Interesting point about the silly reasons employers are now giving to require the vaccine to protect yourself... when I objected to the testing requirement by saying that I had positive antibodies, they said that antibodies don't matter because I should get the vaccine. But I have a religious exemption, I made it pretty darn clear I'm not getting the vaccine. This is a university... but they wouldn't know science if it smacked them in the face.
Since the viral loads in vaccinated and unvaccinated are identical, wouldn't that mean that forcing the unvaccinated to undergo regular testing is discriminatory under the ADA?
Could lawsuits be filed for instances where employers mandate discriminatory testing for unvaccinated?
Steve, the vaccine mandates are nonsensical because the vaccines don't even seem to protect the people who are most vulnerable to COVID. In Ontario, the media and government proudly break down the vaccination status of cases of COVID, but never break down the status of people in the ICUs or deaths. At least not publicly. I stumbled upon the weekly surveillance reports published by the government, and boy does it not look good for the vaccine. Check out Figures 7a and 7b and tell me there isn't something wrong here.
Keep in mind we had a slow initial rollout of the vaccine in Canada due to supply issues/whatever, and it wasn't until early June that we even had 1 million fully vaccinated people, so most people were unvaccinated over this time period. My interpretation is that the vaccines don't even protect the elderly from COVID, and given how high the numbers are for "partially vaccinated" and the implied one month delay between doses, it seems like taking taking the vaccine could potentially make you MORE likely to get hospitalized and die with COVID. That would seem to align with the (misrepresented) conclusion of this paper here.
The authors concluded "Increased risks of haematological and vascular events that led to hospital admission or death were observed for short time intervals after first doses of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 mRNA vaccines. The risks of most of these events were substantially higher and more prolonged after SARS-CoV-2 infection than after vaccination in the same population." But if you look at the Appendix, you can see that from the design of the study, that everyone including the COVID cases had received one dose. So their conclusion really says that getting COVID after one dose of the vaccine has worse outcomes than just getting one dose of the vaccine. What a scam.
“In Ontario, the media and government proudly break down the vaccination status of cases of COVID, but never break down the status of people in the ICUs or deaths.”
Thank you Andrew. I had a look at the Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFIs) for COVID-19 to compare whatever data is comparable with our own Institut National de Santé Publique du Québec (INSPQ) data, where the deaths are conveniently aggregated with severe adverse efffects, too. That's one common point.
Presently, I am trying to find out if there are any ICU data (in Ontario, US, or anywhere else in North America) to substantiate the claims of Public Health that:
a) most infected people in ICUs are unvaxxed;
b) vaxxed patients are easier to cure than unvaxxed.
Steve : Please excuse me if these questions have already been answered. If not, are they relevant to the US situation ?
Great article. Sadly the world governments are not listening. Austria has just announced they may impose a nationwide lockdown for the unvaccinated by this coming Monday. Our Canadian mainstream news breathlessly ran this story this morning. Every day I get up and imagine it can't get any worse and yet it does.
This Wisconsin study shows viral loads statistically significantly higher in asymptomatic vaccinated vs. asymptomatic unvaccinated but the sample size is relatively small.
Also Robert Reich just posted a Facebook post blaming the "unvaccinated". I used to think he was intelligent and knew that there is enormous govt corruption, since he had been in it, so his post is pretty shocking to me.
"if you have had COVID, you should be exempt from both vaccine mandates and testing" I would argue that everyone should be exempt, regardless, and that no one be subjected to totalitarian fascist tyranny.
And, we aren't doing what Joe Biden wants, Joe Biden is doing what Pfizer wants. Fascism is tyranny of the ultra-wealthy via their control of government.
(I just think we shouldn't be acceding to these ideas, even if only rhetorically, that it's ok to accept restrictions and mandates under any set of circumstances, certainly not for a bogus pandemic with a 0.05% CFR, imposed by a fake authority)
I suspect President Elect Biden stroked out before taking office. They must not have any better doubles for speaking engagements- https://youtu.be/EWuAYS8lh7A
I am a paid subscriber to several substack accounts - this one, Berenson, Hart and Eugyppius. My subscriptions were set up with my gmail account. Suddenly this week I have been unable to like any posts and I cannot view or make any comments on any of the posts. Is anyone else experiencing this?
I logged on here as a "free" reader without a subscription to post this comment. I'm switching to proton mail. Can anyone tell me how to change the email address on my substack subscriptions?
Suggestion. Get thee behind me, Google. Abandon Chrome, Brave is better and does not talk to Google. Grab another easy mail address other than a gmail one. Use Startpage or DuckDuckGo rather than Google search. And if you have a Smartphone, it can be "de-googled".
(I realize that logically there shouldn't be a difference between using a free or paid sub, but it's worth a try, it could be a cookie or script issue)
In regard to the vaccines producing antibodies, I've been suggesting to my friends eager to vaccinate their kids that at the very least they get their antibodies tested first. The only one who was able to do it was in Europe with her child at the time, and discovered he had antibodies. He won't be vaccinated and was able to travel back to the U.S. without getting a swab up his nostril. The U.S. pediatricians said, "Antibody tests are flawed. You shouldn't rely on them." I wonder if they looked at Pfizer's clinical trials on 5-11?
In regard to viral loads, the response I've received is generally that vaccinated people are still less likely to become infected, and when breakthrough infections occur, they clear the virus more rapidly. (source: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2786040.) I believe this may have been true in June-July, when the data was collected, but wonder if the results would stand up today.
No one should be mandated to take a "vaccine" for a virus with a global IFR of 0.15% and very well-defined high risk cohorts and early treatment options.
That's especially true since the "vaccine" doesn't stop infection or transmission of the virus.
I don't support mandates, but this argument is not sound. The study started with infected people, so it can't measure any differences in the probability, related to vaccination status, of getting infected in the first place. Indeed, nobody seems to have data that bear on this question. _IF_ vaccination significantly decreases the odds of an infection -- as the CDC is telling us, and many believe -- and _if_ the vaccines were as safe as they claim, then I think one could make a case for mandates.
Decreasing the odds of an infection is not sufficient because then the death count will be the same at the end, only stretched over a longer period of time. Stopping the spread through mass vaccination would be a valid argument, but that almost never worked in history. And it will never work again because so many people believe that the government lied to them that a > 75% vaccination rate is out of reach forever.
"Stopping the spread through mass vaccination" won't work because the jabs don't stop infection or transmission of Delta.
The virus has a global IFR of 0.15% and well defined high risk cohorts. It has early treatment options that are being suppressed. There was never a reason to inject billions of healthy people.
Luc Montganier and Geert Vanden Bossche warned that mass vaccination in the middle of a pandemic exerts evolutionary pressure on the virus, which is not as stable as believed, and will spin off new variants.
The UK has identified a new variant, Delta Plus, that has acquired two of the four mutations the virus needs to completely evade vaxx immunity.
The UK Health Security Agency has reported a higher rate of infection in the fully vaxxed age 30 and older for the last six weeks.
The vaxxes do seem to provide some protection from severe disease and death when normalized for the population, but 79.7% of the deaths in the week 45 report were in the fully vaxxed. Only 17.1% of the deaths were in the unvaxxed.
Looking at the UKHSA surveillance reports it seems vaccine is effective for a short period of time.
For 1 to 20 days after first jab it seems very effective. Ironically as they claim it takes 14 days to develop immunity!
It soon deteriorates after 20+ days after the 1st jab and is disastrous after the 2nd jab ... the more so the older you get suggesting any possible benefit soon disappears.....in fact Expose calculates negative vaccine effectiveness....that is the vaccinated are more likely to get it!
Yet UK government, like Foxtrot Juliet Bravo has mandated care home and health workers are vaccinated.
The care worker mandate estimates 60,000 careworkers will be fired and at least 70000 hospital staff(in April 2022).
This delay then begs the question.....if the unvaccinated are so dangerous you have to implement totalitarian measures never done before in history....why wait until April 2022?
It was like mandatory mask wearing. Until 48 hours before the mandate our Prime minister swore they were not necessary....then they said they were necessary....but only in 10 days time!
Surely if so dangerous ...it should be immediate. Surely if so dangerous you'd supply the masks.
Also _IF_ the virus was much deadlier, _IF_ there were no effective early treatments or preventative measures, and _IF_ we were all just okey dokey with just shredding longstanding medical ethics around consent and bodily autonomy. Yeah, nope.
In the counterfactual world you seem to have in mind, where the virus was actually a broad and serious threat, where no other effective treatment for it existed, and where the vaccine actually prevented transmission, prevented the disease, AND could be honestly shown to induce no serious damaging side effects... well, they wouldn't have to rush to mandate that, would they? Those who did not volunteer would be on their own, and their autonomy could be respected. Mandates, if any, might come decades later, after the long-term studies. Hopefully those studies would be honest as well.
The weaponization of OSHA against the adult population is genuinely unprecedented. State vaccine mandates for childhood vaccines come as requirements for admission to schools. Nearly everywhere, and especially until recently, they also have exemptions. Parents could make informed choices. Unfortunately, the medical establishment has been leaning to the wrong side of this issue for quite a while now, in proportion to the creeping pharma industry takeover. A few mainstream pediatricians have led some measured pushback.
As far as I can see none of the previous mandates were with emergency authorisation .... Or .... using a new technology, ...or ...after suspect hasty trials ...or ... for a population of which over 90% were low risk.
The fact that everyone keeps using these "long standing vaccine mandates" as a justification to current mandates is an absurd and ridiculous argument. First, these are not vaccines and we need to stop calling them that. Second, this gene manipulation pathogen producing instrument, is a brand new, poorly tested, and never tested for long term effects technology, unlike anything ever used in the past like tradional vaccine technologies.
Mass peaceful civil disobedience is our best hope at present. We are seeing just how corrupt and dysfunctional and abusive all those institutions that bore the public trust have become.
Let me emphasize "peaceful." Simply do not comply. They know they're provoking outrage. They would love for any of us to go violent so they could justify martial law and all the horrors that would follow. If they can't provoke us, they'll have to resort to cheap false-flag flim-flam, and they've long since jumped the shark with that.
Interesting point about the silly reasons employers are now giving to require the vaccine to protect yourself... when I objected to the testing requirement by saying that I had positive antibodies, they said that antibodies don't matter because I should get the vaccine. But I have a religious exemption, I made it pretty darn clear I'm not getting the vaccine. This is a university... but they wouldn't know science if it smacked them in the face.
Since the viral loads in vaccinated and unvaccinated are identical, wouldn't that mean that forcing the unvaccinated to undergo regular testing is discriminatory under the ADA?
Could lawsuits be filed for instances where employers mandate discriminatory testing for unvaccinated?
Peer review is overhyped, but it would still be prudent to note that the viral load paper hasn't been reviewed yet.
Steve, the vaccine mandates are nonsensical because the vaccines don't even seem to protect the people who are most vulnerable to COVID. In Ontario, the media and government proudly break down the vaccination status of cases of COVID, but never break down the status of people in the ICUs or deaths. At least not publicly. I stumbled upon the weekly surveillance reports published by the government, and boy does it not look good for the vaccine. Check out Figures 7a and 7b and tell me there isn't something wrong here.
https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/media/documents/ncov/epi/covid-19-epi-confirmed-cases-post-vaccination.pdf?sc_lang=en
Keep in mind we had a slow initial rollout of the vaccine in Canada due to supply issues/whatever, and it wasn't until early June that we even had 1 million fully vaccinated people, so most people were unvaccinated over this time period. My interpretation is that the vaccines don't even protect the elderly from COVID, and given how high the numbers are for "partially vaccinated" and the implied one month delay between doses, it seems like taking taking the vaccine could potentially make you MORE likely to get hospitalized and die with COVID. That would seem to align with the (misrepresented) conclusion of this paper here.
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n1931
The authors concluded "Increased risks of haematological and vascular events that led to hospital admission or death were observed for short time intervals after first doses of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 mRNA vaccines. The risks of most of these events were substantially higher and more prolonged after SARS-CoV-2 infection than after vaccination in the same population." But if you look at the Appendix, you can see that from the design of the study, that everyone including the COVID cases had received one dose. So their conclusion really says that getting COVID after one dose of the vaccine has worse outcomes than just getting one dose of the vaccine. What a scam.
“In Ontario, the media and government proudly break down the vaccination status of cases of COVID, but never break down the status of people in the ICUs or deaths.”
Thank you Andrew. I had a look at the Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFIs) for COVID-19 to compare whatever data is comparable with our own Institut National de Santé Publique du Québec (INSPQ) data, where the deaths are conveniently aggregated with severe adverse efffects, too. That's one common point.
Presently, I am trying to find out if there are any ICU data (in Ontario, US, or anywhere else in North America) to substantiate the claims of Public Health that:
a) most infected people in ICUs are unvaxxed;
b) vaxxed patients are easier to cure than unvaxxed.
Steve : Please excuse me if these questions have already been answered. If not, are they relevant to the US situation ?
"21 Studies Showing Vaccine Mandates Aren’t Based on Science"
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/science-studies-covid-vaccine-mandates/
Great article. Sadly the world governments are not listening. Austria has just announced they may impose a nationwide lockdown for the unvaccinated by this coming Monday. Our Canadian mainstream news breathlessly ran this story this morning. Every day I get up and imagine it can't get any worse and yet it does.
This Wisconsin study shows viral loads statistically significantly higher in asymptomatic vaccinated vs. asymptomatic unvaccinated but the sample size is relatively small.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.31.21261387v4.full.pdf
The word is getting out the shots do not prevent infections, transmissions, hospitalizations, or deaths, so now Big Pharma & the media are coming up with new lies about why this is the fault of the "unvaccinated". This showed up in my feed this morning: https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-covid-cases-are-surging-in-states-with-high-vaccination-rates-and-what-it-means-for-the-winter-ahead-204548703.html
Also Robert Reich just posted a Facebook post blaming the "unvaccinated". I used to think he was intelligent and knew that there is enormous govt corruption, since he had been in it, so his post is pretty shocking to me.
"if you have had COVID, you should be exempt from both vaccine mandates and testing" I would argue that everyone should be exempt, regardless, and that no one be subjected to totalitarian fascist tyranny.
And, we aren't doing what Joe Biden wants, Joe Biden is doing what Pfizer wants. Fascism is tyranny of the ultra-wealthy via their control of government.
(I just think we shouldn't be acceding to these ideas, even if only rhetorically, that it's ok to accept restrictions and mandates under any set of circumstances, certainly not for a bogus pandemic with a 0.05% CFR, imposed by a fake authority)
Biden is an animated corpse that cannot show agency on this or any other issue.
I suspect President Elect Biden stroked out before taking office. They must not have any better doubles for speaking engagements- https://youtu.be/EWuAYS8lh7A
"Is there a hidden benefit that the vaccinated are less likely to get infected?"
The UK Health Security Agency has reported a higher rate of infection in the fully vaxxed age 30 and older for the last six weeks.
79.7% of the deaths recorded in the latest report (week 45) were in the fully vaxxed. 17.1% were in the unvaxxed.
The UK is highly vaxxed. They've used AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J. And the human immune system works the same on either side of the pond.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports
The CDC is either lying or incompetent or both.
I am a paid subscriber to several substack accounts - this one, Berenson, Hart and Eugyppius. My subscriptions were set up with my gmail account. Suddenly this week I have been unable to like any posts and I cannot view or make any comments on any of the posts. Is anyone else experiencing this?
I logged on here as a "free" reader without a subscription to post this comment. I'm switching to proton mail. Can anyone tell me how to change the email address on my substack subscriptions?
Can you give a link for the Hart substack. Search has not revealed it. Thanks in advance
Suggestion. Get thee behind me, Google. Abandon Chrome, Brave is better and does not talk to Google. Grab another easy mail address other than a gmail one. Use Startpage or DuckDuckGo rather than Google search. And if you have a Smartphone, it can be "de-googled".
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Smartphone%2C+it+can+be+%22de-googled%22&t=brave&ia=web
Me? I'm too smart to have a Smartphone.
Have you tried basic troubleshooting like using a different device or browser?
(I realize that logically there shouldn't be a difference between using a free or paid sub, but it's worth a try, it could be a cookie or script issue)
I am finding more links in my spam file in the past two weeks.
Which Hart do you read?
Here's a link to contact substack directly (hopefully it will work)
https://airtable.com/shrUXyNDKtpWeU7i1
And here's a link to their reader
https://reader.substack.com/
In regard to the vaccines producing antibodies, I've been suggesting to my friends eager to vaccinate their kids that at the very least they get their antibodies tested first. The only one who was able to do it was in Europe with her child at the time, and discovered he had antibodies. He won't be vaccinated and was able to travel back to the U.S. without getting a swab up his nostril. The U.S. pediatricians said, "Antibody tests are flawed. You shouldn't rely on them." I wonder if they looked at Pfizer's clinical trials on 5-11?
In regard to viral loads, the response I've received is generally that vaccinated people are still less likely to become infected, and when breakthrough infections occur, they clear the virus more rapidly. (source: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2786040.) I believe this may have been true in June-July, when the data was collected, but wonder if the results would stand up today.
Foxtrot Juliet Bravo!
No one should be mandated to take a "vaccine" for a virus with a global IFR of 0.15% and very well-defined high risk cohorts and early treatment options.
That's especially true since the "vaccine" doesn't stop infection or transmission of the virus.
I don't support mandates, but this argument is not sound. The study started with infected people, so it can't measure any differences in the probability, related to vaccination status, of getting infected in the first place. Indeed, nobody seems to have data that bear on this question. _IF_ vaccination significantly decreases the odds of an infection -- as the CDC is telling us, and many believe -- and _if_ the vaccines were as safe as they claim, then I think one could make a case for mandates.
Decreasing the odds of an infection is not sufficient because then the death count will be the same at the end, only stretched over a longer period of time. Stopping the spread through mass vaccination would be a valid argument, but that almost never worked in history. And it will never work again because so many people believe that the government lied to them that a > 75% vaccination rate is out of reach forever.
"Stopping the spread through mass vaccination" won't work because the jabs don't stop infection or transmission of Delta.
The virus has a global IFR of 0.15% and well defined high risk cohorts. It has early treatment options that are being suppressed. There was never a reason to inject billions of healthy people.
Luc Montganier and Geert Vanden Bossche warned that mass vaccination in the middle of a pandemic exerts evolutionary pressure on the virus, which is not as stable as believed, and will spin off new variants.
The UK has identified a new variant, Delta Plus, that has acquired two of the four mutations the virus needs to completely evade vaxx immunity.
I've adjusted the text to clarify this case.
The UK Health Security Agency has reported a higher rate of infection in the fully vaxxed age 30 and older for the last six weeks.
The vaxxes do seem to provide some protection from severe disease and death when normalized for the population, but 79.7% of the deaths in the week 45 report were in the fully vaxxed. Only 17.1% of the deaths were in the unvaxxed.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports
Does anyone seriously believe that human biology is different on the other side of the pond? The CDC is either lying or incompetent or both.
https://eugyppius.substack.com/p/ukhsa-efficacy-stats-death-watch-2ba
Looking at the UKHSA surveillance reports it seems vaccine is effective for a short period of time.
For 1 to 20 days after first jab it seems very effective. Ironically as they claim it takes 14 days to develop immunity!
It soon deteriorates after 20+ days after the 1st jab and is disastrous after the 2nd jab ... the more so the older you get suggesting any possible benefit soon disappears.....in fact Expose calculates negative vaccine effectiveness....that is the vaccinated are more likely to get it!
https://theexpose.uk/2021/11/12/covid-vaccines-negative-effectiveness-minus-126-percent/
Yet UK government, like Foxtrot Juliet Bravo has mandated care home and health workers are vaccinated.
The care worker mandate estimates 60,000 careworkers will be fired and at least 70000 hospital staff(in April 2022).
This delay then begs the question.....if the unvaccinated are so dangerous you have to implement totalitarian measures never done before in history....why wait until April 2022?
It was like mandatory mask wearing. Until 48 hours before the mandate our Prime minister swore they were not necessary....then they said they were necessary....but only in 10 days time!
Surely if so dangerous ...it should be immediate. Surely if so dangerous you'd supply the masks.
The WHOLE thing stinks.
Not to mention in that data, after 200 days, it's in negative antibodies and the immune systems are worse than prior vaccination☹
Exactly. So they are making it worse. Let's hope ADE doesn't also become a reality
Also _IF_ the virus was much deadlier, _IF_ there were no effective early treatments or preventative measures, and _IF_ we were all just okey dokey with just shredding longstanding medical ethics around consent and bodily autonomy. Yeah, nope.
I agree with you that the existence of effective early treatments is a point against a mandate. But vaccine mandates in general are nothing new: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/10/08/states-have-mandated-vaccinations-since-long-before-covid-19/
That doesn't mean you have to support them, but I don't see how you can claim they go against "longstanding" medical ethics.
Scott, how familiar are you with the 1976 swine flu vaccine rollout?
When I say "longstanding medical ethics" I'm talking about voluntary and informed consent. https://www.deepcapture.com/2021/10/letter-to-physicians-have-you-checked-your-1947-nuremberg-code-today/
In the counterfactual world you seem to have in mind, where the virus was actually a broad and serious threat, where no other effective treatment for it existed, and where the vaccine actually prevented transmission, prevented the disease, AND could be honestly shown to induce no serious damaging side effects... well, they wouldn't have to rush to mandate that, would they? Those who did not volunteer would be on their own, and their autonomy could be respected. Mandates, if any, might come decades later, after the long-term studies. Hopefully those studies would be honest as well.
The weaponization of OSHA against the adult population is genuinely unprecedented. State vaccine mandates for childhood vaccines come as requirements for admission to schools. Nearly everywhere, and especially until recently, they also have exemptions. Parents could make informed choices. Unfortunately, the medical establishment has been leaning to the wrong side of this issue for quite a while now, in proportion to the creeping pharma industry takeover. A few mainstream pediatricians have led some measured pushback.
As far as I can see none of the previous mandates were with emergency authorisation .... Or .... using a new technology, ...or ...after suspect hasty trials ...or ... for a population of which over 90% were low risk.
The fact that everyone keeps using these "long standing vaccine mandates" as a justification to current mandates is an absurd and ridiculous argument. First, these are not vaccines and we need to stop calling them that. Second, this gene manipulation pathogen producing instrument, is a brand new, poorly tested, and never tested for long term effects technology, unlike anything ever used in the past like tradional vaccine technologies.
One of those so called mandates was BEFORE the ratification of the US Constitution!
(Oops -- hit Post by accident.)
The problem is, as I say, we don't even seem to have data on the odds of infection, and it's pretty clear we're being lied to about the safety.
Agreed. So when will this nightmare be over? Almost 2 years and despite all the exposed fraud and racketeering there is no end in sight
Mass peaceful civil disobedience is our best hope at present. We are seeing just how corrupt and dysfunctional and abusive all those institutions that bore the public trust have become.
Let me emphasize "peaceful." Simply do not comply. They know they're provoking outrage. They would love for any of us to go violent so they could justify martial law and all the horrors that would follow. If they can't provoke us, they'll have to resort to cheap false-flag flim-flam, and they've long since jumped the shark with that.
Big protest on the Golden Gate Bridge tonight