Latest Covid Shots Released Without Safety Data Under 4.5-Year-Old ‘Emergency’
HHS and the FDA should be leading the world in health care policy, not being over one year behind the curve.
Less than three years ago, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris attempted to force the entirety of the country to get the COVID mRNA vaccine — which was an experimental shot — by threatening the loss of people's jobs.
Such a grotesque display of government overreach cannot, and should not, be forgotten by Americans as they head to the polls this November.
“Kamala and Biden used the administrative state of the federal government to do their dirty work. They used an agency called OSHA to threaten employers. They tried to force all businesses, including small businesses, to be the enforcers of this vaccine mandate,” Liz Wheeler of “The Liz Wheeler Show” explains.
“If employers didn’t mandate that their employees, you and I, be vaxxed, then the employer would face penalties from this agency of the executive branch of the federal government,” Wheeler comments.
The Supreme Court wasn’t having it, and it was fortunately overturned.
“It’s unconstitutional, it’s egregious tyranny, it’s a violation of your medical freedom and mine,” Wheeler says, though she can’t believe it hasn’t been brought up to the Democratic nominee for president, Kamala Harris.
“This vaccine mandate was imposed by Kamala and Biden. Kamala and Biden made up this tyrannical mandate. Kamala and Biden tried to enforce this on businesses. Kamala and Biden threatened you with being fired from your job if you didn’t comply with his mandate. So why is nobody asking Kamala about this on the campaign trail?” Wheeler asks.
“Let me tell you specifically how to ask Kamala about this,” she continues. “Madam Vice President, do you agree with the Supreme Court that the OSHA vaccine mandate is illegal? It has to be asked in just that way, because if Kamala says yes, she agrees with the Supreme Court, then she admits that she tried to tyrannize you.”
“If Kamala says no, she doesn’t agree with the Supreme Court, then she admits she thinks it's perfectly OK to do what she did to mandate a vaccine on you,” Wheeler adds. “She wants to be president, God forbid, she must be asked, she must answer this question.”
To enjoy more of Liz’s based commentary, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
People with natural immunity to COVID-19 have better protection against the respiratory disease than those who received mRNA vaccines, according to a new study.
A group of researchers from Estonia took a pool of 329,496 adults between Feb. 26, 2020, and June 25, 2021.
The analysis was based on data from 246,113 individuals who qualified as one of four categories. The scientists categorized the individuals as those with no immunity against COVID, those with natural immunity from previously being infected, those who had vaccine-induced immunity, and those who had both natural immunity and who were vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.
"Natural immunity conferred substantial protection against COVID-19 hospitalization," the authors of the study wrote. "Our study showed that natural immunity offers stronger and longer-lasting protection against infection, symptoms, and hospitalization compared to vaccine-induced immunity."
The Epoch Times reported, "People who received a vaccine were nearly five times as likely as the naturally immune to test positive for COVID-19 during the Delta era and 1.1 times as likely to test positive for COVID-19 during the Omicron era, researchers in Estonia found."
Individuals who were vaccinated against COVID were seven times as likely to be hospitalized during the Delta variant era, and two times when the Omicron variant was spreading, according to the outlet.
The study declared that hospitalization due to COVID was "extremely rare" for those with hybrid immunity. The researchers discovered that hybrid immunity had "substantially lower rates of reinfection" than those with natural immunity. However, the protection was diminished during the Omicron period.
The Estonian researchers noted, "Studies on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines suggest that protection against SARS-CoV-2 decreases over time, waning considerably after six months."
The authors concluded, "Our findings suggest that the risk of infection (and of developing severe disease) is affected not only by age and comorbidities but also by personal history of immunity-conferring events and by the viral variant responsible for the epidemic. Therefore, personalized risk-based vaccination strategies could be both effective and cost-effective."
The study was published on Nov. 21 in Scientific Reports – a peer-reviewed journal that is part of the Nature Portfolio and covers natural sciences, psychology, medicine, and engineering.
In February, a study was published that declared that natural immunity provides "at least as high, if not higher" levels of protection against COVID-19 as two doses of an mRNA vaccine. The research analyzing 65 studies from 19 different countries was published in The Lancet – one of the oldest and most respected medical journals in the world.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!