This game of hunt-and-kill Covid cases has reached peak absurdity, especially in media culture...
Take a look at Supermarkets are the most common place to catch Covid, new data reveals. It’s a story on a “study” assembled by Public Health England (PHE) from the NHS Test and Trace App. Here is the conclusion. In the six days of November studied, “of those who tested positive, it was found that 18.3 per cent had visited a supermarket.”
Now, if the alarm bells don’t go off with that one, you didn’t pay attention to 7th grade science. If the app had also included showering, eating, and breathing, it might have found a 100% correlation. Yes, the people who tested positive probably did shop, as do most people. That doesn’t mean that shopping gives you Covid and it certainly doesn’t mean that shopping kills you.
Even if shopping is a way to get Covid, this is a very widespread and mostly mild virus for 99.8% percent of the population with an infection fatality rate as low as 0.05% for those under 70. Competent infectious disease experts have said multiple times that test, track, and isolate strategies are nearly useless for controlling viruses such as this.
This story/study was so poor and so absurd that it was too much even for Isabel Oliver, Director of the National Infection Service at Public Health England. She sent out the following note:
Thank you. One down, a thousand to go.
The New York Times pulled a mighty fast one with this piece: “States That Imposed Few Restrictions Now Have the Worst Outbreaks.” This would be huge news if true because it would imply not only that lockdowns save lives (which no serious study has thus far been able to document) but also that granting people basic freedoms are the reason for bad health outcomes, an astonishing claim on its own.
The piece, put together by two graphic artists and seemingly very science-like, speaks of “outbreaks,” which vaguely sounds terrible: packed with mortality. It’s odd because anyone can look at the data and see that New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Connecticut lead the way with deaths per million, mostly owing to the fatalities in long-term care facilities. These were the states that locked down the hardest and longest. Indeed they are locking down again! Deaths per million in states like South Dakota are still low on the list.
How in the world can the NYT claim that states that did not lock down have the worst outbreaks? The claim hinges entirely on a trivial discovery. Some clever someone discovered that if you reflow data by cases per million instead of deaths per million, you get an opposite result. The reasons: 1) when the Northeast experienced the height of the pandemic, there was very little testing going on, so the “outbreak” was not documented even as deaths grew and grew, 2) by the time the virus reached the Midwest, tests were widely available, 3) the testing mania grew and grew to the point that the non-vulnerable are being tested like crazy, generating high positives in small-population areas.
By focusing on the word “outbreak,” the Times can cleverly obscure the difference between a positive PCR result (including many false positive and perhaps half or more asymptomatic cases) and a severe outcome from catching the virus. In other words, the Times has documented an “outbreak” of mostly non-sick people in low-population areas.
There are hundreds of ways to look at Covid-19 data. The Times picked the one metric – the least valuable one for actually discerning whether and to what extent people are sick – in order to generate the result that they wanted, namely that open states look as bad as possible. The result is a chart that massively misrepresents any existing reality. It makes the worst states look great and the best ones look terrible. The visual alone is constructed to make it looks as if open states are bleeding uncontrollably.
How many readers will even know this? Very few, I suspect. What’s more amazing is that the Times itself already debunked the entire “casedemic” back in September:
Some of the nation’s leading public health experts are raising a new concern in the endless debate over coronavirus testing in the United States: The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus.
Most of these people are not likely to be contagious, and identifying them may contribute to bottlenecks that prevent those who are contagious from being found in time….
In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.
All of which makes one wonder what precisely is going on in this relationship between cases and severe outcomes. The Covid Tracking Project generates the following chart. Cases are in blue while deaths are in red.
Despite this story and these data, the graphic artists at the Times got to work generating a highly misleading presentation that leads to one conclusion: more lockdowns.
(My colleague Phil Magness has noted further methodological problems even within the framework that the Times uses but I will let him write about that later.)
Let’s finally deal with Salon’s attack on Great Barrington Declaration co-creator Jayanta Bhattacharya. Here is a piece that made the following claim of the infection fatality rate: “the accepted figure of 2-3 percent or higher.” That’s an astonishing number, and basically nuts: 10 million people will die in the US alone.
Here is what the CDC says concerning the wildly disparate risk factors based on age:
These data are not inconsistent with the World Health Organization’s suggestion that the infection fatality rate for people under 70 years of age is closer to 0.05%.
The article further claims that “herd immunity may not even be possible for COVID-19 given that infection appears to only confer transient immunity.” And yet, the New York Times just wrote that:
How long might immunity to the coronavirus last? Years, maybe even decades, according to a new study — the most hopeful answer yet to a question that has shadowed plans for widespread vaccination.
Eight months after infection, most people who have recovered still have enough immune cells to fend off the virus and prevent illness, the new data show. A slow rate of decline in the short term suggests, happily, that these cells may persist in the body for a very, very long time to come.
How is it possible for people to make rational decisions with this kind of journalism going on? Truly, sometimes it seems like the world has been driven insane by an astonishing blizzard of false information. Just last week, an entire state in Australia shut down completely – putting all its citizens under house arrest – due to a false report of a case in a pizza restaurant. One person lied and the whole world fell apart.
Meanwhile, serious science is appearing daily showing that there is no relationship at all, and never has been, between lockdowns and lives saved. This study looks at all factors related to Covid death and finds plenty of relationship between age and health but absolutely none with lockdown stringency. “Stringency of the measures settled to fight pandemia, including lockdown, did not appear to be linked with death rate,” says the study, echoing a conclusion of dozens of other studies since as early as March.
It’s all become too much. The world is being seriously misled by major media organs. The politicians are continuing to panic and impose draconian controls, fully nine months into this, despite mountains of evidence of the real harm the lockdowns are causing everyone. If you haven’t lost faith in politicians and major media at this point, you have paid no attention to what they have been doing for the better part of this catastrophic year.
"The invitation is lost in the lingering threat," wrote Turley, a professor of law at George Washington University.
The Hill reported Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel waws responding on Twitter to former state Republican state Sen. Patrick Colbeck discussing allegations of vote fraud during a Michigan Board of State Canvassers meeting that ended with the state’s election results being certified.
Colbeck was asked at the meeting whether he had brought his allegations to the state attorney general.
The report said Nessel claimed Colbeck has never made a complaint of election fraud to her office.
Nessel tweeted, "Colbeck’s assertions aside, intentionally making a false claim of criminal activity to law enforcement is itself a crime."
Turley noted Nessel has been threatening people who post videos on alleged vote fraud.
"These threats are coercive and abusive, particularly when targeting opponents of your party who are challenging the victory of your candidate for president," he wrote.
"Yet, as shown by a congressman seeking to disbar dozens of Trump lawyers, such threats are popular in today’s rage-filled politics. So, Nessel continued her threats of prosecution on Monday in warning that a former state senator could be prosecuted for alleging possible voter fraud at a meeting of the Michigan Board of State Canvassers. So, raising voting fraud at the board overseeing voting is now a possible basis for prosecution in Michigan."
Turley noted Colbeck said he had submitted affidavits to lawyers who were moving the allegations up the chain to the attorney general's office.
"Of course, many Republicans in the state may be a tad reluctant to reach out to Nessel given her threats of prosecution against citizens and legislators alike," Turley explained. "As if to fulfill that view, Nessel immediately responded with yet another threat of prosecution."
Turley said Nessel's threat "is directed not just at Colbeck but those who signed these affidavits."
"In other words, you must submit your allegations of fraud to me but I may prosecute you if you submit your allegations of fraud to me. Hardly an inviting prospect," he said.
"I tend to view these stories from the perspective of a criminal defense attorney. These citizens are coming forward to allege what they believe were instances of voter fraud. They may be wrong in what they perceived or what they believe is fraud. However, we want voters to feel free to come forward. Affidavits are signed on penalty of perjury. There are cases of such perjury cases or false police reports that are prosecuted. However, one would think that Nessel would be encouraging submissions of such complaints to her office, not threatening those who may do so," he wrote.
Turley observed that while "the Democrats and the media continue to raise threats against democracy, they are entirely oblivious to the implications Nessel’s use of the criminal code to threat those who question the victory of Joe Biden."
"They are equally silent (as is Biden himself) on a campaign of threats and intimidation against both lawyers and legislators questioning the election. It is part of a toxic atmosphere where Democratic members are calling for blacklists and others denounce any questioning of the Biden victory as akin to 'Holocaust denial,'" he said.
"Nessel adds a particularly menacing element to this campaign in her use of her office to threaten prosecution against those who post videos on voting fraud, legislators who raise objections to the certification, or even voters who allege improprieties. Yet, she cannot understand why anyone would fail to contact her with allegations of voting irregularities," he wrote.
Just days earlier, the report said, Nessel had threatened to look into whether bribery and perjury criminal investigations should be launched into state GOP leaders.
Their possible offense? Planning to meet with President Trump to review the vote certification process and determine whether there was evidence of fraud.
Experts cited by the website said there needed to be evidence for Nessel to proceed.
UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh said: "Well, bribery is a crime, so if someone was bribed, that warrants a criminal prosecution – but is there any actual evidence? Perjury is a crime, so if someone perjured himself, that warrants a criminal prosecution – but is there any actual evidence? Rescinding one’s vote, of course, isn’t a crime."
Volokh described Nessel's comments as "saber-rattling."
Michigan is one of several states swing states in which witnesses have come forward with sworn statements alleging fraud in the presidential election. The statements form the basis of Trump campaign lawsuits challenging the results in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Nevada and Georgia.
Exactly 400 years ago, 102 Pilgrims were staring down what promised to be a brutal winter, after first coming to shore, and setting up a tiny village in Plymouth, Massachusetts.
The industrious, God-fearing Pilgrims decided to pull together and pool their resources and efforts to better survive winter. They created a commune, and elected a Governor to call the shots.
By the spring of 1621, half of the Pilgrims had died from starvation, disease, and exposure.
One of the Pilgrims, William Bradford, explained in his journal that communal living “was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort.”
Young single men found it unjust that they had to do all the hard work, but received no more reward for it. And wives “deemed it a kind of slavery” to be forced to do chores for men besides their husbands.
Clearly, this little experiment in collectivizing society had failed. So they reversed course, and tried something new; every man for himself.
This might sound harsh, or even counterproductive. But on the contrary, Bradford explained:
This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use… The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression.
400 years later, it seems leaders have forgotten the lesson.
We are entering winter grappling with COVID-19, a lockdown-stunted economy, and as I noted Monday, millions of hungry Americans relying on food banks to survive.
And tyrannical governments seem to be doing everything they can to stop us from responding to these problems as we see fit.
We’ve been told to abandon any sense of reason, trust the experts, and “listen to the scientists”.
But this month, New England Journal of Medicine published the results of a study to test the theory that extreme lockdowns are effective at controlling the spread of COVID-19.
The study, which enforced a strict quarantine and social distancing regimen on Marine recruits, found there is no correlation between strict lockdowns and reduced COVID-19 transmission.
In fact the control group, which went about life as normal, had a lower percentage of COVID infections (1.7%) compared to the test group under strict lockdown (2%).
So, will Governors “listen to the scientists”?
Hardly. Several states are going so far as to attempt to cancel Thanksgiving– or at least place a strict limit on the number of family members you can invite to your own home to share a meal.
Oregon recently decriminalized hard drugs– invite five people over to smoke crack, and you’re all good. But if you are caught sharing a Thanksgiving meal with seven family members, you could face 30 days in jail and a $1,250 fine.
California says you can host no more than two other families, but everyone must stay outside, with guests seated six feet apart, in all directions.
The state of California will graciously allow your houseguests to enter your home… but only to use the bathroom.
(Meanwhile, the Governor of California, Gavin Newsom, was caught dining out maskless with about a dozen friends for a lobbyist’s birthday party.)
But these are just the latest authoritarian escalations, which should surprise no one.
Since March, Governors have simply been ruling by decree to shut down businesses, define who is an essential employee, and stop people from earning a living, even though courts have deemed these lockdowns unconstitutional.
But governors are ignoring the courts and imposing lockdowns anyway.
And we see the results– 11 million out of work, record consumer debt, corporate debt, and government debt, and a pandemic that has still not been controlled, despite the restrictions.
It took a 50% death rate from disease and hunger in Plymouth in the winter of 1620 to convince the Pilgrims that controlling people wasn’t saving lives, or creating prosperity.
But individual liberty accomplished what authoritarianism and communism could not.
Now more than ever people need the freedom to make their own decisions, to decide for themselves if they want to open their businesses, earn a living, and have family over to share a Thanksgiving meal.
And if those basic freedoms which we all took for granted just one year ago seem out of reach, take one more lesson from the Pilgrims.
They hopped in a tiny wooden boat, and crossed the Atlantic at great personal risk just to have a shot at building a free life by their own design.
Today, it is not nearly as dangerous or difficult to find greener pastures.
Just removing yourself from a city goes a long way, as does settling amongst neighbors who aren’t ready to turn you in to the Gestapo for celebrating Thanksgiving.
But also, don’t be afraid to look overseas.
When people think that your personal liberty is a threat to them, it makes sense to at least consider the possibility that at some point, your home country may no longer be right for you.
Big tech censorship strikes conservatives again. This time the target is One America News Network which has been suspended for one week and been demonetized by YouTube for allegedly posting a video promoting a cure for the COVID-19 China coronavirus.
Chanel Rion, Chief White House Correspondent for OAN
YouTube has barred One America News Network from posting new videos for a week and stripped it of its ability to make money off existing content after the Trump-friendly channel uploaded a video promoting a phony cure for COVID-19, YouTube spokesperson Ivy Choi tells Axios.
Why it matters: YouTube has been criticized for allowing OANN to spread misinformation using its platform, particularly around coronavirus and the election. This marks the Google-owned service’s first crackdown against OANN.
“After careful review, we removed a video from OANN and issued a strike on the channel for violating our Covid-19 misinformation policy, which prohibits content claiming there’s a guaranteed cure,” Ivy Choi, a YouTube spokesperson, told CNN in a statement.
“Additionally, due to repeated violations of our Covid-19 misinformation policy and other channel monetization policies, we’ve suspended the channel from the YouTube Partner Program and as a result, its monetization on YouTube,” Choi added.
CNN’s Donie O’Sullivan noted that OANN is carried by several cable companies, “OANN, which has become a hub of conspiracy theories undermining the integrity of the election, is also carried by major cable operators, including DirecTV, which is owned by CNN’s parent company AT&T.”
OANN, which has become a hub of conspiracy theories undermining the integrity of the election, is also carried by major cable operators, including DirecTV, which is owned by CNN’s parent company AT&T. https://t.co/FCSM1HLOtH
Look for a stronger effort by the censorious left and media to further deplatform One America News Network.
UPDATE: The ADL says YouTube’s actions against OANN is “insufficient”, “While it is commendable that YouTube took action here, it’s unclear why this is the channel’s first strike. OANN has been involved in spreading electoral misinformation since at least early Nov. & this limited ban on posting new content is insufficient.”
While it is commendable that YouTube took action here, it’s unclear why this is the channel’s first strike. OANN has been involved in spreading electoral misinformation since at least early Nov. & this limited ban on posting new content is insufficient. https://t.co/VhkAJ5WGm2
ORIGINAL LINK
It is apparent from the data that there has been no consistent warming trend in the U.S. over the last 2 decades; average mean temperatures (daytime and nighttime) have been slightly higher in some years and slightly lower in other years. On balance–and contrary to mountains of uninformed social and political commentary—annual temperatures on average […]
Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.
An appeals court in Portugal has ruled that the PCR process is not a reliable test for Sars-Cov-2, and therefore any enforced quarantine based on those test results is unlawful.
Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.
OANN, which has become a hub of conspiracy theories undermining the integrity of the election, is also carried by major cable operators, including DirecTV, which is owned by CNN’s parent company AT&T. https://t.co/FCSM1HLOtH
