadr, chair of global health at Columbia University. “Africa doesn’t have the vaccines and the resources to fight COVID-19 that they have in Europe and the U.S., but somehow they seem to be doing better,” she said.

Evaluating medical “experts” in the AP article, you get a general idea surrounding this revelation that Africa is practically Wuflu-death-free, except for South Africa. Get it?

The country with the most money has the most Wuflu. But the experts say that of all the African countries, South Africa is “civilized” and therefore reporting real stats. The other countries are not.

The second theory reminds me of Jimmy the Greek speaking of the “big buck slave”. Thus, some scientists wonder if African people are more hearty than their non-African counterparts. However, that theory flies in the face of American scientists pushing the notion that Blacks in America are more likely to die from Wuflu. Perhaps “African-Americans” are as hearty as their Motherland counterparts? I’d love to see that racial debate in academia.

Finally, there is a third theory that suggests Africans, and in this case Zimbabweans are not in the demographic for Wuflu to kill them.

According to AP, the average age of people in Zimbabwe (for example) is roughly 20 because life expectancies are much lower. Ergo, younger people are less likely to die from the disease. Research that for yourself, though I have trouble believing this.

Regardless of the excuse, there are some things missed. For example, Africans could have already contracted the disease and have the antibodies. This would have created herd immunity, something Fauci the Fraud and others in the U.S. and elsewhere avoid discussing.

In truth, Africa is what the entire world would look like if elitists and bureaucrats had not weaponized this scamdemic