I wonder why…………..

OSHA Instructs Federal Agencies Not to Record COVID Vaccine Side Effects

The Occupational Health and Safety Administration [OSHA], which falls under the jurisdiction of the Department of Labor [DOL], is instructing federal agencies not to record adverse reactions or side effects from the Wuhan coronavirus vaccine. Earlier this year, President Joe Biden mandated the shot for all federal workers and contractors. He did the same in September for private companies with more than 100 employees.

“Are adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine recordable on the OSHA record keeping log?” the frequently asked questions section for COVID-19 states on OSHA.gov. “DOL and OSHA, as well as other federal agencies, are working diligently to encourage COVID-19 vaccinations. OSHA does not wish to have any appearance of discouraging workers from receiving COVID-19 vaccination, and also does not wish to disincentivize employers’ vaccination efforts. As a result, OSHA will not enforce 29 CFR 1904’s recording requirements to require any employers to record worker side effects from COVID-19 vaccination at least through May 2022. We will reevaluate the agency’s position at that time to determine the best course of action moving forward.”

Continue reading “”

Ivermectin: The Elephant in the Room

There are a great many unknowns and controversies associated with the COVID pandemic.  Among the most urgent are those associated with appropriate therapeutic and prophylactic interventions.  Some of the most intense disputes involve repurposed therapies — i.e., drugs that have been approved for treatment of some other condition being used as therapy for COVID.  This is the case with the anti-parasitic agent ivermectin.

Much of the controversy regarding ivermectin involves “evidence” that the drug has a benefit in treatment of COVID.  Detractors will often use the hyperbolic claim that there is no evidence that ivermectin is useful in this setting.  The truth is that there is, in fact, some evidence.  Ivermectin has been known since at least 2012 to have antiviral activity.  It has been shown to have at least some antiviral activity against a number of viruses, including HIV-1, Zika, flaviviruses, and dengue.  It is known to have in vitro activity against SARS CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID.  It has been shown to have some efficacy in Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, a disease caused by a coronavirus with similarities to SARS CoV-2.  There are plausible mechanisms proposed for why ivermectin might be useful against viral infections: it inhibits a class of proteins that are necessary for the virus to replicate within human cells.

These observations are evidence.  They are not definitive evidence.  They are probably not sufficient, or even persuasive evidence, but these assessments should not be confused with “no evidence.”

Continue reading “”

Joe Rogan Interviews Sanjay Gupta and a Train Wreck Ensues

Joe Rogan has found himself at the center of a debate over the COVID-19 vaccines, despite never presenting himself as anti-vaccine. His great sin was daring to get treated for the virus after contracting it earlier this year. The fact that Rogan’s doctor included ivermectin in the medicinal regime sent heads exploding, as he was accused of taking “horse dewormer” amid other unfair, out-of-context claims.

Today, though, Rogan got a bit of redemption by running circles around CNN’s chief COVID hysteric, Sanjay Gupta. You may recall Gupta as the same guy who touted Chris Cuomo’s COVID X-ray, only to be embarrassing fact-checked by actual radiologists.

During the long-form discussion with Rogan, there were several key moments that showed just how out of his element Gupta was. Here’s one of them.

What Rogan is doing in the above clip is showing the absurdity by which COVID hysterics shift their viewpoints to meet what ultimately boils down to a political narrative. Because he wants to insist the vaccines are highly effective, Gupta presents himself as not worried about a breakthrough infection.

Continue reading “”

Southwest CEO backs down, will not fire employees who refuse to get vaxxed

Chalk this up as a major victory for personal autonomy and liberty!  Even while refusing to admit that resistance to vaccination had anything to do with the massive disruption to operations that occurred last weekend, Gary Kelly, CEO of Southwest Airlines, backed off from earlier policy and announced that employees who refuse to receive COVID gene therapy “vaccines” will not be terminated.

Debra Heine reports at American Greatness:

During an interview with ABC News Tuesday, Gary Kelly, the CEO of Southwest Airlines, stated that no employees will be fired over the company’s vaccine mandate. However, the airline announced on October 4 that all 56,000 U.S. Southwest employees needed to get vaccinated against COVID-19 by November 24, or face termination.

The CEO also told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that there was “no evidence” that any type of demonstration against the mandate had contributed to the massive service disruptions over the holiday weekend. Over 2,000 Southwest flights were cancelled, leaving tens of thousands of passengers stranded.

Technically speaking, Kelly is correct: there is no evidence because even if pilots (and other employees) were calling in sick or using vacation time, or refusing overtime, they would not say so — i.e., provide “evidence” — because doing so would amount to a confession of violating the law with an illegal work stoppage.  So, yes, there is no evidence, but Kelly’s reversal of policy, backing away from termination for failure to vax, is hard to explain otherwise.  And it is a major reversal:

The CEO told employees last week that the airline had no choice but to comply with the regime’s vaccine mandate.

“Southwest Airlines is a federal contractor and we have no viable choice but to comply with the U.S. government mandate for employees to be vaccinated, and — like other airlines — we’re taking steps to comply,” Kelly said.

As Debra Heine points out, Southwest and every other private employer has an out:

An executive order was issued last month requiring all federal employees to get vaccinated, but no executive order, or federal regulation has yet been issued for private companies. Joe Biden on September 9 unveiled his draconian plan to force all private businesses with more than 100 employees to make their workers get inoculated with the experimental COVID vaccines, or face weekly testing. A month later, no official guidance on the alleged mandate has been issued by the White House, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), or the Department of Labor.

Here is a three-plus-minute video of the interview:

Continue reading “”

the vaccinated superspread hypothesis
assessing the riddle of more recovered, more vaccinated, and more dying despite a lower CFR variant

there has been a strange riddle in the covid data of late.

we have a lower CFR variant of the disease that has become predominant. delta has roughly 1/3 the case fatality rate of prior variants (like alpha)

far more people have acquired immunity from having had and recovered from covid. this immunity is long lasting and extremely effective. (much more so than vaccines)

high risk cohorts were significantly reduced last year. there is less “dry tinder” now.

we have FAR more people vaccinated now. it’s 50-90% in many places and in many high risk groups. last year it was zero.

and yet in many of the high vaccine uptake places, we’re seeing deaths from covid (and excess mortality) rise to levels ABOVE last year.

this has led many to posit that vaccines not only don’t work, but that they make you worse.

but on an individual level, this does not appear to be true. (though there is quite a lot of evidence that vaccines induce higher risk in the two weeks post administration and that this is being accounted for dishonestly, added to the “unvaccinated” butcher’s bill, and artificially enhancing reported VE.

BUT, even if we control for this, vaccines are showing efficacy in preventing deaths among the vaccinated. it’s more like 50% than the 90%+ being claimed, but VE against death in the 50%’s should still be showing BIG community effects with so many people in the high risk groups vaccinated.

but, on a societal level, it’s not. we’re seeing breakouts to new seasonal highs vs last year and epidemics in covid death rapidly following vaccination campaigns. (MORE)

all else equal even without vaccines, we’d expect to see attenuation in covid deaths for the reasons laid out above. instead we see acceleration.

the case rate in covid would need to be 3X last year to drive equivalent deaths and higher than that to show excess. but, it’s nothing like that, especially once you control for testing levels.

this is showing up in excess deaths as well as covid deaths, so the signal looks real.

the data has caused a lot of hand wringing and confusion.

grab a seat, because i have an idea to inject into the debate, i sincerely hope that i am wrong, and i suspect a fair few folks are not going to like hearing it, but it’s the best fit i can find for the data.

so here we go:

the current surge in covid deaths is caused by the vaccinated.

the covid vaccines are extremely leaky and may well accelerate contracting and carrying covid.

they allow for very high viral loads to go unnoticed and generate a new and severe asymptomatic spread vector to where none existed before.

the high viral loads lead to greater contagion. they may lead to greater severity (but this data is iffy and contested)

vaccine campaigns cause superspread events because vaccination leads to a 2 week window of 40-100% more covid risk that then gets counted as “unvaccinated” because the definitions are bad.

this combination makes those vaccinated with one dose or more into superspread bombs.

Continue reading “”

BMJ Urges Doctors to Cut Back on Treatment Because Climate Change

Doctors should think less about the health of their patients and more about the health of the planet, an editorial in the BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal) has urged.

The editorial, published as part of a special edition dedicated to the forthcoming COP26 climate summit in Glasgow, Scotland, says that medical treatment contributes significantly to “greenhouse gas emissions” and that this carbon footprint can be reduced if only “health professionals” can learn to reduce “overdiagnosis” and “overtreatment”.

Healthcare contributes 4-5 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. In the NHS, 62 per cent of these emissions are from its supply chains and 24 per cent from delivery of care. Health professionals can be institutional leaders who drive decarbonisation in hospitals through reducing overdiagnosis and overtreatment in healthcare, eliminating waste, streamlining services, and better managing suppliers and procurement. All of these efforts will bring us closer to making healthcare more sustainable.

One of the bigger problems, a separate piece argues, is all those pesky suspected cancer patients who tiresomely insist on getting as early a diagnosis as possible. They need to learn to wait, argues one Rammya Mathew:

The pressure to diagnose cancers earlier and earlier is another major contributor to modern medicine’s carbon footprint. Over successive years we’ve been told to continually lower our threshold for suspecting cancer, and we’re encouraged to investigate sooner and more extensively. In primary care, most patients with mildly elevated or even high normal platelet counts now undergo a barrage of investigations in case thrombocytosis is an early indicator of underlying cancer. What does the yield of these tests have to be to make this an acceptable approach? And shouldn’t we be considering the environmental impact of putting so many patients on a conveyor belt of investigations, as part of cost-benefit calculations?

But hey, why stop at letting the occasional undiagnosed cancer patient die? What we should really be doing is forcing everyone to go vegan and make everyone travel by bicycle…

Adopting the largely plant based planetary health diet and taking most journeys using a combination of walking, cycling, and public transport would substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve our health.

Animal sourced foods (meat, dairy, fish) generally use much more land and water and create more greenhouse gases than plant sourced food. Sustainable and healthy diets consist largely of diverse plant foods with low amounts of animal source foods, unsaturated rather than saturated fats, and limited amounts of refined grains, highly processed foods, and added sugars. The nature and scale of change required depends on existing dietary patterns and nutritional status of local populations. For example, to meet the planetary health diet recommendations, average meat consumption in Africa can slightly increase (2 per cent), whereas in North America and Europe it needs to fall by 79 per cent and 68 per cent, respectively.

Sustainable land travel will involve substantially fewer journeys by car and more journeys taken by foot, bicycle, and public transport, ensuring that all transport is carbon neutral and powered by renewable energy. This requires a transformation of the energy sector and transport infrastructure, prioritising active and public transport over road building. Estimates of the nature and scale of change needed vary. In the UK, for example, a central net zero pathway includes car mileage per driver falling by 10 per cent by 2050, whereas other analysis calls for a reduction between 20 per cent and 60 per cent by 2030, depending on the speed of transition to electric vehicles.

Old fashioned types who imagine doctors should be concentrating on healthcare rather than engaging in environmental activism may be puzzled by this. But they shouldn’t be. The Climate Industrial Complex — and the sinister billionaire backers behind it, such as the World Economic Forum — has run a hugely successful gaslighting operation in which schools, universities, the entertainment industry, big business, and the mainstream media now broadcast nothing but environmental scare stories. Any stories providing evidence that the global warming scare has been massively overblown are ruthlessly suppressed.

Hence, for example, the recent announcement by Google that it will demonetise media that “contradicts the scientific consensus on climate change”. (Spoiler: there is no such thing as “consensus” in science. There is definitely no “consensus” on climate change, neither on the causes nor the solutions. If there were a consensus Google would not need to indulge in censoring dissident voices because everyone would agree on the subject already).

Hypocrisy O’ The Day

Medicine for me, but not for thee.

More Info Surfaces On Southwest Airlines Flight Cancellations and Pilot Push Back Against Vaccine Mandates

People inside Southwest Airlines are speaking out carefully and pointing out why there are so many flight disruptions.   Essentially, the background issues are what were discussed earlier.  Pilots are pushing back against vaccine mandates; and if you think about the curriculum vitae of a typical pilot, it makes sense.

A big percentage of commercial airline pilots are former military pilots.  That group of people carry a strong disposition toward the principles of patriotism, service, liberty and freedom.

It is a simple truism that upsets leftists, but it makes sense for this specifically skilled workforce group to be the tip of the push back spear.

Alex Berenson provides some background details after being contacted by a Southwest pilot: “The pilot emailed following the first Southwest post today (and provided his SWA ID to prove his identity). He asked that I paraphrase the email.

Essentially, the union cannot organize or even acknowledge the sickout, because doing so would make it an illegal job action. Years ago, Southwest and its pilots had a rough negotiation, and the union would not even let the pilots internally discuss the possibility of working-to-rule (which would have slowed Southwest to a crawl).

But at the moment the pilots don’t even have to talk to each other about what they’re doing. The anger internally – not just among pilots but other Southwest workers – is enormous. The tough prior negotiations notwithstanding, Southwest has a history of decent labor relations, and workers believe the company should stand up for them against the mandate. Telling pilots in particular to comply or face termination has backfired. (read more)

This account is being confirmed by multiple people in/around the industry on social media:


Continue reading “”

People are saying that SloJoe has lost his mind,
but that would mean he had a mind to lose in the first place.

Truth Being Ignored – Victoria Australia Records 867 New COVID Cases, 375 in Hospital and 95% of Those Hospitalized are Vaccinated

Pay close attention to what Victoria, Australia, Health Minister Martin Foley says at the 2:45 minute mark of his comments.

Health Minister Foley announced 867 new COVID cases recorded yesterday.  During the statistical outline Foley identifies 375 people as hospitalized, 81 people in intensive care and 61 people on a ventilator.   Then comes the statistic everyone in government and media ignore.  Amid the recorded cases “78% of the hospital cases are fully vaccinated, and 17% are partially vaccinated (1 dose)”….

That means 95% of the COVID patients in Victoria hospitals are vaccinated.

356 people out of 375 patients are vaccinated, yet 81 people are still in intensive care with 61 on a ventilator.

What good are the vaccinations if 78% of those occupying the hospital are fully vaccinated?

Keep in mind, this tracks with what we have been saying about sample populations around the world in general. The percentage of people sick and hospitalized is directly equivalent to the percentage of people vaccinated in the population. If 50% of the population is vaccinated, 50% of the hospitalized patients will be vaccinated. The vaccine makes no difference.

Victoria is reflecting this same issue, perhaps worse. 78% of the hospital patients are fully vaccinated, that’s actually a higher percentage than the population vaccinated as a whole. Meaning vaccinated people are arriving at the hospital in greater percentage than they represent in the population. The vaccine could be making people suffer more severe outcomes. Watch it again. These are his own statements.

Doctors are getting angry at their patients

One of the more bizarre twists in the saga of the COVID pandemic has been doctors growing increasingly frustrated and even angry with patients asking for medical treatment rather than wholesale vaccination. We have been told for almost two years that COVID is a deadly disease. Naturally, when people test positive for COVID, they want to be treated to avoid serious illness. Instead, they are sent home to quarantine, with no medical treatment until they become seriously ill.

Some patients take exception to this approach and ask for ivermectin, which is being used outside of the United States to treat early COVID. There is a significantly lower incidence of serious cases of COVID in countries that use ivermectin for early exposures.

Doctors are not taking kindly to the suggestion that patients should have access to medication that can prevent serious illness. They are denouncing ivermectin as a veterinary drug as if they were not aware that it was developed for human use, that the FDA approved it for human use back in the 1990s, and that almost 4 billion doses have been administered around the world in the past 30 years. It’s true ivermectin was developed to treat parasites, not viruses, and that it is used for livestock as well as humans. However, there are a number of life-saving medications that are not being used for their original purpose.

It’s common knowledge that penicillin was discovered by accident when it was noticed that moldy bread destroyed bacteria. Less commonly known is that the heart medicine nitroglycerin was developed from the compound used in dynamite. Warfarin, a common blood thinner, started out as rat poison. Arsenic, another deadly poison, is used to treat acute promyelocytic leukemia. Even if ivermectin was originally developed for animals, there is no reason to discard it on that basis when it is being used successfully around the world to prevent dangerous illness and death from COVID.

Doctors are having none of it. Instead, they lash out at the very idea that patients should expect to be treated for COVID. They complain of being imposed upon by people who refuse to be vaccinated, overlooking the fact that even the vaccinated have become seriously ill or died of COVID or one of the many variants that have emerged since mass vaccination began. Doctors are not supposed to hurt us—yet I can’t think of anything more hurtful than telling people who test positive for COVID to go home and wait to see how sick they will get, then getting angry at those same people when they ask for a treatment that might prevent them getting sick at all.

As Cases Plummet In Florida, New Data Show Forcibly Masking Kids Made No Difference

New data coming out of Florida school districts show virtually zero difference between masked vs. unmasked counties, even as Covid-19 cases plummet across the state.

Leftists hellbent on forcibly masking every child in schools across the country never had any solid data to back up their position, only emotional pleas and scare tactics. In truth, however, this virus has never posed any statistical risk to children, nor were they a significant transmitter to adults. And besides, if teachers were vaccinated, what were they worried about?

While many districts refused to implement mask mandates in their schools, others stubbornly insisted upon them, even defying an order from Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis to allow parental exemptions. We were assured that the masked counties would fare far better than the ‘Wild West’ unmasked ones, where the bodies of schoolchildren would presumably be stacked in the streets, or something.

Except, none of that happened (via press release from DeSantis’ press secretary, Christina Pushaw):


New COVID-19 cases for children ages 5-17 – the vast majority of the school-aged population – have decreased 79% in the month of September, in the 54 Florida counties where school districts have no masking policy or are following state law by honoring the parental opt-out rule.

For comparison, COVID-19 cases for children 5-17 in the 13 districts that imposed forced-masking in schools have decreased 77%, on average.


The 54 districts with opt-outs or no mask policy have seen an average decrease of 65% in positivity from week ending Aug. 19 (when school started) to the week ending Sep. 30.

The 13 districts that broke the law to impose forced-masking have seen an average decrease of 67%.

That is to say, the data for this school year to date shows no impact of forced masking in schools on pediatric COVID-19 prevalence. This is not surprising, since there were no statistically significant differences in case rates in forced-masking versus mask-optional schools during the 2020-21 school year in Florida.

Continue reading “”

Pandemia: How Coronavirus Hysteria Took Over Our Government, Rights, and Lives.

The most important fact about the coronavirus pandemic that turned the world upside down in 2020 is that our response to it has been an epic overreaction driven by a disastrous confluence of public and private interests—all of them purporting to “follow the science.”

Since the lockdowns began, millions of Americans have relied on the reporting of Alex Berenson. Exposing the hysteria and manipulation behind the worst failure of public policy since World War I, this clear-eyed journalist has been a critical source of reason and truth.

The product of relentless investigation and research, Pandemia explains how an illness that many people will never even know they had became the occasion for economically ruinous lockdowns and the suppression of personal freedom on a previously unimaginable scale. Dispassionate, factual, and untainted by any agenda other than telling the truth, this is the account that pandemic-weary Americans desperately need.

What Dr. Makary Said About the FDA That Left Fox News Host Stunned:

Merck & Co’s stock price rose sharply on Friday after the drug company announced positive clinical trial results from its experimental anti-viral Covid-19 pill. Data showed the pill halved the chances of dying or being hospitalized for at-risk populations—a breakthrough advancement in the fight against the global pandemic.

Discussing the development on Fox News Monday morning, Dr. Marty Makary, a professor of surgery and health policy at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, called it the “most profound scientific achievement since the vaccines.”

* * * * * * * *

Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade wondered why, then, Merck isn’t going “to bat for their own drug.”

“Well, they’ve got to be very careful with the FDA,” Makary responded. “If you do something out of line with what they want you could offend them and the FDA is vindictive and they will hold up authorizations and approvals.”

The Fox News host couldn’t believe what he just heard.

“Are you kidding? The FDA is vindictive?” he asked.

“First of all this is the most political FDA in U.S. history,” Makary claimed. “Second of all, the FDA has a long history of pulling products from companies that are unrelated to mistakes in other medication and device applications so companies have to be very careful, and that’s why you generally don’t see pharma complaining about the bureaucracy and red tape at the FDA—”

“They’re afraid,” Kilmeade interjected.

“Yeah, they’re afraid of the backlash,” Makary confirmed.

“Yeah, that’s healthy,” the host responded sarcastically.

217 Democrats voted to block consideration of the proposal which would require DHS to give a COVID test to everyone crossing our border illegally.