quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
The Australian Army is now removing people from their homes and placing them into quarantine "camps" in the Northern Territory:

WTAF, Australia?

Just when I think you can't get any more dystopian and dictatorial, you say "hold my Fosters"

quote:

"Residents of Binjari and Rockhole no longer have the five reasons to leave their homes," said Northern Territory chief minister, Michael Gunner, referring to the country's five allowable reasons to avoid lockdown (buying food and supplies, exercising for up to two hours, care or caregiving, work or education if it can't be done from home, and to get vaccinated at the nearest possible location.

"They can only leave for medical treatment, in an emergency, or as required by law."

"It's highly likely that more residents will be transferred to Howard Springs today, either as positive cases or close contacts," he continued, adding "We have already identified 38 close contacts from Binjari but that number will go up. Those 38 are being transferred now."

Australian Army Begins Transferring COVID-Positive Cases, Contacts To Quarantine Camps

I'm not sure what it's going to take to make people realize this has NEVER been about Covid.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
^^^
This is the democRAT pipe dream for the US. 2A is the only guarantee they would never try it.

I would never have expected Australia to do much of what it's done the last few years, either. I would never have expected Austria, with its history, to do some of what it's done.

I would never have expected our Commander In Chief to essentially lobotomize our military's leadership. I would never have expected the once-vaunted FBI to turn into what it clearly has. I would never have expected our education system to turn into a brain-washing daycare or our "news" media to turn into a monolithic propaganda machine.

So you'll excuse me if I make no assumptions about the future.

Are you implying that the US military is potentially going to violate posse commitatus and operate on US soil and physically round up American citizens? The same military that can’t even get its own forces vaccinated? Or that Americans or the National Guard, who are in fact full fledged members in the communities they serve in would? Or cops outside of pure commie enclaves? Oh ye of little faith. Nobody that has the backbone to resist will stand for it.

^^^ I have offered many a leftist to come and get my guns since they believe I shouldn't have them and the government has refused to do so. Not a single taker.

I have offered the exact same to those demanding everybody be vaccinated. Come give me my shot. No knocks at my door so far.

I suppose if they'd like to come round me up for camp they could do that too. I won't be holding my breath.

First, Do No Harm [Muldoon]

I've been reflecting lately on my 35 year career as a physician and how that relates to American medicine in the age of COVID and the United States of America at the end of 2021.

Two different, yet interrelated foundational principles have been central to my thoughts. The first is a core tenet of western medicine, the doctrine of primum non nocere or "first do no harm". The second is "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness".

Although the concept of primum non nocere is linked in most people's minds with the Hippocratic Oath. The words are not likely his, seeing as how they are Latin and he was Greek, but I digress. Primum, while meaning 'first' also has a hierarchical sense, indicating primacy or being of primary importance. It is not so much in the sense of being 'the first thing on your list' as it is 'the most important thing'.

The Online Etymology Dictionary links nocere (harm, injury, damage) to modern words such as 'innocent' (doing no evil; free from sin, guilt, or moral wrong) and 'innocuous' (harmless, producing no ill effect). But intriguingly, the Latin word 'nocere' is also linguistically linked to the Proto-Indo-European root 'nek-' (death), and part of modern words such as pernicious, necrosis, obnoxious and nuisance. In my view, the sense of nocere in "primum non nocere" includes more than just physical harm or injury, but also a broader meaning of not interfering with the individual's personal domain or autonomy.

The Declaration of Independence positively asserts mankind's God-given rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. The first two seem relatively straightforward, but what is "the pursuit of happiness"? I have read that Thomas Jefferson wrestled with the wording of that portion, including substituting 'property' for pursuit of happiness. Happiness, in this context has a sense of fulfillment, satisfaction or self-meaning. What are those things that give you as an individual a sense of purpose in your life? You could say it equates b being master of your personal domain.

So, if we juxtapose those two principles, the phrase "primum non nocere" or "first, do no harm", can be restated in the form "As a primary principle, do not impinge on the individual's self in a harmful way". As a practicing physician I always sought to follow that principle, balancing my knowledge of the science as it related to the patient's condition, with the patient's family situation, resources, culture, and overall identity. My job was not to tell them what they needed to do, rather it was to help them navigate the complexities of their condition, demystify the language, explore treatment options (sometimes including the option of not providing any treatment at all, one of the most difficult decisions a family may face) and empower them to make hopefully wise decisions.

**********


That brings us to today. For the sake of discussion, let's compare the official reactions to ivermectin versus mRNA vaccines. We have seen numerous news reports of physicians being censored, fired, or losing their medical license for daring to prescribe ivermectin for off-label use. Ivermectin has been approved by the FDA for many years and has been prescribed widely in humans for anti-parasitic uses. In general, physicians in regular practice commonly prescribe medications for uses that are off-label, or not specifically delineated in the FDA's approval. This a well known and widely accepted part of medical practice. Ivermectin has a known track record of safety and a well defined mechanism of action at the cellular level. Where is the harm in trying such a medication, with its anecdotal evidence of beneficial effects in COVID, particularly when compared with the known demonstrable harm of myocarditis following mRNA vaccines?

Recently the FDA blithely approved the Pfizer mRNA SARS-2 vaccine for children as young as 5 years old. This vaccination in some settings is being made mandatory for young healthy children. In making this move, the FDA blatantly dismissed with a wave of the hand or entirely ignored VAERS-documented increases in confirmed cases of myocarditis in teens and young adult males (above anticipated baseline levels). Pfizer had two separate trials of its mRNA vaccine involving a total of a little over 4000 children, of which approximately 3000 received two doses of the active vaccine and the rest received placebo. They reported zero cases of myocarditis within 7 days of receiving the vaccine ( approximately 6000 total doses). The VAERS data on myocarditis reported 21.5 cases of myocarditis per 1 million doses of vaccine, which they calculated to be more than 3 times the expected occurrence in the general population of males aged 12-15 (21.5 vs. expected range of 1 to 7 cases). A single case of myocarditis in a sample size of 6000 doses would equal roughly 170 cases per one million doses. For a condition such as myocarditis that is rare in the general population, a sample size of 6000 is insufficient to be confident that 5 to 11-year-olds do not experience myocarditis at rates substantially higher than the general population risk. Yet the FDA and the CDC both tout the vaccine to be safe and are actively recommending widespread vaccination of young children. Why not take a more even handed approach to both ivermectin and the mRNA vaccines? Why are physicians who recommend ivermectin vilified and politicians and bureaucrats who push a new vaccine technology with an as yet uncertain safety profile praised?

In a context of "first, do no harm", a physician acting in good faith ought to be able to prescribe a medication that in their best medical judgment is safe and may have some effectiveness, until such time as it is shown to cause harm. The FDA's own webpage "Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19" does not cite any harm from appropriate doses of human forms of ivermectin, rather it focuses on overdosing of the veterinary forms in individuals who self-administer, and scant evidence of any widespread adverse effects even at that.

Secondly, in a framework of the basic rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness", a patient by rights should retain the autonomy to apply their conscience in making their own health care decisions. Yet here we are, in a circumstance where politicians are threatening individuals' liberty and pursuit of happiness on the vague and as yet unproven notion that vaccine mandates, as Surgeon General Vivek Murthy put it, "...our pathway out of the pandemic”. This is a vain hope at best. That "science" most certainly is NOT settled, as natural immunity, cross-immunity and mutation of the virus to more benign forms are all contributors.

Perhaps I'm just a dinosaur, but I believe the precepts of Primum Non Nocere and inalienable rights endowed by our Creator are every bit as valid now as they were when first put forth. I commend those in the medical community who have followed their conscience in advocating for individual rights, at risk to their own livelihood. And I call on the rest of the medical community to wake up and realize where their loyalty ultimately lies. Physicians should actively push back when a third party (employer, government) seeks to inject themselves into the relationship between doctor and patient or to supersede it entirely. They should rededicate themselves to a duty to individual patients rather than a 'greater' public good. Let us rekindle a spirit of "First, Do No Harm".

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/396400.php

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
^^^
This is the democRAT pipe dream for the US. 2A is the only guarantee they would never try it.

I would never have expected Australia to do much of what it's done the last few years, either. I would never have expected Austria, with its history, to do some of what it's done.

I would never have expected our Commander In Chief to essentially lobotomize our military's leadership. I would never have expected the once-vaunted FBI to turn into what it clearly has. I would never have expected our education system to turn into a brain-washing daycare or our "news" media to turn into a monolithic propaganda machine.

So you'll excuse me if I make no assumptions about the future.

Stop being a conspiracy theorist.

The Benefit Of SARS-CoV-2 Natural Immunity In The Armed Forces

Authored by Scott Sturman via RealClearDefense.com,

The risks to soldiers, sailors, and airmen of contracting SARS-CoV-2 affect the readiness of military organizations. The condition of an individual's immune status determines susceptibility to infection and is dependent on one's pre-existing medical condition, the implementation of beneficial prophylactic treatments, and whether protection is conferred by natural immunity or vaccination. Commanders who assess and rationally address the problem will ensure the best possible health outcome for those under their command.

The age of those serving in the military places them in a low-risk category for severe morbidity and death due to Covid. Without accounting for health risk factors, those 18-29 represent 0.56% of all U.S. Covid deaths to date, while those 18-49, a cohort representing most active duty personnel, account for 6.3% of the total. In this healthy patient population, the goal to achieve broad, long-lasting immunity against SARS-CoV-2 can be better achieved by naturally acquired immunity instead of relying on vaccines that require multiple boosters and do not confer sterilizing protection.

Natural immunity is the gold standard of immunology. Exposure and subsequent recovery from a pathogen provide immunity due to antibodies and memory B and T cells. This protection is often lifelong and complete since one's immune system develops antibodies against multiple antigens on the infectious organism. Traditional vaccines using live attenuated or killed inoculums also afford this level of protection. However, mRNA vaccines designed to induce antibodies against a single, highly mutating antigen require frequent booster shots, allow for breakthrough infections, and the ability to infect others.

To date, there are over 100 high-quality studies that demonstrate the superiority or equality of natural immunity compared to vaccine induced immunity. Natural immunity critics point out that long-lasting immunity has not been proven; however, this is a disingenuous argument since persistent immunity has been shown as long as the observations have been conducted. Patients who recovered in 2003 from SARS-CoV-1, a close relative of SARS-CoV-2, remain immune eighteen years later. An article from Nature concluded that those with even mild symptoms due to SARS-CoV-2 will produce antibodies for a lifetime.

The CDC traditionally recognized that patients who have contracted certain diseases do not require vaccination for those diseases. Examples include mumps, measles, rubella, and chickenpox-diseases where there is no benefit to vaccination after illness. Studies published by the Cleveland Clinic and from Israel describe extremely low reinfection rates in patients who acquired and recovered from SARS- CoV-2.

Pfizer admits that its mRNA vaccine induces antibody titers that wane rapidly after administration, thus requiring multiple boosters. Furthermore, vaccinated patients obtain high viral loads and are as infectious as non vaccinated patients, yet the CDC cannot demonstrate one case when a patient with natural immunity becomes reinfected with SARS-CoV-2 and transmits it to another person. Fully vaccinated countries have the highest incidence of new Covid cases. While protective against hospitalization and death, adverse reactions to mRNA vaccines exceed 850,000, including over 18,000 deaths, as reported in a recent summary of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). The link between vaccine induced myocarditis and young males is widely established, prompting Germany and France to suspend all Moderna vaccinations for those under age 30. Those recovered from naturally acquired disease are more apt to experience side effects if vaccinated.

Black and Hispanic vaccination rates lag behind Whites, yet these minorities die from Covid at numbers out of proportion to their respective vaccination rates. With the high numbers of minorities serving in the armed forces, commanders must be aware of the best medical options to ensure their health and ability to fulfill the mission. Blacks and Hispanics frequently have low serum vitamin D3 levels due to inadequate dietary supplementation or sun generated synthesis. Studies indicate that those who suffer severe symptoms or death from Covid often presented with low levels of serum vitamin D3. Routine supplementation with vitamin D3 prior to contracting Covid has a beneficial effect, particularly in patients at high risk.

Natural induced immunity to SARS-CoV-2 offers a military advantage. Under these circumstances, the Department of Defense has at its disposal a fighting force at low risk for reinfection, protected against the severe effects of new variants, and not in need of endless booster shots. Requiring vaccinations that are potentially harmful and provide little medical benefit adversely affects reenlistment rates and degrades morale. Exempting Congress, their staff, and judicial branch of government from mandatory vaccination reeks of hypocrisy, and this double standard is palpable among those who serve. The argument that vaccinating low-risk groups is necessary to protect others is debunked in a recent Lancet study which noted, "fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections have peak viral load similar to unvaccinated cases and can efficiently transmit infection in household settings, including to fully vaccinated contacts."

All members of the armed services should receive SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing, and if positive, be automatically exempted from Covid vaccination. Those who test negative and do not have medical risk factors should be placed on prophylactic vitamin D3 and encouraged to maintain an ideal body weight. There are a number of other widely discussed prophylactic and therapeutic options available, which are inexpensive, protective, and of low risk to patients. Commanders must insist that these alternatives be thoroughly explored, studied, and implemented if proven effective. The welfare of the country depends on those serving in the armed forces, and their health care must be based on non-political, scientifically based policies.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covi...mmunity-armed-forces

I think that VTail is correct in his assessment. I typically get the flu every year around the first week of December. Like clockwork. I've never gottten a flu shot and never will.

In December 2019 I got the flu and it was bad enough that I cancelled my plans to travel to Canada and spend Christmas with family. I was laid up for almost 3 weeks.

In February 2020 'the WuFlu' hit and I think I've had it although no one can prove otherwise.

Yeah, I had a flu like I’ve never had the last week of January or first week or February last year. Actually had hallucinations from the fever. Lost my sense of smell and taste for two weeks or so. Felt like I had pneumonia and the flu at the same time. Couldn’t breathe. Told a friend about my symptoms and she told me to go to the hospital. Glad I didn’t, I wonder if they would have put me on a ventilator.

This was on top of another fatal disease I later got diagnosed with, so really, that I survived speaks volumes to me. According to the leftists, I should have been dead.

I do not like your COVID jab.
I will not take your COVID jab.
I will not take it in my house.
I will not be your little mouse.
I will not take it because you're nice.
I know what happened to those mice.
Do not demand to have my arm.
Your persistence causes great alarm.
Do not make me a scornful topic.
Graphene oxide is a toxin.
You need not mandate I partake.
In VAERS I've seen the lives it takes.
Fauci says the disease is deadly.
Then why did he fund it with our money?

- Author Unknown

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:


In December 2019 I got the flu and it was bad enough that I cancelled my plans to travel to Canada and spend Christmas with family. I was laid up for almost 3 weeks.

In February 2020 'the WuFlu' hit and I think I've had it although no one can prove otherwise.

I got hit in mid-December 2019 with something too that lasted over a month. It was awful and I never want to go through that again, the cough was the worst. I could not stop coughing 24/7, and ended up at the local urgent care where they diagnosed me with the beginnings of pneumonia. I’ve gotten the regular antibody test and the T-cell test and they both came back negative for Covid antibodies but I’m still convinced it was going around then and I got it. I just don’t trust any tests anymore, this has gotten way way way too political and what if these testing companies were being pressured into falsifying them?

Abstract 10712: Mrna COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: a Warning

Abstract

Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test (GD Biosciences, Inc, Irvine, CA) a clinically validated measurement of multiple protein biomarkers which generates a score predicting the 5 yr risk (percentage chance) of a new Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). The score is based on changes from the norm of multiple protein biomarkers including IL-16, a proinflammatory cytokine, soluble Fas, an inducer of apoptosis, and Hepatocyte Growth Factor (HGF)which serves as a marker for chemotaxis of T-cells into epithelium and cardiac tissue, among other markers. Elevation above the norm increases the PULS score, while decreases below the norm lowers the PULS score.The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients.This report summarizes those results. A total of 566 pts, aged 28 to 97, M:F ratio 1:1 seen in a preventive cardiology practice had a new PULS test drawn from 2 to 10 weeks following the 2nd COVID shot and was compared to the previous PULS score drawn 3 to 5 months previously pre- shot. Baseline IL-16 increased from 35=/-20 above the norm to 82 =/- 75 above the norm post-vac; sFas increased from 22+/- 15 above the norm to 46=/-24 above the norm post-vac; HGF increased from 42+/-12 above the norm to 86+/-31 above the norm post-vac. These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac.We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.

Link

In English please?

What health issue is higher probability of occurrence and by how much over what period of time?

California County Mandates Masks in Private Homes for People Not in Same Household
Vaccination status doesn't matter, say Santa Cruz County officials

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...usehold_4120640.html

Officials in Santa Cruz County, California, imposed a sweeping indoor mask mandate (pdf) this week that includes private settings.

For individuals gathering with people who do not live in the same household, masks should be worn in homes regardless of the COVID-19 vaccination status, according to the county on Monday.

“Masks must be worn in private settings, including your home, when non-household members are present,” the county wrote, without saying how it would enforce masking inside private homes.

The mandate will also apply to public settings including offices and grocery stores. Businesses will be required to post signs about the mask requirement, the county said.

“Unfortunately, a potential winter surge appears to be a significant threat to the health and safety of our community,” said Santa Cruz County Health Officer Dr. Gail Newel, without providing data for why a “winter surge” will occur.

Citing individuals’ desire to spend more time “with those we love during the holidays, it is important to protect vulnerable friends and family members by wearing a mask indoors,” Newel said.

Santa Cruz County lifted its mask mandate on Sept. 29 as cases numbers dropped and vaccine uptakes increased. Officials, however, told local media that COVID-19 cases have surged 29 percent in the past two weeks.

According to data provided by Santa Cruz County, which is located south of the San Francisco Bay Area, about 72 percent of residents have received at least one vaccine dose while 67 percent are fully vaccinated.

Newel said the mask requirement will remain in effect indefinitely until it is amended, rescinded, or superseded.

“Those are the three main things to watch but our big concern is also saving lives so we will be watching deaths and, additionally, the impacts on our health care system,” Newel told local media. “There has been quite an increase in hospitalizations in the last week to two weeks.”

She also said that health officials will monitor cases, hospitalizations, and other data.

“We just don’t know what lies ahead. We don’t know enough about this virus; about the variant; about data tracking and monitoring to really know at this point when it’s going to be safe to lift the order.” Newel told KSBW.

Data from the CDC suggests that California’s COVID-19 transmission rate is currently higher than states in the Southeast United States. The seven-case average in California as of Nov. 21 is more than double that of Florida, which has statewide orders banning masking or vaccine mandates.

The Epoch Times has contacted Santa Cruz County for additional comment.

Here's to hoping the ignorant busybodies fuck right off during the holidays.

Try enforcing your stupid fucking rules, meddlers.

We are so close to cartridge box time to solve these problems once and for all.

Santa Cruz.

I guess those that choose to remain there must love being the loyal subjects of their county officials. Dollars to donuts that these sheep will indeed where their precious masks in their homes through the Holidays. I can see the wonderful Christmas photos now......

quote:

Originally posted by konata88:
In English please?

You can search on "Endothelial Inflammatory Markers" and "ACS: (Acute Coronary Syndrom) to get an idea.

I believe SF has a cardiologist aboard?

quote:

Originally posted by konata88:
What health issue is higher probability of occurrence and by how much over what period of time?

As for the former: Some form of heart failure, I imagine. As for the latter: Dunno.

This Australian GOVERNMENT P.O.S. has lost his mind.
We have all heard by now about some Australian people being forced into Fema Camps by Army Truck.
His Nazi accent really starts to show at the 1:45 mark.

https://brandnewtube.com/watch...tx8POO593z54GfZ.html



Here are a few videos from people that are asking for help. You decide if they sound credible.

Woman Warns Of Ongoing Forced Injections For Australian Aborigines.
https://brandnewtube.com/watch...LcVzskDMdLmM1dV.html



UPDATE! Australia Are vaccinating People Against Their Will Kids Included
https://brandnewtube.com/watch...3fNE9TDmmzTvYQa.html



Here is something a little closer to home that also pertains to Indigenous People. (Canada)
Indigenous People Are Being Forced To Take Vaccines
https://brandnewtube.com/watch...N5ysv6uZgVNsOKD.html

Mexico News Daily: Health minister insists vaccination not beneficial for children

Jorge Alcocer said he would not vaccinate his own grandchildren

Health Minister Jorge Alcocer has once again claimed that COVID-19 vaccines could inhibit the development of children’s immune systems.

“… Children have a wonderful immune system compared to the later phases … of their life,” he said during an appearance in the lower house of Congress.

In that context, “hindering” the “learning” of a child’s immune system – the “cells that defend us our whole lives” – with a “completely inorganic structure” such as a vaccine is not the right thing to do, the health minister said.

Alcocer made the remarks a week and a half after claiming that vaccinating children against COVID-19 could have a “limiting” effect on the development of their immune systems. He said Tuesday that he wouldn’t vaccinate his grandchildren.

Health regulator Cofepris has approved the use of the Pfizer vaccine to inoculate youths aged 12 to 17 but the federal government hasn’t made the shot widely available to minors, and hasn’t indicated it will do so.

However, it has begun inoculating adolescents with underlying health conditions that place them at risk of serious COVID-19 illness, and vaccinated minors who obtained injunctions ordering they be given shots.

Link