10% of 300 million is much more than enough for a random sample needed for a valid statistical analysis.

The third dose as required to keep my job has caused me tinnitus that will not subside. There has been a jet engine in my head for months now.

The doctor just claims that the it CAN'T be the vaccine.

^^^^^^
Sounds like your doctor is an AMA douche-nozzle sell-out.

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
The third dose as required to keep my job has caused me tinnitus that will not subside. There has been a jet engine in my head for months now.

The doctor just claims that the it CAN'T be the vaccine.

I'd find a new doc. It is a reported side-effect and at least one of the "vaccine" makers has added tinnitus as a possible side-effect. Further: People with existing cases of tinnitus have reported an increase in severity.

Covid-19 vaccine tinnitus

Thanks for mentioning this, Mars_Attacks. I have constant, but tolerable tinnitus. You've just added another reason I will continue to shun these "vaccines."

Another good video from Jimmy Dore concerning Joy Behar and the View.
She's decided to ignore the "experts" and wear a mask forever, yet as she says this indoors, she's not wearing one.
And the hypocrisy, it's okay for her to ignore experts and do what she wants, yet anyone else who does so should be canceled because of "mis-information". What a whack job.
I'm fine with people wearing a mask if they want, just stop forcing others to do it.

Dore Video

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
The third dose as required to keep my job has caused me tinnitus that will not subside. There has been a jet engine in my head for months now.

The doctor just claims that the it CAN'T be the vaccine.

Sorry to hear that. I've had moderate tinnitus for about 15 years due to an anti-biotic adverse reaction which is not well known by docs but if you dig into the literature it is well documented.

Try Vit D as well as B. Reduce caffeine and chocolate. Sometimes it helps.

One of my daughters now has constant mild tinnitus as an adverse reaction to the C19 vaccine. She's in her late 20's, and I am so very unhappy at her doc for pushing the vaccine even after she had recovered from a pretty significant case of C19 where she was hospitalized with, amongst other issues, cardiac complications.

The docs are taking a completely distanced approach of parroting the narratives and chalking up adverse outcomes to, shrug, rare random chance.

Two classes of people I have dramatically reduced trust in over this scamdemic...

...any and all government officials

...any and all so called "health care professional" (my two nieces who are nurses, excepted)

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
The third dose as required to keep my job has caused me tinnitus that will not subside. There has been a jet engine in my head for months now.

The doctor just claims that the it CAN'T be the vaccine.

My wife developed tinnitus following a single J&J shot last year. It's been crippling for her.

Jimbo. #Me2

My father and step-mother are both GP docs, we have a huge rift in our relationship now over this. They've turned into socialists, supporting mandates and falling off the deep-end in several other areas also.

quote:

Originally posted by JoseyWales2:
I'm fine with people wearing a mask if they want, just stop forcing others to do it.

Sage words, sir!! You could apply that same logic to ANYTHING in this world..."I'm fine with people [fill-in-the-blank] if they want, just stop forcing others to do it." Life would be a LOT simpler and it would help quell the urge I have to punch so many f**ktards in the throat.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimbo Jones:
Two classes of people I have dramatically reduced trust in over this scamdemic...

...any and all government officials

...any and all so called "health care professional" (my two nieces who are nurses, excepted)

Fortunately, my Primary Care Physician has maintained his trust with me. I am BLESSED for that and thank our good Lord above for him!

quote:

Originally posted by Jimbo Jones:
Two classes of people I have dramatically reduced trust in over this scamdemic...

...

...any and all so called "health care professional" (my two nieces who are nurses, excepted)

I distrusted the "vaccines" push, from the start, because I already had a jaundiced view of the western medicine "health care" industry.

That jaundiced view developed, over time, as I began to notice nearly every "health care" professional's solution to any and every ailment was pharmaceuticals. Which would often necessitate more pharmaceuticals to counteract side-effects. Which would often necessitate yet more pharmaceuticals to counteract the side-effects from those pharmaceuticals. Wash, rinse, repeat.

We just had a family friend go through that. She'd been suffering mild depression since her husband passed away. Long story short: By the time my wife finally convinced her to get another doc, she was on a half-dozen meds--each one prescribed to treat the side-effects from the previous one, in terrible health, and still clinically mildly depressed.

The "health care" industry's handling of the Wu Flu scaredemic has only served to reinforce my distrust in it.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by Jimbo Jones:
Two classes of people I have dramatically reduced trust in over this scamdemic...

...

...any and all so called "health care professional" (my two nieces who are nurses, excepted)

I distrusted the "vaccines" push, from the start, because I already had a jaundiced view of the western medicine "health care" industry.

That jaundiced view developed, over time, as I began to notice nearly every "health care" professional's solution to any and every ailment was pharmaceuticals. Which would often necessitate more pharmaceuticals to counteract side-effects. Which would often necessitate yet more pharmaceuticals to counteract the side-effects from those pharmaceuticals. Wash, rinse, repeat.

We just had a family friend go through that. She'd been suffering mild depression since her husband passed away. Long story short: By the time my wife finally convinced her to get another doc, she was on a half-dozen meds--each one prescribed to treat the side-effects from the previous one, in terrible health, and still clinically mildly depressed.

The "health care" industry's handling of the Wu Flu scaredemic has only served to reinforce my distrust in it.

A family friend was hospitalized and in ICU for 2 weeks in 2012 for some heart problems and was given so many medications. Many of it to counter act the other, etc. One day he was fed up with having to take all of it, he stopped taking them and told his doctor. His doctor told him, if he did he would not live for long and would more than likely pass in a few weeks. He lived for almost 6 year more without all of it. God Bless !!!

quote:

Originally posted by JoseyWales2:

I'm fine with people wearing a mask if they want, just stop forcing others to do it.

Well, I'll tell 'ya, I'm not fine with it. Not at all. It is not normal for people in this country to be walking around with their faces covered. It is a disjointed reality. And I'm frankly sick of seeing it. It needs to stop. These people need to have some sense slapped into them. I don't want my daughters growing up in a society where half the people are so neurotic that they wrap a dirty cloth over their noses and mouths.

One on hand, people should be free to do as they want as long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights of others.

On the other hand, stupid should hurt.

quote:

over their noses

Often not.

Why it Is Ethical To Resist the Biosecurity Surveillance State

https://brownstone.org/article...-surveillance-state/

Peter Leithart over at the Theopolis Institute invited me to contribute to this “Conversation,” which begins with a lead article from theologian Doug Farrow, “Whether There is a Moral Obligation to Disobey the Coercive Mandates,” followed by several responses, including mine. With permission, I’m reprinting here my piece, “The Rising Biosecurity Surveillance Regime”:

Doug Farrow has written, in the form of a Medieval disputatio, a cogent and persuasive defense of civil disobedience in response to vaccine mandates and other unjustifiable Covid measures. For those familiar with my work over the past year, my full endorsement of his position will come as no surprise. Until recently, I had spent my entire fifteen-year career as a professor and director of the Medical Ethics Program at the University of California Irvine School of Medicine. Last August I challenged the University of California’s vaccine mandate in federal court on behalf of individuals, like me, who had infection-induced (natural) immunity. A few months later, and after twice rejecting my medical exemption request, the University fired me for alleged noncompliance with their vaccine mandate.

It was clear then from more than 150 studies, and it is even more apparent today, that natural immunity to Covid is superior to vaccine-induced immunity, both in terms of efficacy and longevity. Indeed, during the most recent wave, efficacy against omicron infection of the two-dose mRNA vaccines dropped to zero; a third-dose booster raised that—albeit only temporarily—to 37%, still well below the 50% threshold required by the FDA for Covid vaccine approval. By contrast, natural immunity only saw a modest drop in efficacy against omicron and remains well over the 50% threshold. Although vaccine efficacy against severe symptoms initially appeared promising, with time and new variants, it is now clear that these vaccines have failed to control the pandemic.

Indeed, in some highly vaccinated regions, for example, the U.K., Israel, and Ontario, we are now seeing negative vaccine efficacy—that is, higher rates (not just total numbers) of infection among the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. The reasons for this—whether antibody dependent enhancement or original antigenic sin—remain unclear, but the findings are now evident. Even prior to omicron, we knew that none of the Covid vaccines provided sterilizing immunity, i.e., they did not prevent infection and transmission (in contrast, for example, to the measles vaccine). This empirical finding obviated the common good argument that one has a duty to get vaccinated for the sake of protecting others. Our one-size-fits-all mandates also failed to consider the most basic epidemiological facts about Covid, for example, that morbidity and mortality risks of the coronavirus to a healthy child or adolescent were a thousand-fold less than the risks to an elderly person.

Our public health authorities over-promised and under-delivered with the vaccines, squandering public trust in the process. This came on the wake of other failed pandemic policies of 2020, including the failure of masks, social distancing, disinfecting surfaces, and most disastrously, harmful lockdown policies, to stop the spread of the virus. Despite all these aggressive mitigation measures, estimates suggest that more than 70% of all Americans—vaccinated and unvaccinated included—have nevertheless been infected with Covid. As I have been arguing for some time now, natural immunity remains our primary way out of the pandemic. Yet our public health authorities continue to deploy the dubious “vaccinated vs. unvaccinated” distinction, rather than the more empirically defensible “more immune vs. less immune” distinction.

Medical Ethics

Many of our pandemic policies cast aside foundational principles of medical ethics. During the initial lockdowns in 2020, hospitals sat empty for weeks and hospital staff were sent home, as we waited for an influx of Covid patients that did not arrive until months later. Healthcare systems, spurred by perverse payment incentives from CMS, focused narrowly on a single disease: this biased our Covid hospitalization and death counts and effectively abandoned patients with other medical needs. The disastrous fruits of this myopia include an unprecedented 40% increase in all-cause mortality among working-age adults (18-64) last year, most of which was not attributable to Covid deaths. To put this number in context, actuaries tell us that a 10% rise in all-cause mortality represents a once in two-hundred-year catastrophe.

The ethical principle of free and informed medical consent—guaranteed by the Nuremberg Code, the Helsinki Declaration, the Belmont Report, and the Federal Common Rule—was abandoned when vaccine mandatesrequired experimental EUA vaccines. Transparency, a central principle of public health ethics, was likewise abandoned. Along with several colleagues, I had to file a FOIA request to obtain the Pfizer vaccine clinical trial data from the FDA: the agency wanted 75 years to release data they reviewed in only 108 days (the judge has ordered the data release in 8 months). Thousands like me have lost our jobs for declining a novel injection whose safety and efficacy data remains hidden from independent scrutiny.

The scientific method suffered under a repressive academic and social climate of censorship and the silencing of competing perspectives. This projected the false appearance of a scientific consensus—a “consensus” often strongly influenced by economic and political interests.

Social Isolation vs. Social Solidarity

Our ruling class saw in Covid an opportunity to revolutionize how we relate to one another and how we exist in the world. Recall how the phrase “the new normal” emerged almost immediately in the earliest days of the pandemic. This public health crisis offered the ideal pretext for expanding exceptional state powers beyond all previous limits. Our government and public health authorities have still not defined the thresholds for what counts as a public health emergency—the supposed legal justification for burdensome Covid “countermeasures” (a military, not a medical, term), serious infringements on civil liberties, and censorship of dissenting voices. The assumption of emergency powers by both elected officials and unelected bureaucrats continues indefinitely, with little critical scrutiny and no appropriate checks and balances.

The lockdowns of the past two years represented the first time in the history of pandemics that we quarantined healthy populations. Those who benefitted economically from lockdowns—Amazon, for example, and professionals in the laptop class who could easily work from home—lobbied for these untested measures. The working class bore the brunt of the lockdown burdens and saw massive transfers of their wealth upwards, mostly into the pockets of a few ultra-rich tech elites.

Governments initiated these unproven and unprecedented measures with virtually no public debate and without due deliberation about the overall consequences. While the lockdowns failed to slow the spread of Covid, they did untold damage. The carnage included what I’ve called “The Other Pandemic”: the lockdown mental health crisis, which gave us skyrocketing rates of depression, anxiety, trauma, addictions, and suicide—especially pronounced among the young. Prior to Covid we had an opioid crisis, with 44,000 deaths per year in the US from overdose in 2018; last year that number was 100,000.

It turns out that people who are afraid, who are locked down, who are isolated for months behind computer screens are easier to control. A society grounded on “social distancing” is a contradiction—it is a kind of anti-society. Paradoxically under the stay-at-home orders, the highest form of civic participation was framed as non-participation. The specter of asymptomatic viral spread—which never had any scientific basis—turned every fellow citizen into a potential threat to one’s existence. It would be hard to devise a better method to destroy the fabric of society and to divide us.

Biosecurity and Totalitarianism

With vaccine mandates and passports, we are seeing the emergence of a new biosecurity surveillance regimedesigned and implemented by unelected technocrats. The unholy welding of digital technologies, public health, and police power is leading to unprecedented invasions on our privacy and intrusive methods of monitoring and authoritarian control. In this framework, citizens are no longer viewed as persons with inherent dignity, but as fungible elements of an undifferentiated “mass,” to be shaped by supposedly benevolent health and safety experts. I predict that if these trends do not meet more robust resistance in 2022, this new paradigm of governance will demand increasingly intrusive and burdensome interventions into the lives, and bodies, of individuals.

The marriage of global public health with novel digital technologies of surveillance, personal data extraction, information flow, and social control now makes possible novel forms of domination unimaginable in the totalitarian regimes of the past. Whether we agree or disagree with this or that pandemic policy, this broader development should concern each of us. Farrow describes this perceptively when he sketches the “systemic change otherwise unpalatable to the people” introduced during the pandemic:

That change is in the direction of what the World Economic Forum calls stakeholder capitalism, backed by biodigital convergence, universal surveillance, and technological control of a wide range of human activities, from reproduction to religion. Information exchange, like monetary exchange, is to be monitored and controlled. A social credit system is being devised in which conformity will be rewarded by inclusion and lack of conformity punished by exclusion. What is already operative in China, in other words, is advancing very rapidly in the West.

To see and understand the emergence of this “new normal,” consider as instructive cautionary tales the prior regimes in which the pretext of public safety during an emergency paved the way for totalitarian systems. Anyone who draws a historical analogy to the Nazis is understandably met with the charge of alarmist hyperbole, so let me be clear: I am comparing neither the current nor the previous administrations to Hitler’s totalitarian regime. Still, it remains a sobering, instructive, and undeniable fact that Nazi Germany was governed for virtually the entirety of its existence under Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution, which allowed for the suspension of German law in times of emergency. Recall also the name of the group that carried out the infamous Reign of Terror during the French Revolution: the “Committee on… Public Safety.”

Vaccine passports are merely an early, though significant, step for the emerging biosecurity surveillance regime. As Farrow rightly observes, “We are not dealing with a [pandemic] exit strategy at all, but rather with an entrance strategy for the new Lords of the World.” It is not too early for firm resistance; indeed, with virtually no pushback we have uncritically allowed unjust and harmful measures to advance while meeting no resistance. Our general goodwill and civic mindedness are nullified by misplaced trust and self-protective timidity. Cowardice masquerades as civility. Consider the remarks of the great Soviet dissident, Alexander Solzhenitsyn:

If only we had stood together against the common threat, we could easily have defeated it. So, why didn’t we? We didn’t love freedom enough. We hurried to submit. We submitted with pleasure! We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.

The hour is later than we think; twilight is near. Continued compliance with manifestly unjust and often absurd mandates will not return us to a normal functioning society. Every good-faith or selfless act of compliance on the part of citizens has only resulted in more illogical pandemic “countermeasures” that further erode our civil liberties, harm our overall health, and undermine human flourishing.

There is a human right not enshrined in any constitution: the right to the truth. I would suggest that no right has been more systematically trammeled over the last two years than this one. Why, I ask, do our public health authorities acknowledge the truth only after the damage from the lie has already been done—only, for example, after tens of thousands have lost their jobs due to coercive vaccine mandates that have not advanced public health? Who will hold our leaders accountable for this malfeasance?

Doug Farrow knows the score and he is correct: nonviolent resistance and civil disobedience now constitute the right and just path forward. At the risk of ending on an apocalyptic note, I join Farrow in maintaining that firm resistance to the point of civil disobedience is not only permissible under the circumstances, but indeed required if we are to prevent this twilight from fading into night.

Metro Nashville schools to end mask mandate after spring break and while that’s another month away at least they’ve put a number on ending the madness.

I still pose the question……if a decision has been made to lift ANY mandate, why wait? Why not lift it right f***ing now?!? What are these ass-hats waiting for?

New JAMA paper show Ivermectin blows the COVID vaccines out of the water

Whoops! How embarrassing! The CDC gave you bad advice. If you want to survive COVID, you should use the drug they said to avoid, and avoid the drug they said to use.

Steve Kirsch

Remember that “horse dewormer” that the FDA, CDC, NIH, CNN, and Sanjay Gupta all told you not to use? A new paper recently published in the Journal of the AMA (JAMA) shows that Ivermectin works way better than the COVID vaccine in keeping you from dying from COVID.

Do not fall for it. Read the paper if you want the truth. If you want to be misled, just read the abstract.

Pierre Kory did a brilliant takedown of the paper on his substack. I won’t repeat that here. Instead, I’ll just summarize the data for you; the hidden gems in the paper that you are never supposed to notice.

https://stevekirsch.substack.c...blows?utm_source=url

Good info! Thanks!