Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘vaccination mandates’

CNN medical expert calls for COVID restrictions to be lifted, but only for the vaccinated


Reported by SAMUEL MANGOLD-LENETT | February 01, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/cnn-medical-expert-calls-for-covid-restrictions-to-be-lifted-but-only-for-the-vaccinated-2656528777.html/

Dr. Leana Wen is at it again, folks.

In a recent editorial published in the Washington Post, Dr. Leana Wen — CNN’s medical expert — called for lifting COVID-19 restrictions across the country as the Omicron variant’s presence begins to wane. Dr. Wen acknowledged that many Americans are likely feeling fatigued with safety precautions that have faded in relevance, such as masking, social distancing, and self-isolating. Omicron was one of several variants that sent society into a tizzy, Wen acknowledges, and it likely won’t be the last now that COVID-19 is endemic.

The likely emergence of new variants that could very well be more lethal than Omicron is precisely why Dr. Wen encouraged relaxing COVID restrictions. She said “new and possibly dangerous variants are likely to emerge. But it is precisely because of this future threat that we need to allow normalcy now.” However, Dr. Wen, as indicated by the last word in her statement, isn’t calling for society to return to normal in perpetuity. She calls for COVID-19 restrictions to be lifted to give people a breather right before reimplementing them upon the premiere of the next variant.

Wen writes, “In areas where hospitalizations are declining, the rapid removal of restrictions with the understanding that they may need to come back if new threats emerge. Doing so could give weary Americans much-needed respite while also preserving public-health authority for when it’s needed again.”

She also calls for the local and federal government and businesses to implement rigorous vaccine requirements while allowing the vaccinated to forgo COVID-19 restrictions. Essentially, Dr. Wen is calling for those who received a COVID-19 vaccination not to be burdened by restrictions, while those who are unvaccinated must continue to deal with them.

Paradoxically, Dr. Wen writes, “Keep vaccine requirements and drop everything else. The vaccinated who have done everything right, should not have any restrictions placed on them; it’s not fair to them and it disincentivizes vaccination.”

What Dr. Wen is clearly advocating for is a tiered society in which those who are compliant with vaccination mandates are allowed to participate uninhibited while those who don’t receive the vaccine must continue to jump through hoops on a day-to-day basis.

Dr. Wen wants to force the American public to receive the vaccine. She calls for an end to masking for the vaccinated while hoping for a reality where the unvaccinated are shamed into vaccination due to the embarrassment of wearing a mask.

Wen’s warped wish list for reality comes as Dr. Anthony Fauci and CDC Director Rochelle Walensky admit that a lot of the protocols implemented as COVID restrictions were products of social engineering; they wanted to see what people would tolerate.

That said, a new study from Johns Hopkins University revealed that COVID-19 lockdowns and preventive restrictions had little to no effect on reducing COVID’s mortality rate while “imposing numerous economic and social costs.”

The study states that these procedures are “ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.” But, considering that people like Dr. Wen are more concerned with cramming their worldview down the throats of the American people, rather than following the science, it is likely this research will not find its way into public policy anytime soon.

Daniel Horowitz Op-ed: GOP governors must ban shots for babies and toddlers


Commentary by DANIEL HOROWITZ | February 01, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/horowitz-gop-governors-must-ban-shots-for-babies-and-toddlers-2656528942.html/

It’s utterly senseless. Pfizer is now asking to authorize a dangerous, outdated shot for babies and toddlers, for whom the virus does not pose a statistical risk and for a virus against which the shots have failed to show any benefit. Yet, just as taxes and death are a certainty in life, you can bank on the FDA never turning down any Pfizer request. This is where Republican governors must serve as the safety net for the people. They must actively oppose expanding the shots to the final control group against the greatest experiment on mankind.

In one of the most shocking and immoral moves since the beginning of the pandemic, Pfizer is submitting its request this week for emergency use authorization of its COVID shot for babies as young as 6 months old through 5 years old. They are quite literally pushing a shot with the hopes of ameliorating symptoms (not stopping transmission) of a virus that is a cold for young children and much less dangerous than RSV. But here’s the kicker: The trial they conducted showed that two doses failed to even produce positive results, and they are still working on a trial for a three-dose regimen. Plus, we have a new variant. So, what exactly are they seeking authorization for?

As other countries are already recommending against vaccinating those under 12, our government will likely approve this shot for babies and young children based on a failed trial. There was never any efficacy in the shot because no child in the trial got seriously ill to begin with. So, they chose a trial endpoint around levels of antibody titers. Putting aside for a moment the premise that higher antibody titers (as opposed to T cells) are necessarily a good thing and won’t cause original antigenic sin, their own trial failed to achieve these endpoints in 2- to 4-year-olds. Which is why Pfizer announced in December that it was beginning a trial on a three-dose regimen. So how can they seek authorization of the failed two-dose trial for what is essentially a new virus?

One of the precepts of the Nuremberg Code: “The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.” There is no way pursuit of an already flawed vaccine can be justified on young children, even if it still had a degree of efficacy and wasn’t outdated. A recent study from the U.K. showed that even immunocompromised children were not at an elevated risk for severe COVID. The study of 1,527 immunocompromised children and young adults found “no increased risk of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection.” None of those even more vulnerable children died.

While there likely have been a tiny number of severely ill children who have died of the virus, it’s extremely hard to tell how many of the recorded deaths were legitimately caused by the virus itself. A large COVID study conducted in Germany found just three pediatric COVID deaths out of a million. The same analyst found zero deaths occurred in children under 5.

Already among older children, no positive benefit was found in the vaccine, even when the vaccine was working better. An Israeli study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found ZERO deaths or severe illnesses BOTH in the vaccinated and in the control (unvaccinated) groups of 12- to 18-year-olds in a 29-day follow-up of their vaccination. Under what pretext could the government possibly justify COVID as an emergency in this age group, and based on what evidence does this vaccine address that “emergency?”

On the flip side, the CDC, in a study in published in JAMA just conceded that the VAERS data on myocarditis was indeed an accurate reflection of an increased risk of heart inflammation following the vaccines. “Based on passive surveillance reporting in the US, the risk of myocarditis after receiving mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines was increased across multiple age and sex strata and was highest after the second vaccination dose in adolescent males and young men,” concluded the CDC researchers. “This risk should be considered in the context of the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination.”

More broadly, over 22,600 vaccine deaths and over 1 million injuries have been reported to VAERS. We already know from previous studies that VAERS only captures 1% of adverse events, and no other shot has come with such a stigma against reporting it for harm, often at the threat of the physician losing his job. Medicare data seems to hint at a much broader cohort of vaccine casualties. The military’s epidemiological database also seems to indicate a very disturbing trend of neurological and cardiological disorders rising in association with the take-up of the vaccine.

How can this be foisted upon the youngest children — with no apparent benefit — when they concede, “Long-term outcome data are not yet available for COVID-19 vaccine–associated myocarditis cases”?

There are no long-term cancer studies, there are no long-term studies on what this does to one’s immune system, and there are no long-term studies on autoimmune diseases, even though the VAERS data and the Pfizer surveillance data from early 2021 raises some concerns. Plus the vaccine is for a virus that is not a threat to children.

Think about it: Monoclonal antibodies can get their existing EUA pulled based on the arrival of a new variant, yet shots that have already proven to be outdated – and are associated with greater infection rates – can secure official full approval and then EUA for babies with a new variant that was never run through a clinical trial.

As such, for a governors to merely take a neutral stance while allowing this travesty to plague the children of their states is unacceptable. Governors have a responsibility to direct their respective health departments to conduct the proper oversight that the FDA has abdicated and demand a moratorium on shots for children until a proper cost-benefit analysis can be conducted. At a minimum, they should join together in a lawsuit to enjoin the EUA because Pfizer has failed to prove the shots meet the eligibility thresholds in the EUA statute.

Moreover, Republican governors and legislators have an obligation to treat Pfizer like Planned Parenthood and cut all political ties with the company’s lobbying groups. Bio-medical fascism and the breach of informed consent is a greater pro-life cause than opposition to abortion right now, because its practitioners are encouraging all children to get something with only a potential downside. It is the equivalent of forcing abortions upon us, not just permitting them.

The final precept of the Nuremberg Code reads as follows: “During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.” If after everything we have learned, they won’t even discontinue this experiment on babies, then we truly have learned nothing since that dark era of history.

Boston hospital takes dying patient off heart transplant list because he’s unvaccinated


Reported by PHIL SHIVER | January 25, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/hospital-takes-unvaccinated-man-off-heart-transplant-list/

The family of a patient who is fighting for his life is speaking out after a Boston hospital removed him from its heart transplant list because he is unvaccinated against COVID-19.

David Ferguson told WBZ-TV this week that his 31-year-old son DJ Ferguson’s heart has deteriorated to the point that it will no longer work on its own. Thankfully, he was first in line to receive a heart transplant. Yet because of his unvaccinated status, the hospital ruled that he was no longer eligible for the transplant.

“My son has gone to the edge of death to stick to his guns, and he’s been pushed to the limit,” Ferguson told the outlet, adding that his son simply won’t get the shot. “It’s kind of against his basic principles, he doesn’t believe in it. It’s a policy they are enforcing and so because he won’t get the shot, they took him off the list of a heart transplant.”

In a statement, Brigham and Women’s Hospital confirmed its decision to remove Ferguson from the list, saying, “Like many other transplant programs in the United States — the COVID-19 vaccine is one of several vaccines and lifestyle behaviors required for transplant candidates in the Mass General Brigham system in order to create both the best chance for a successful operation and also the patient’s survival after transplantation.”

Man Can’t Get Heart Transplant Because He’s Not Vaccinated Against COVID www.youtube.com

Hospitals: You know, maybe firing unvaccinated staff isn’t such a great idea after all


Reported by CHRIS FIELD | December 13, 2021

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/hospitals-you-know-maybe-firing-unvaccinated-staff-isn-t-such-a-great-idea-after-all-2656021804.html/

Hundreds of thousands of hospital staff members — from nurses and doctors to janitors and receptionists — worked in hospital settings for nearly a year dealing with COVID patients while unvaxxed. They did their duty and were repeatedly heralded as heroes. But after the vaccines came out, how were they treated by the same society and government that had just sung their praises?

President Joe Biden rewarded them by issuing a mandate that health care workers at facilities that take Medicare or Medicaid money would have to get vaxxed or hit the bricks. And because many hospital systems across the U.S. were waiting for the government to act first to give them cover, they followed suit and issued their own mandates. But it didn’t work out as well as they’d hoped.

Hospitals, which were already facing labor shortages before the pandemic began, saw thousands of nurses exit instead of taking the jab, the Wall Street Journal reported. Add to that the fact that those hesitant to get the vaccine made up 30% of all staff, not just nurses, and you’ve got the makings of what experts call a “fustercluck.”

Hospitals needed a way to get out from under their self-imposed staffing crisis created, at least in part, by their mandates. Enter the late-November federal court suspension of the feds’ vax mandate. After a federal judge temporarily blocked the mandate, the Journal reported, some of the nation’s biggest hospital systems suddenly decided to drop their own ill-considered vaccine mandates.

HCA Healthcare, Tenet Healthcare Corp., AdventHealth, and the Cleveland Clinic all announced they are dropping their jab requirements, which had exacerbated the hospitals’ cost of labor problems and caused all kinds of issues with staff retention, the paper said.

The Journal talked to employee benefits lawyer Wade Symons, who noted the “mass exodus” debacle and said facilities that don’t have the vax requirements “could be a magnet” for health professionals looking to practice health care away from mandates.

Alan Levine, CEO of Ballad Health, which has 21 hospitals in Tennessee and Virginia with 14,000 employees, said the federal court did everybody a favor by stopping the mandate, the Journal said. According to Levine, his company had 2,000 folks unvaccinated, and he said that canning that many people “would have been devastating to our system.”

HCA, which has one of the country’s largest collections of hospitals with some 275,000 employees, announced last month that all of its workers would need to be vaxxed by the federal Jan. 4 deadline, but then suspended the oh-so-very-important vaccine policy after the court ruled against the Biden administration.

Other hospital systems are still holding fast to their jab mandates, though, the Journal said. Kaiser Permanente and New York’s Northwell Health combined have let go of about 2,000 employees for refusing the jab, with many more on the chopping block should they not hit the deadline.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: