VACCINES SAVE INDIA! but not Kerala
One more bad day for Kerala with almost 3/4 of all India CoV-19 cases and now clearly "targeting" 2/3 of India's deaths. Maharashtra is second in cases with a far smaller number/mio.
Could somone who understands this please explain it to me?
Do you now claim a reading disability?
Texas Appellate Panel Overturns District Court’s Order to Treat COVID-19 Patient with Ivermectin—Patient Dies
Although a Houston-based hospital, Memorial Hermann Sugar Land, was recently ordered by a Texas district judge to administer an ivermectin prescription to a 73-year old veteran, Pete Lopez, the hospital administration refused to do so, instead of filing an appeal at the appellate level—rapidly securing a victory. Now a family grieves as the granddaughter of the deceased shared with local press that the hospital didn’t allow the family the opportunity to see if the drug could save the patriarch’s life. The family reports that the ivermectin regimen was initially prescribed by the now-deceased patient’s physician at the VA Medical Center, but unfortunately for him and his family, he was admitted to the hospital prior to the arrival of the prescription. Tested positive for COVID-19 on July 30th, but he was admitted to the hospital intensive care unit on August 4th. By August 19, it was clear that much like in the recent Ohio hospital case covered, the hospital’s COVID-19 treatment protocol failed, and consequently, Mr. Lopez’s condition worsened. He was put on a ventilator and in a medically induced coma, meaning he was dying. A cursory glance at the news, and one would think that there wasn’t much else to the story however, what unfolded was a rapid legal battle as the district judge clearly looking out for the interests of the patient ordered the hospital to follow the instructions of the patient’s personal physician. This probably was an overreach, and the hospital went to war, securing a court order by a Texas appellate court to ignore the lower court order that the hospital should administer the ivermectin. The patient died recently, and not unexpectedly, in what is, unfortunately, a story being played out across America during the pandemic.
Background: Failed COVID-19 Protocol
The now-deceased patient, Mr. Pete Lopez, was first diagnosed with COVID-19 on July 30. Upon experiencing worsening symptoms, he was admitted into the Memorial Herman intensive care unit on August 4th. The patient’s wife, Gloria Lopez sought to get her husband a transfer to Houston’s Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital by August 16 however they were at full capacity.
The patient’s COVID-19-triggered respiratory infection worsened, with doctors ordering that he be placed on a ventilator and medical induced coma. Memorial Hermann doctors acknowledged to the patient’s wife that the hospital’s protocol for COVID-19 failed. With little time and urgency to save her husband’s life, a natural response—Ms. Lopez sought out other approaches and was able to secure an ivermectin prescription from her husband’s primary care doctor at the Houston VA.
But upon request by Mrs. Lopez that the hospital intravenously administer the drug, the hospital refused, thus prompting the patient’s wife to seek legal recourse for her husband. Mrs. Lopez retained Joe Ray Rodriguez and Ralph C. Lorigo, the prominent New York attorney taking on many of the hospital ivermectin cases.
The District Judge—’Why not try to save the man’s life’
Ms. Lopez filed an action, and the case landed in front of Fort Bend County District Judge Rodney Williams. With a matter set for September 3 apparently, Memorial Herman referred to the action as a “misnomered show-cause hearing,” according to a Law360 write-up by Michelle Casady.
At the hearing, Judge Williams asked the Memorial Herman representatives “why the doctors won’t administer this medication to save a man who is at the end of the road,” based on a quote in the hospital’s petition.
While the Hospital resisted, later arguing that the plaintiff (again Ms. Lopez) offered no evidence or compelling argument, District Judge Williams declared, “If the medicine fails, it will do no more harm than it would have done had he not taken it. If it fails, he will meet the same fate that he might meet anyway,” Judge Williams is quoted as saying. “But at the current time, there is a medicine out there that information suggests could save this man’s life.”
Thus Judge Williams made the order, on September 3, compelling the hospital to treat the patient with the legitimate prescription from the Houston VA-based family doctor. That was seven 3 mg. tablets of the medication daily for a period of five days.
Moreover, the judge, in a move that undoubtedly was seen as an overreach, ordered that the Memorial Herman doctors defer to the family’s primary care physician for care ongoing. Thus Memorial Hermann organized their “A” team targeting appeal, including Partner Warren S. Huang and Associate Christopher L. Conatser with Norton Rose Fulbright.
The Appeal
A recalcitrant hospital refused the order and, in fact, was already prepared with legal firepower, thus appealing the case to the First Court of Appeals on the same day. Indicating that the hospital was ready for legal war, they made the case to a three-justice panel to overturn Judge William’s order. That panel consisted of Chief Justice Sherry Radack as well as Justices Veronica Rivas-Molloy and Amparo Guerra.
Declaring the use of ivermectin as “medically inappropriate”—despite the fact that TrialSite has chronicled several other cases around the country where the court-ordered use of the drug did, in fact, appear to correlate with an extended or saved a life—the hospital’s lawyers also declared to the three justices making up the appellate panel that the previous ruling was an overreach—that Judge Williams had no legal authority to order the hospital to take direction from the family physician.
Much like the recent Ohio ruling covered by TrialSite, that blocked a dying man of an ivermectin regimen that appeared to be working, here the hospital’s lawyers further argued that if Judge Williams ruling was to stand, that would “establish a dangerous legal precedent” thus they argued could “severely undermine the ability of physicians to exercise their professional judgment-free of micromanagement by the judiciary.”
In what is becoming a trend, the appellate panel sided with the hospital, granting Memorial Herman temporary relief, thereby ensuring they didn’t have to follow Judge Williams’ ruling.
They ‘Took away the opportunity to know’
Meanwhile, Mrs. Lopez was given until Tuesday, September 7, to respond to Memorial Hermann’s mandamus petition, but apparently, that didn’t happen, and within the last days, Mr. Lopez died due to his severe COVID-19 condition making the matter moot.
Memorial Hermann simply deferred to “best medical standards” reminding that the FDA hadn’t approved the drug for use off-label. They also declared there is no data indicating any effectiveness of the drug in relation to COVID-19. Of course, a review of studies and real-world activity around the world may paint a slightly different picture, depending, of course, on one’s point of view.
Meanwhile, Mr. Lopez’s granddaughter, Gabrielle Snider, first shared with local press “We are taking this time to grieve and process.” But then she had a message for the hospital—“Memorial Herman took away from my grandfather and us, his family, the opportunity to know whether or not that drug would have worked for him. We don’t know if that would have worked. Memorial Herman took that away from us. We will never have that peace.”
Law & Humanity
Words cannot describe what’s unfolding across America and beyond. The existing POTUS’ vaccine-centric COVID-19 eradication policy, while undoubtedly well-intended, more than likely will lead to one gut-wrenching patient death story after another. What’s unfolding really comes down to a war-time-like, top-down, government-driven mandate driving either vaccination or, frankly, death. That’s the effect when no alternatives are tolerated—even if they are approved by regulators for another indication.
The use of repurposed off-label drugs is in “peace times” completely acceptable. But in COVID-19 times war times under the Biden administration, a war has been declared, full PREP Act powers—including liability shields for vaccine makers and health systems—invoked, a vaccine-centric COVID-19 eradication strategy means taking the hill and planting the flag. Biden now is betting his entire presidency on this premise.
And that impacts reality as we know it. Just a handful of years ago the discovers of ivermectin were awarded Nobel Prizes while billions of doses of the “wonder drug” were administered to overcome dangerous tropical born parasites.
Yet in this war of eradication by only vaccines or pharmaceutical therapies in development, any and all is fair game, including the complete vilification of a drug that’s really done nothing but good. Much of the recent hyperbole in the press stems from a report from the American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC) that a 3-fold increase of calls association with ivermectin represents a growing threat to public health.
As it turns out legitimate physician-written prescriptions for ivermectin have skyrocketed 2,344% from baseline pre-pandemic norm to today. Given that extreme growth, TrialSite was able to secure the AAPCC data and found a very different situation than is billed in the mainstream press.
For example, the calls to 55 poison control centers went from 435 to 1,143, hence the approximate “three-fold increase” yet 80% of the calls were completely harmless. Only 11 (1%) calls involved what AAPCC categories as serious, but it’s not clear if hospitalization was involved. No deaths were reported, and TrialSIte compared that to hand sanitizer calls, finding that the latter was far more dangerous than the former during the pandemic based on this data set.
Put another way, with a 2,344% increase in prescriptions, the fact that there are so few real incidences represents perhaps another point of view. Much of the criticism of the drug stems from the illicit self-medication of the veterinary variety, an activity not condoned by anyone responsible. But the press has been conflating the legitimate physician prescription with the not so legitimate self-medication activity—labeling it all as a world of “anti-vax”, right-wing leaning “loons” and what liberals won’t say publicly but some mutter privately “Christian fanatics.”
Drugs like remdesivir are routinely used in America’s health system during the pandemic with known safety issues from previous clinical trials and despite the fact that the World Health Organization (WHO) is on record that the drug doesn’t work based on their Solidarity trial. Gilead, remdesivir’s maker, was able to secure blockbuster status for the drug during a pandemic thanks in part to a cozy relationship with the NIH.
Meanwhile, 63 mostly positive studies combined with intriguing real-world use scenarios around the world along with the fact that major ivermectin trials are ongoing in America—from the United Health (Optum) supported COVID-OUT study to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) ACTIV-6 study, points to a very different reality than what is continuously now broadcast by mainstream media.
That is the “horse de-wormer” medicine has no place in any COVID-19 care. But if that was truly the case, would major institutions such as the University of Minnesota, UnitedHealthcare, or for that matter, the Duke University via the NIH ACTIV-6 invest the time, capital, and talent to expensive late phase studies? Of course, notable critics in the TrialSite community argue these larger studies are all but designed to fail (not appropriate dosing, etc.), but the very fact that these institutions embraced the drug for late-phase study indicates there is something there, even if the results don’t compel approval.
Hence a campaign to vilify the drug possibly originates from an orchestrated effort involving the “like-minded” in key federal health agencies (NIH, CDC, FDA), academia, and industry all driven by what’s becoming a maniacal vaccine-centric, SARS-CoV-2 eradication mission—at all costs including any and all perceived alternatives or supporting treatments.
Perhaps Mr. Lopez’ granddaughter is more prescient than she could ever know on a matter of international health, safety, and frankly political economy when she declared that the hospital took her and her family’s opportunity to know if the drug could work. Maybe that’s the whole idea.
^ Some wag referred to ivermectin as 'Darwins little helper'...
My question with using it as a vaccine is based on targeted mRNA vaccines to the spike. In December of 2019 an article from bio-tech discussed why a spike targeted vaccine had not been used yet. The spike was to unstable. Now jump ahead 4 months and Pfizer is injecting an mRNA spike targeted vaccine. I have some questions and concerns. Really, it that simple. Explain how they stabilized the spike.
There is a website called Google, ya know...
Or did you set trialsitenews as your homepage? 
The two mRNA vaccines in current widespread application (BioNTech-Pfizer and Moderna) (Table 1) are technologically very similar. They contain codon-optimized sequences for efficient expression of the full-length S protein and use the authentic signal sequence for its biosynthesis44,45,46,47 (Fig. 1b). Both constructs include the two stabilizing mutations in S2 (K986P and V987P) that were shown to prevent the conformational change of the pre-fusion into the post-fusion structure of S (section “Introduction” and Fig. 2c)20,21.
[ Warning : USA political analysis ]
A Simple Actuarial Analysis.
https://acasignups.net/21/09/09/simple-actuarial-analysis
Tested positive for COVID-19 on July 30th, but he was admitted to the hospital intensive care unit on August 4th. By August 19, it was clear that much like in the recent Ohio hospital case covered, the hospital’s COVID-19 treatment protocol failed, and consequently, Mr. Lopez’s condition worsened. He was put on a ventilator and in a medically induced coma, meaning he was dying. A cursory glance at the news, and one would think that there wasn’t much else to the story however, what unfolded was a rapid legal battle as the district judge clearly looking out for the interests of the patient ordered the hospital to follow the instructions of the patient’s personal physician.
They can sue the hospital anytime for not following "lege artis" medical treatment.
This protocol is used world wide even one hospital in Germany /Munich) uses it...
Evidence please . A link , a study that confirms this before injections begun. SHOW ME!
Do you own homework.
Do you own homework.
I'll remember that the next time you demand links
Apparently the Chinese vacs work better than experts thought in June. However, they only work after the second shot (the booster).
This shows why you have to be careful not to jump to conclusions. In June there were widespread reports that the Chinese vaccine does not work. I thought that was odd, because they could not sell them for long if they don't work. Indeed, some countries started refusing them. Now, however, it seems they work after the second shot. They work about 50% of the time, compared to 80% or 90% for Pfizer. The Chinese manufacturer should have told the customers that's how the vaccines work. Perhaps they did but the message did not get through?
I'll remember that the next time you demand links
Give me a break. I don't demand links. I use Google.
I don't recall where I read that. I am not going to spend time looking it up. You can take it or leave it.
This shows why you have to be careful not to jump to conclusions. In June there were widespread reports that the Chinese vaccine does not work. I thought that was odd, because they could not sell them for long if they don't work. Indeed, some countries started refusing them. Now, however, it seems they work after the second shot. They work about 50% of the time, compared to 80% or 90% for Pfizer. The Chinese manufacturer should have told the customers that's how the vaccines work. Perhaps they did but the message did not get through?
Yes you did jump to the wrong conclusion when faced with widespread vaccine breakthroughs and deaths in chili. You boldly posted the Chinese vacs don't work ignoring the WHO , who said the vacs were 72% effective. You denied the science old boy!
Yes you did jump to the wrong conclusion when faced with widespread vaccine breakthroughs and deaths in chili.
Chile, not chili. It wasn't me. I was reporting what some experts said.
You boldly posted the Chinese vacs don't work ignoring the WHO , who said the vacs were 72% effective.
The WHO was wrong. It is more like 50%. But that was not clear until later in the year, as the Chilean researcher quoted above said.
You denied the science old boy!
The science was unclear. Different scientists thought different things. I reported them all. It often happens that scientists and other experts disagree with one another.
(free with email registration)
I don't recall where I read that. I am not going to spend time looking it up.
Ah, here's one article in my archive. This is called the six proline design.
https://cen.acs.org/pharmaceuticals/vaccines/tiny-tweak-behind-COVID-19/98/i38
UK’s Vaccine Advisory: No Vaccine Mandates for Healthy 12 to 15 Year Old’s
An influential independent expert advisory committee that advises the United Kingdom health departments on immunization, generating recommendations for vaccination policy, schedules, and observances of vaccine safety has declared that healthy children ages 12 to 15 will not be needing COVID-19 vaccines in the UK. Called the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization (JCVI), with a statutory role in England and Wales, health care departments in Scotland and Northern Ireland can opt to follow its advisory. The recent declaration appears to deviate from the Anglo-American world, where a vaccine-centric eradication of COVID-19 drives the Biden administration’s plans now and into 2022, where he hopes to stave off an election massacre against his party.
While the JCVI has recognized that the “health benefits from vaccination are marginally greater than the potential known harms,” the influential body declared that the particular “margin of benefit is considered too small to support universal vaccination of healthy 12 to 15 year old at this time.”
While mass vaccination programs, such as the ongoing and unfolding one in America do consider wider societal impacts such as benefits to education and the like, JCVI has no concerns on that front. Thus JCVI recommended to the UK government that if it seeks other views associated with “wider societal and educational impacts” that it elicit inputs from the Chief Medical Officers of the 4 UK nations.
The Reality
TrialSite has recorded for over a year now that 90% plus of all SARS-CoV-2 cases are asymptomatic to mild-to-moderate and can be resolved, ideally with early-care treatments that could stop most disease progression. The UK’s JCVI emphasizes that most children aged 12 to 13 are very healthy and hence wouldn’t require hospitalization even if they did catch a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Put another way, the high-risk group within this cohort is the few children with other underlying health conditions.
Thus the committee recommended the expansion of the list of conditions to which the offer applies for at-risk 12 to 15-year-olds.
JVCA also recognized the rare but significant risk of myocarditis. Nonetheless, the medium and long-term effects on young people are not known at this time.
What cohorts get offered vaccines?
When deciding on childhood immunizations, the JCVI has consistently maintained that the main focus should be the benefits to children themselves, balanced against any potential harm from vaccination.
As longer-term data on potential adverse reactions accumulate, greater certainty may allow for a reconsideration of the benefits and harms. This data may not be available for several months.
Previously, the JCVI advised that children with severe neuro disabilities, Down’s syndrome, immunosuppression, profound and multiple learning disabilities, and severe learning disabilities or who are on the learning disability register should be offered COVID-19 vaccination.
Following consideration of updated data on hospital admissions and deaths, the JCVI advises that this offer should be expanded to include children aged 12 to 15 with the following:
hematological malignancy
sickle cell disease
type 1 diabetes
congenital heart disease
other health conditions as described in Annex A
Children with poorly controlled asthma and less common conditions, often due to congenital or metabolic defects where respiratory infections can result in severe illness, should also be offered COVID-19 vaccination.
Conclusion
JCVI concluded that “given the very low risk of serious COVID-19 disease in otherwise healthy 12 to 15-year-olds, considerations on the potential harms and benefits of vaccination are very finely balanced and a precautionary approach was agreed.” The group concluded, “Taking a precautionary approach, this margin of benefit is considered too small to support universal COVID-19 vaccination for this age group at this time. The committee will continue to review safety data as they emerge.”
Call to Action: Follow the link to review the JCVI press release.
Pandemic Continues On as POTUS Doubles Down on Vaccine-Centric Pathogen Eradication: Will this Work?
With the Delta variant dominant, much of America is now under siege. TrialSite has pointed out that each of the top ten most vaccinated states all experience surges, dispelling the propaganda promulgated by the Biden Administration that this is now a pandemic of the unvaccinated. Just like in heavily vaccinated Israel, the pandemic rages on with a growing number of breakthrough infections and hospitalizations due to what TrialSite increasingly suspects is a subpar Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine combined with a strong virulent variant. BNT162b2 was approved in an unorthodox manner under the PREP Act’s severe controls and liability shield. Studies indicate it wanes in effectiveness from above 90% to less than 42% and even under 40% within four or five months concerning the Delta variant. Moderna’s vaccine, according to some of the data, performs at a higher level. Regardless, with an approved vaccine and imminent mandates across society, Pfizer stands to generate about $33 billion in one year for one product—an unprecedented sales figure that shatters all records. With a vaccine-centric, complete eradication policy in place—backed by the PREP-Act—the federal government, as directed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), believes the vaccination program is working. Now mandates will force ever more vaccines, which according to the eradication theory, helps move toward the goal of eradication—yet is this approach really working?
That’s the real question—is the vaccine-centric strategy of vaccinating a live coronavirus out of existence working? Well, answering this question is as politically loaded nowadays as one premised on a scientific discussion. Some argue in this TrialSite OpEd that the exact opposite problem is occurring, that mass vaccination is allowing variants to thrive. We can’t say for sure. However, we agree pandemics are not static but dynamic, and already Dr. Anthony Fauci has been on record that at some points, the current crop of vaccines, let’s say version 1.0, will live out their usefulness. But at what cost?
While daily new infections rise above 160,000 a day, Fauci still classifies the country as being in “pandemic mode,” although the endgame is to vaccinate until viral suppression is achieved. But has this approach ever been attempted before, with a novel vaccine and a new, dynamic, and unfolding virus? The answer is no; the reality is that the federal government imposed the PREP Act to contain the U.S. population in what can be considered a giant experiment to overcome the pandemic.
So Fauci believes until the numbers go “well below 10,000,” there is no comfort, and more than likely, the American public will be locked up and contained in what could be a top-down, federally imposed research program.
POTUS to Focus on Vaccine Eradication in Updated Plan
As reported by Thomson Reuters Foundation, POTUS plans an imminent update to the strategy in a bid to control the pandemic. With a focus on six areas, more vaccine mandates (some seemingly draconian) are on the table as POTUS cannot afford this contagion to continue into the end of the year or 2022. With troubling economic signs, the economy could go into a complete tailspin.
Hence, the importance of the eradication through vaccination approach and other controls that are politically acceptable in American society at this pandemic stage.
Key focus areas include increased testing, mask-wearing, protecting the economy, and improving healthcare for people infected with the disease.
TrialSite suspects some good things can come out of the POTUS strategic upgrade, assuming there is a recognition that brute force eradication through vaccination is probably not the answer.
Why No Lockdowns?
That’s ideally what some public health and health and human services leadership would like to see to stop the viral spread of the pathogen. But such measures would probably not be politically feasible at this point, as they are in places like Australia.
For example, as mentioned above, the American economy is in trouble, with inflammation and low job growth. And with the recent debacle in Afghanistan (still apparently hundreds of Americans and green card holders left behind), POTUS needs to set some positive direction well in advance of the 2022 midterm elections. So even if Biden believed lockdowns in areas with high infectious clusters made sense, he doesn’t have the political capital to make that call. He would undoubtedly lose the 2024 election, and 2022 would be, and still probably will be, problematic for the party currently in charge.
Does Mass vaccination contribute to variants?
We cannot be certain one way or another. In a way, Fauci has already acknowledged this by recognizing that the current batch of V1.0 vaccines might become useless at some point. None of the vaccines are designed with the Delta variant in mind, yet the operating assumption is that they work. However, the Biden Administration went on a limb declaring greenlight on a booster program, much like Israel, despite the fact the FDA hadn’t even completed reviewing study data. As a consequence, two prominent vaccine regulators at the Gold Standard agency resigned.
The COVID-19 viruses are not alive but rather need us—their host—to survive, much like the cells in our body. However, once the pathogen enters our body, they reproduce and propagate themselves. The more the pathogen can disseminate within a set population of people, the more it can morph—some at a fast rate, some not so fast. While some viruses morph at a fast rate of change, such as the flu, others are slow, which, thankfully, SARS-CoV-2 could fall under.
Now, given the current vaccines do not stop transmission—the NIH and CDC have acknowledged this—that implies that even when people are vaccinated, they can still become infected and spread the virus, serving as vectors. So theoretically, if every conceivable being were to be vaccinated on the planet, there could still be transmission, thus mutation and new variants.
Moreover, given that the developed world has used up 80% of the vaccine supply and the WHO calls for a halt of booster programs to let the low- to middle-income countries (LMICs) catch up, the holes in the current paradigm of pandemic control are becoming quite apparent to anyone that bothers to review unfolding data critically.
However, the vaccine has helped reduce the rate of serious infection and death in some countries—but not all—so there are most certainly benefits for having next-generation vaccines.
But, unfortunately, the entire experiment unfolding isn’t going in the direction contemplated. TrialSite’s been on the record since the earlier days of the pandemic that a combination of safe and effective vaccines, early care options accessible for all socioeconomic levels, and intelligent public health management at the local level would have the most impact to support a coexistence strategy until this horrible pathogen runs its course
The shaky science behind ivermectin as a COVID-19 cure
We need no more science. India tested it among 1'000'000'000 people with outstanding success.
So please stop linking (big pharma paid) fake science:
In Uttar Pradesh, start of May 2021 every household got a number of Ivermectin kits (IVR, Zink, V-D3, Doxycycline, and V-C). 2 weeks later CoV-19 was gone. Ivermectin does 100% prevent an infection with CoV-19. If a case did reoccur (e.g. missing medication) it was treated with the same kit and all contacts had to restart the Ivermectin procedure.
See: https://www.indiamart.com/prod…e-tablet-12373324255.html
Current case rate in Uttar Pradesh 20 cases/day among 205 million people. UK 38'000/day among 68 mio people or just about 50'000x more cases....everything with no vaccines!!
If you give Ivermectin to a cow then the "cow shit" cowpat/cowpie no longer is eaten by insects/bacteria. So its stays on ground for a very long time. This is part of the Swiss alpine cow history...
The American Godfather finally shows the dark side of his ass.
Vaccine terror for state employees!
Why not using a 10 cent IVR pill? Uups the fear would disappear. No more patriot act - the slaves would get a feeling of freedom again...
I expect some heavy shooting soon. Not all US citizen are calm enough to follow this fascist order...Buy a bullet proof west! Or Ivermectin...
POTUS’ Sweeping Vaccine Mandates Showcase Unprecedented Use of Federal Powers in Modern Era
Earlier today, TrialSite suggested the current Biden administration might “double down” on mandates and other measures based on the premise that pandemic eradication can be accomplished through mass vaccination, and now the president uses his formidable executive powers for sweeping federal vaccine requirements impacting up to 100 million Americans. In a hostile tone to the 80 million Americans currently unvaccinated, Biden’s authoritarian learnings emerge with every month that his standing in polls drops. Declaring that this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated, despite the fact that vaccinated individuals are also passing the virus, POTUS introduced a mandate that all employers with over 100 workers must require their workers to be vaccinated or test for the virus weekly. Moreover, about 17 million healthcare workers that receive federal Medicare or Medicaid must now submit to the jabs. Additionally, executive branch employees or contractors will also need to submit to a vaccine, with no option to test out, covering an additional 7 million in the workforce. Biden’s frustrated that nearly 100 million Americans don’t want to subject themselves to the still novel mRNA vaccines, for whatever reason. Thus the Democrat made moves today that probably would have triggered mass resistance had the previous POTUS entertained anything even remotely close to such deep, pervasive control.
In an executive order, POTUS will mandate COVID-19 vaccination of all staff within Medicare and Medicaid-certified facilities in a bid to both protect themselves and patients from SARS-CoV-2 and Delta variants. Now it’s a matter of federal regulatory compliance—get staff vaccinated or fall out of compliance with executive orders.
Emergency Orders
With the executive edict in motion, the U.S. Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), in partnership with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), promulgate emergency rules mandating the expansion of vaccinations for nursing home workers—including hospitals, dialysis facilities, ambulatory surgical facilities, home health organizations, and other organizations in the federal ecosystem. If they don’t comply, then they will be cut from Medicare and Medicaid. TrialSite has written that both Medicare and Medicaid cover nearly 120 million people.
The rationale for this seemingly authoritarian move: a rapidly spreading virus is deemed a public health emergency. With the PREP Act already establishing an ongoing emergency since last year, most Washington insiders won’t see the moves today as too far a stretch.
Nursing homes are an example TrialSite has covered, reporting that these facilities already face severe shortages in workers. Nonetheless, with a vaccination rate of 75% or lower, the elderly purportedly experience higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 infections that these rules are meant to prevent. So, on the one hand, POTUS’s well-intentioned orders might seek one outcome, but a byproduct of such government direction and control could be even fewer facilities.
Across other facilities, such as hospital staff, CMS now will wield its considerable federal authority to promulgate vaccine requirements in a bid to reduce the risk of infection against the Delta variant.
The moves by POTUS today are controversial. While there is a point of view that could completely concur with the underlying logic—e.g., we are in a nasty ongoing pandemic—other viewpoints might seriously question the moves made by Biden his administration.
TrialSite’s founder Daniel O’Connor stated today, “What is now unfolding represents an unprecedented mobilization of federal power into the deepest, most intimate levels of the society, the economy and communities and while well-intentioned, goes contrary to the ethos and spirit of the American system.”
The founder continued, “There is any number of reasons why vaccine hesitancy exists, from significant legacy racism, manifested in human experimentation on African Americans a few decades ago, to a significant concern about vaccine side effects to religious or other personal reasons. While, undoubtedly, POTUS’ intentions are to overcome this pandemic—and that is understandable—there are so many data points that the public health authorities are not recognizing. For example, the current vaccine that’s been approved doesn’t translate to the product liability American consumers are accustomed to. The PREP Act shields all the economic actors. Moreover, the effectiveness wanes within four to five months. Does this set up forced boosters every six months? The rule of law as we know it in many ways has been superseded by apex executive powers that could produce unanticipated, perverse, and paradoxical outcomes that no one cares for.”
TrialSite has chronicled growing breakthrough infections among the population. Meaning that even vaccinated people are not protected from Delta, and can serve the pathogen as a vector to continue the transmission of the disease.
Troubling UK Data—More than Just Breakthrough Infections
The British Medical Journal (BMJ) recently reported that significant numbers of hospitalizations and deaths in the UK are now in unvaccinated people. In fact, this piece cites Public Health England saying that “More people are dying of the delta variant of COVID than unvaccinated people.” According to this recent report, 489 of 742 (65.9%) people who died of the delta variant within 28 days of a positive COVID test between 1 February 2021 and 2 August 2021, had received at least one dose of the vaccine.” The BMJ reported that “54.1% (402 of 742) had received both doses.”
An alarming set of numbers? Absolutely, it is. Yet The BMJ plays it down, declaring, “with an imperfect vaccine and high vaccination coverage, it is exactly what we would expect.” Significantly, Israel now moves rapidly through its third booster, and while Herzog Hospital reported to TrialSite that the jabs are helping protect vulnerable populations, such as the elderly, there is now already talk of a fourth booster. This level of intense vaccination isn’t normal and indicates problems with the underlying vaccine.
Expect the Unexpected
Pfizer’s the big winner with the POTUS declaration. With absolutely no liability and already an unprecedented $33 billion projected in the bag, it’s heaven on earth for shareholders. But for people that, for whatever reason, opt not to accept this early-stage vaccine, this could quickly become hell.
But the yin and yang of life are at play here. For every desperate move to beat Mother Nature (or possibly a gain-of-function created version), through a brute force eradication via vaccination of a dangerous and dynamic pathogen, comes unintended and often unexpected consequences, and in this case, they’ll be heavy, perhaps unprecedented, to say the least.
