It appears (from what a cousin reported) that at least in one part of CA, that hospitals are "prioritizing" ventilators.  Where a person at a certain age who normally would've received a ventilator, was deemed by the medical professionals to "not meet criteria" for the vent. 

No salty feelings.  In this case, the person was in hospice and had ended treatment of condition, so somewhat of a consolidation of "et nature taking it's course".  Though her med directive was for "full code", which was to extend her life. 

Anyways, just sharing recent personal experience.  Not meant to be a commentary either way.

When you run out of resources you have to allocate it to certain people.  Doctors choose priority like who has the best chance of survival.  This is what they were warning us about flattening the curve. 

.

..

...

Enjoy!

Enjoy!

Baa, baa!

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

Only a useful idiot or intentional propagandist could write such an overtly ludicrous statement on January 8, 2021.

PS Why are you okay with unserious abuse?

You are sidestepping the issue. Unless you are an absolute anarchist you accept granting the government certain powers over its citizens. With any power there is a potential for abuse, this is simply realistic. What we try to do is make sure there are no serious abuses of power.

Have you ever seen someone with ebola or bubonic plague? They are not exactly in shape to go out to a club and dance all night.

It would be one thing if there was a specific serious threat that needed to be addressed, but Covid-1984 is basically a worse than average flu season which has been repeatedly used as a tool for tyrants. This is just another one of those totalitarian proposals, albeit way more prone to abuse

Either you grant the government the power to confine people or we don't. If you say it is unconstitutional to confine a person with a serious disease then that person gets to travel as they please. If we never grant that power then the day someone decides to go around with ebola because he hates the world people will be crying left and right about why the government doesn't detain the individual.

Covid is quite a bit worse than influenza but it is a fair question whether it is bad enough to close down the economy. I don't subscribe to this belief it is just tyrants trying to control us, the numbers don't add up. What we have is scientists trying to figure the data out then politicians reacting trying to do what they think best to protect their constituents and their own images. When government screw up it is often incompetence and mistakes, not a secret plan. No one is celebrating that we have to wear masks now, except maybe 3M.

Either you grant the government the power to confine people or we don't. If you say it is unconstitutional to confine a person with a serious disease then that person gets to travel as they please. If we never grant that power then the day someone decides to go around with ebola because he hates the world people will be crying left and right about why the government doesn't detain the individual.

Covid is quite a bit worse than influenza but it is a fair question whether it is bad enough to close down the economy. I don't subscribe to this belief it is just tyrants trying to control us, the numbers don't add up. What we have is scientists trying to figure the data out then politicians reacting trying to do what they think best to protect their constituents and their own images. When government screw up it is often incompetence and mistakes, not a secret plan. No one is celebrating that we have to wear masks now, except maybe 3M.

Either you grant the government the power to confine people WHO HAVE SYMPTOMS AND/OR HAVE TESTED POSITIVE FOR A COMMUNICABLE DISEASE, or [you] don't.

Confining people who are not sick, many of whom have immunity already, is not a power the government should have beyond the existing 60-day emergency declaration law.  After 60 days, lawmakers have to act.  The Constitutionality of this almost year long confinement is beyond illegal.

We have people designated "essential" working in food and home improvement businesses.  So, what's the rate of infection among all essential workers?  I bet it's no higher than the general population.  That would indicate that the lockdowns are NOT motivated by health concerns nor "science".

Enjoy!

What does the fox say?

Either you grant the government the power to confine people WHO HAVE SYMPTOMS AND/OR HAVE TESTED POSITIVE FOR A COMMUNICABLE DISEASE, or [you] don't.

Confining people who are not sick, many of whom have immunity already, is not a power the government should have beyond the existing 60-day emergency declaration law.  After 60 days, lawmakers have to act.  The Constitutionality of this almost year long confinement is beyond illegal.

We have people designated "essential" working in food and home improvement businesses.  So, what's the rate of infection among all essential workers?  I bet it's no higher than the general population.  That would indicate that the lockdowns are NOT motivated by health concerns nor "science".

Let me unconfuse you!

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

Either you grant the government the power to confine people WHO HAVE SYMPTOMS AND/OR HAVE TESTED POSITIVE FOR A COMMUNICABLE DISEASE, or [you] don't.

Confining people who are not sick, many of whom have immunity already, is not a power the government should have beyond the existing 60-day emergency declaration law.  After 60 days, lawmakers have to act.  The Constitutionality of this almost year long confinement is beyond illegal.

I would certainly agree that the government cannot physically confine people just on a chance they could have a disease. I am of mixed feeling whether the extensions to the initial emergency declaration are legal.

We have people designated "essential" working in food and home improvement businesses.  So, what's the rate of infection among all essential workers?  I bet it's no higher than the general population.  That would indicate that the lockdowns are NOT motivated by health concerns nor "science".

Thats an interesting question to ask. However I will point out that rules alone only tell part of the story, the rest is people's behavior. You could have stringent rules that don't work if people don't follow. Likewise you could have a city with no regulations but people just take precautions on their own.

Did a quick search and it appears that essential workers are catching covid at a higher rate.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-2667(20)30164-X/fulltext

I would certainly agree that the government cannot physically confine people just on a chance they could have a disease. I am of mixed feeling whether the extensions to the initial emergency declaration are legal.


Thats an interesting question to ask. However I will point out that rules alone only tell part of the story, the rest is people's behavior. You could have stringent rules that don't work if people don't follow. Likewise you could have a city with no regulations but people just take precautions on their own.

Did a quick search and it appears that essential workers are catching covid at a higher rate.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-2667(20)30164-X/fulltext

Wrong.

That article compares infections between front-line health-care workers and the general community, NOT "essential workers" as I stated -- Home Depot, McDonald's, Safeway. etc.

Naturally, healthcare workers coming into contact with infected COVID patients will be contracting the disease at a higher rate than those working in other services and industries.

From Tom Woods today:

In the fight for COVID sanity we have many good and highly credentialed scholars on our side. In general, though, they tend to have the quiet disposition of the academic rather than the fiery, attack-dog style that those of us outside of academia (I left 14 years ago and have never been happier) sometimes display.

So I have to say, I was rather pleased to see our own Martin Kulldorff of Harvard Medical School take the gloves off the other day.

Dr. Ashish K. Jha is a prominent COVID hysteric on Twitter. When Dr. Scott Atlas announced the other day that he was deleting his account because the platform was toxic and unproductive, Dr. Jha took the opportunity to take swipes at him.

Among them:

"That's also how many Americans we have lost in the last few days -- in no short part because of the misinformation and bad policies you championed. "

To which Professor Kulldorff responded, to my great delight:

"Dear Ashish: By quietly working his butt off to make more COVID-19 tests available for nursing homes, under enormous hostility, Scott Atlas saved more lives during a few months in DC than you have during your whole life."

Boom.

Our friend Ashish is the sort of person who instead of focusing on the elderly thinks it's equally important in the fight against COVID to make sure your kids can't play football.

Somebody else jumped in to ask: since many American deaths yesterday were in California, which policy California might have adopted (and of course California has been insanely locked down) did Scott Atlas prevent them from adopting?

Crickets, of course.

In another matter, here's an excerpt of an email the heroic Alex Berenson just received from a personal trainer in Illinois:

"I'm watching kids and adults fall apart around me. Two kids in the next town committed suicide last week (one was 18 with a full ride to MIT/star quarterback, and one was 20). On top of the insanity of two suicides in a small, wealthy town in a week, the school then prevented the grieving football team from running on the field together to try and honor him. They cited COVID restrictions as their reason for preventing kids from running on the field, outdoors. While this is heartbreaking, the sheer number of kids failing academically, depressed, or simply despondent is staggering.

"I work with 20 to 30 or so kids -- and remember these are kids whose parents prioritized them getting exercise and activity during COVID -- and 50% of them are struggling. Their friends who can't afford or whose parents are afraid, 80-90%.

"As for my adults? I'm watching grown men and women crack and struggle under the depression and anxiety this causes. Marriages that were once strong seem to be teetering, people lashing out at strangers for no reason. And without fail, the ones struggling the most are the ones adhering to the insane protocols best. Maybe as if there is a direct correlation between cutting yourself off from society and depression? If it wasn't so sad it would be laughable how dense people have become.

"And don't even get me started on the 90% of rich Illinoisans who jetted to Florida for 4-8 weeks while crying about how DeSantis is a murderer. The honest ones at least came home and admitted what we're doing is insane. Yet even those honest ones fall right back in line with crazy COVID precautions while acknowledging they took almost none in Florida.

"Sorry for ranting. This is all just insane."

In recent weeks, as I noted in a previous issue, some people I would never have expected to hear the phrase "back to normal" from have begun discussing precisely that. At the same time, some public health officials almost appear to take delight in warning us that just because we wear masks/socially distance/get vaccinated doesn't mean we'll get back to normal.

Screw these deranged people. Reward the decent states with your vacation dollars. Heck, move to them, so they become invulnerable to destruction by twisted lockdowners.

We must vaccinate the frail and elderly, because they are most at risk from THE VIRUS!!! The vaccine trials did not include the frail and elderly. The frail and elderly appear to have a significant rate of mortality due to being vaccinated.

Who could ever have guessed that?

https://norwaytoday.info/news/norwegian-medicines-agency-links-13-deaths-to-vaccine-side-effects-those-who-died-were-frail-and-old/

Norwegian Medicines Agency links 13 deaths to vaccine side effects. Those who died were frail and old

The Norwegian Medicines Agency linked 13 deaths to the corona vaccine’s side effects. Those who died had two things in common – they were old and frail.

A total of 23 deaths have been reported in connection with the corona vaccination.

So far, 13 of these have been assessed.

“The reports might indicate that common side effects from mRNA vaccines, such as fever and nausea, may have led to deaths in some frail patients,” chief physician Sigurd Hortemo in the Norwegian Medicines Agency noted.

“The reports might indicate that common side effects from mRNA vaccines, such as fever and nausea, may have led to deaths in some frail patients,” chief physician Sigurd Hortemo in the Norwegian Medicines Agency noted.

"linked" does not equal causation...
but i'm #notarealdoctor

"linked" does not equal causation...
but i'm #notarealdoctor

I'd bet real money that "frail and elderly" were contributing factors, if not the direct cause of death.

Old, frail people tend to die of natural causes without any assistance from vaccine side effects.  The vaccine may have been purely coincidental.

Here's a thought -- let's STOP with the "one size fits all" pandemic mindset.

Instead of potentially killing "old and frail" people with what might be vaccine side effects, let's give that vaccine to the people the old and frail come into contact with.

If staff, visitors and everyone else (plumbers, maintenance people, delivery people, etc.) are all vaccinated, then the chances of the old and frail ever catching COVID becomes that much lower.

That's my opinion -- at least until they prove that immune people can be carriers, too.   

I would certainly agree that the government cannot physically confine people just on a chance they could have a disease. I am of mixed feeling whether the extensions to the initial emergency declaration are legal.

Is there a fine line between the government physically confining people and telling them to stay home and if they don't then arresting them for not staying home?

You are sidestepping the issue....What we try to do is make sure there are no serious abuses of power.

So this is the part where you accuse others of exactly what you are doing?

You know that is a leftist tactic yeah?