Parents Appeal To U.S. Supreme Court After Vermont Courts Ruled Schools Can Vaccinate Kids Against Parents’ Wishes
All American children are constitutionally entitled to the protections of informed parental consent.
Those in favor of mass forced vaccination have an amazing narrative, or at least they think they do. They think that a bunch of "low vaccinated" areas are getting hit strongly with the virus and that somehow this is "an epidemic of the unvaccinated."
But when you open your eyes a crack, you can see that almost every area of America is relatively highly vaccinated for adults and especially seniors and that the virus is bizarrely spreading uncontrollably out of season, even in northern latitudes and even in areas with virtual universal adult vaccination. In fact, what this phenomenon might point to is not only a complete lack of power of vaccination to stop the spread, but also that it is serving as an unnatural viral escape mechanism to create durable and prolific mutations that would not have been created absent mass vaccination.
India had a low vaccination rate of 3% when cases began to plummet in mid-spring, and indeed the country achieved close to de facto herd immunity without the vaccine. On the other hand, no place in America truly has a low vaccination rate. Even states like Arkansas have 85% of seniors with at least one dose and 71% with two doses. It simply makes no sense that with the degree of efficacy the "experts" ascribe to the vaccine, we would be witnessing this amount of spread. What's more, Florida actually has a higher vaccination rate than California among seniors and a pretty solid overall rate.
Yet cases are spreading in places like Florida quicker than they did a year ago with much less immunity and 0% vaccinated last summer. There's no way the unvaccinated alone could explain this phenomenon, because even if the vaccine didn't exist today at all, we should be seeing less, not more spread, than last year, simply based on built-up immunity. Thus, this indicates something of a negative effect of the vaccine.
Obviously, we all expected to experience a summer uptick in the South because, as we saw last year, southern latitudes tend to get a wave in the hot months of the year, known as the "Hope-Simpson curve." However, this degree of spread makes no sense. Moreover, unlike last year, when the virus was essentially dead north of the 35th parallel in the summer, cases are spreading much more, despite extremely high rates of vaccination. Cases in New York and New Jersey are running four to five times higher than this week last year. San Francisco, with most adults vaccinated (and masked), is experiencing its greatest spread yet — all out of season.
Fully masked San Francisco, with one of the highest vaccination rates on earth, has now matched their highest case… https://t.co/9Rjm3G9jmG
— IM (@ianmSC) 1628451826.0
We can only imagine what these northern latitudes will experience in season, with the vaccination rates having a negative effect on the case rate.
Wherever one stands on the vaccine, the case explosion makes no sense. There are twice as many cases in the U.S. this week than this time last year, without any vaccine and with nearly half the country already immune. There is simply no way the unvaccinated could account for this degree of spread, because last year everyone was unvaccinated (plus fewer with natural immunity), yet we are seeing both greater numbers and off-season spread in climates that should not be getting a summer spread. For example, Oregon has nearly five times the number of cases over last year with very high vaccination rates.
Our observations in America are accentuated in other countries, where entire populations are fully vaccinated. The entire adult population of Gibraltar is vaccinated, yet the country has one of the highest case per capita rates and the fifth-highest death rate. Israel was the poster child for successful vaccination, after draconian lockdowns and mask mandates, yet 17 months into this, the Israelis have double the case rate of this time last year. Then we are also seeing even northern climates get an out-of-season spread, like the U.K. last month and Iceland at present. Iceland's cases have gone up exponentially despite near-universal adult vaccination. Iceland has never seen any spread like this during the entire epidemic. How can it be that the worst spread is taking place after near-universal adult vaccination?
Everyone is quick to point out that most of these places, Iceland included, are not experiencing deaths, which they credit to the vaccines rather than the virus becoming less deadly (as we saw in India with a low vaccination rate).
If vaccines are causing the de-coupling of cases and fatalities, what explains what is happening in Finland?Cases… https://t.co/38g05u3aJQ
— PLC (@Humble_Analysis) 1628279587.0
They claim the vaccine ameliorates symptoms. That may very well be true – at least temporarily, before it wears off, as we are seeing in Israel – but clearly it is not doing one iota to stop the spread, and clearly the vaccinated are spreading the virus just as prolifically as the non-vaccinated. Unlike in America, some of these other countries (or places like San Francisco) are almost exclusively composed of vaccinated adults.
And let's not forget that in March, April, and May, when the South was completely clear, the Northeast and upper Midwest – with their impervious restrictions and mask mandates in place, along with already high vaccination rates – had high case counts.
Companion version for you, @ianmSC from your buddy Hold2...with another Neanderthal state added.Date range starts… https://t.co/CYH1JPOcFY
— Hold2 (@Hold2LLC) 1620433610.0
Thus, we've never seen any correlation of the vaccines with better outcomes on a macro level.
There is no scientifically proven answer to this, but we should find out soon enough. With strong evidence from two Israeli studies that the efficacy of the vaccines even against severe illness wanes after about five months, particularly for the people who need it the most, and Fauci downright admitting they won't work against some variants, perhaps it's time to study Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche's concern that we are making things worse.
Bossche, a former top vaccinologist at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, clearly not an anti-vaxxer, has been frantically warning that mass vaccination (especially with a narrow spike protein vaccine) during the middle of a pandemic is unprecedented and comes with a degree of risk. He warns that weak and waning antibodies from the vaccine can create a natural selection for the virus to mutate around and induce a vicious cycle of endless strengthening of the virus, at least quantitatively if not qualitatively. This is the exact opposite of what Fauci is saying – that somehow more mass vaccination equals less viral immune escape.
Here is a small synopsis of Dr. Bossche's warning from March, when there was little evidence to support his concern:
Why is nobody worried about "immune escape" whereas Covid-19 has already escaped people's innate immunity as reflected by multiple emerging, much more infectious, viral variants (most likely due to the global implementation of infection prevention measures)? Vaccine deployment in the ongoing mass immunization campaigns are highly likely to further enhance (adaptive) immune escape as none of the current vaccines will prevent replication/ transmission of viral variants. The more we use these vaccines for immunizing people in the midst of a pandemic, the more infectious the virus will become. With increasing infectiousness comes an increased likelihood of viral resistance to the vaccines. It's not exactly rocket science, it's a basic principle taught in a student's first vaccinology class: One shouldn't use a prophylactic vaccine in populations exposed to high infectious pressure (which is now certainly the case as multiple highly infectious variants are currently circulating in many parts of the world). To fully escape selective immune pressure exerted by vaccinal antibodies, Covid-19, a highly mutable virus, only needs to add another few mutations in its receptor-binding domain ...
I am beyond worried about the disastrous impact this would have on our human "race". Not only would people lose vaccine-mediated protection but also their precious, variant-nonspecific (!), innate immunity will be gone (this is because vaccinal antibodies outcompete natural antibodies for binding to Covid-19, even when their affinity for the viral variant is relatively low).
Fast-forward five months, and Moderna has already warned everyone will need a third dose, something that is already under way in Israel. But this is akin to giving last year's flu shot to this year's strain. We will continue chasing our tails. Rather than achieving natural immunity, which is much broader and longer-lasting – and using cheap medicines to get people through the virus safely – we will continue to make the virus worse in the long run while continuously offering shorter-term protection for those vaccinated themselves. Israel is already seeing hospitalization from the brand-new third injection!
Iceland's Chief Epidemiologist Þórólfur Guðnason appears to finally understand the failures of the past and the only way forward. When I point to Iceland's unprecedented spread post-universal vaccination, opponents are quick to point out the country's terrific record on preventing deaths. However, notwithstanding the fact that (for whatever reason) Icelandic people appeared to do better with this virus even before the vaccine, their chief epidemiologist clearly understands that 0% efficacy for cases is an obvious harbinger of waning efficacy against critical illness in the future. Which is why in a recent interview he lamented that vaccination failed to achieve herd immunity and conceded that nothing we do, short of focusing on those vulnerable, will stop the natural progression toward herd immunity, whether we like it or not.
"We need to somehow navigate this way, and we are now in this, not to get too many serious illnesses so that the hospital system does not collapse, but still try to achieve this herd immunity by letting the virus somehow run," said Guðnason [translated from Icelandic via google translate].
The Pentagon will require all members of the U.S. military to receive the COVID-19 vaccine by Sept. 15, according to a memo obtained by The Associated Press.
The Food and Drug Administration is expected to approve Pfizer-BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine in early September, according to reports.
In the memo, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin says, "I will seek the president's approval to make the vaccines mandatory no later than mid-September, or immediately upon [FDA approval] whichever comes first."
"I will not hesitate to act sooner or recommend a different course to the president if I feel the need to do so," Austin added in the memo, which is reportedly set for Monday distribution. "To defend this nation, we need a healthy and ready force."
The memo added, "I strongly encourage all DoD military and civilian personnel — as well as contractor personnel — to get vaccinated now and for military service members to not wait for the mandate."
CNN reports that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley will also "communicate a related message to the troops" following the memo's release.
"The intervening few weeks will be spent preparing for this transition. I have every confidence that Service leadership and your commanders will implement this new vaccination program with professionalism, skill, and compassion. We will have more to say about this as implementation plans are fully developed," Austin wrote in the memo.
On Monday, President Joe Biden endorsed the idea of a vaccine mandate.
"I strongly support Secretary Austin's message to the Force today on the Department of Defense's plan to add the COVID-19 vaccine to the list of required vaccinations for our service members not later than mid-September," Biden said in a statement. "Secretary Austin and I share an unshakable commitment to making sure our troops have every tool they need to do their jobs as safely as possible."
According to the report, "The Navy said that more than 74% of all active duty and reserve sailors have been vaccinated with at least one shot. The Air Force, meanwhile, said that more than 65% of its active duty and 60% reserve forces are at least partially vaccinated, and the number for the Army — by far the largest service — appears to be closer to 50%."
Fox News reports that troops already have to receive as many as 17 different vaccines.
Military officials added that once the vaccine is mandated, a "refusal could constitute failure to obey an order, and may be punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice."
Exemptions will be granted under certain conditions, the report added, "for a variety of reasons including health issues or religious beliefs."
"What they can't do any more is prevent transmission."
Those were the words of CDC Director Rochelle Walensky to CNN's Wolf Blitzer last week, as she stated the obvious fact that the COVID shots do not stop symptomatic infection or transmission. Based on data from nearly universally vaccinated regions and countries, such as San Francisco, Israel, Gibraltar, and Iceland, it is abundantly clear that the virus is spreading in some places in greater numbers than before the vaccine was even distributed. Thus, there is no possible legal or moral justification under which any private or public entity can force another human being to take this experimental shot, unless "your body, my choice" is the new guiding principle.
Let's put aside the dubious assertion that the vaccines are an impervious defense against serious illness, a premise that is being seriously challenged by two Israeli studies showing waning efficacy. Even if the vaccines somehow conveyed long-term benefits against serious illness, we now know we were already lied to about the vaccine's use as a tool for source control. Not only should that give us pause about officials' evidence-free statements about the safety of the shots or their long-term efficacy against serious illness, but it should immediately end the debate over the ability of government to mandate these shots on anyone.
Their own position is that there is zero benefit to another human being if the person next to them is vaccinated; that is purely a risk-benefit decision for that person alone. Period. Full stop. Cutting through all the clutter, that was the most important news story to emerge from last week's imbroglio over the virus.
Back in December, the CDC stated clearly that the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine "was 95.0% effective (95% confidence interval = 90.3%–97.6%) in preventing symptomatic laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in persons without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection." Indeed, in late March, Walensky promised, "Our data from the CDC suggest that vaccinated people do not carry the virus." Even those who had questions about transmission among the vaccinated were only concerned about asymptomatic transmission, whereas now we see that the vaccinated can contract the infection symptomatically.
There is nowhere for them to run or hide or seamlessly glide into a new position about the virus only working against critical illness. The more they lie about the past, the more it's quite likely they are lying about the future.
A recent study from the University of Wisconsin-Madison concluded, "We find no difference in viral loads when comparing unvaccinated individuals to those who have vaccine 'breakthrough' infections." This is why we are seeing an unprecedented spread in Iceland, more prolific than ever before, after nearly all the country's adults have been vaccinated. Because most of them have been recently vaccinated, there are few critical cases because the protection has not worn off yet. But we see clearly that even among those recently vaccinated, the shots failed to stop the spread. Which is why the CDC is now back to pushing masks on the vaccinated, even though they have never been proven to work against even the less transmissible strain of the virus.
Cases in Japan continue to rapidly spiral out of control, so I thought I’d check & see if mask compliance had dropp… https://t.co/kRrDLAYqx8
— IM (@ianmSC) 1628355946.0
Given the CDC's own narrative, how does anyone have a legal leg to stand on to mandate forced vaccination on employees? We already know that bodily integrity is an unassailable right that is likely untouchable by the state, even if it has a substantial reason to infringe upon it under a strict scrutiny test. The court said in Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Botsford (1891), "No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others." The court implied it is unassailable because "the right to one's person may be said to be a right of complete immunity; to be let alone."
However, at this point, given that according to the CDC's own narrative, vaccination can only be a personal benefit, not a benefit to others, the growing mandates can't even pass a rational basis test. Consider the fact that an uninterrupted stream of studies show immunity from prior infection (even mild cases) likely lasts long-term; T cells that have stem cell-like properties are in the bone marrow, are as durable as stem cells, and likely last a lifetime or very long. Nearly half the country already has immunity. Yet a person with a positive T cell test but no vaccination faces discrimination, while someone with a vaccine card but no prior immunity is admitted into society, despite being just as prone to spreading the virus as someone without immunity or the vaccine.
There is only one way to stop this tyranny and get the truth out to the public. Employers mandating the vaccine under the guise that it is "safe and effective" must be forced to put their money where their mouths are. Every state must convene an emergency session of the legislature and require that any employer mandating the shots be on the hook for workplace injury liability, pursuant to the original federal policies before they were reversed for political reasons.
On April 20, OSHA released new guidance in the frequently asked questions section of its website for COVID-19 safety compliance stating that employers requiring the vaccine must record all adverse events. The agency required any business with more than 10 employees to treat any vaccine injury or illness as work-related, as would have been the case under current law in any similar circumstance. Yet a month later, as reports of vaccine injuries were exploding, OSHA reversed course and was quite honest about the political nature of the new policy.
"The Department of Labor and OSHA, as well as other federal agencies, are working diligently to encourage COVID-19 vaccinations," reads the new statement on the FAQ page of OSHA's COVID-19 section. "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 through May 2022."
The federal government says businesses can mandate that employees get vaccinated against COVID-19 to enter their workplace, and offer incentives for receiving the vaccine.
Meanwhile, legal experts affirmed that being fired for refusing the vaccine is generally legal.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission released updated guidance Friday explaining that vaccine mandates do not generally violate equal employment regulations.
"The federal EEO laws do not prevent an employer from requiring all employees physically entering the workplace to be vaccinated for COVID-19, subject to the reasonable accommodation provisions of Title VII and the ADA and other EEO considerations discussed below," the agency said. "These principles apply if an employee gets the vaccine in the community or from the employer."
The EEOC also affirmed companies who offer incentives for employees who get vaccinated, although the agency cautioned against "substantial" incentives.
Yes, if any incentive (which includes both rewards and penalties) is not so substantial as to be coercive. Because vaccinations require employees to answer pre-vaccination disability-related screening questions, a very large incentive could make employees feel pressured to disclose protected medical information. ...however, this incentive limitation does not apply if an employer offers an incentive to employees to voluntarily provide documentation or other confirmation that they received a COVID-19 vaccination on their own from a third-party provider that is not their employer or an agent of their employer.
According to Politico, businesses had been pressuring the EEOC to "clarify whether employers could offer paid time off or even cash to encourage vaccination."
"[E]mployers including Dollar General, Aldi and Instacart have already moved to reward their employees for receiving the COVID-19 vaccine by offering paid time off and cash stipends," Politico reported.
As the vaccine became available to all American adults this spring, employers began requiring vaccination — and employees who refused the vaccine began to be terminated, which have resulted in lawsuits.
But legal experts say that firing employees for refusing a vaccine given Emergency Use Authorization by the Food and Drug Administration is probably legal, especially considering most states have "at-will" employment laws.
"I am not aware of any court or agency at the state or federal level that has held that the Emergency Use Authorization language prohibits an employer from enforcing a vaccine mandate," attorney Erik Eisenmann told Bloomberg News.
Nicholas Bagley, a law professor at the University of Michigan, agrees. "It's a condition on future employment. And institutions can do all sorts of things as a condition of employment," he said.
Addressing the EUA argument, Bagley told Bloomberg, "The argument looks good for about a half-second, and then, as soon as you start digging, it starts to look much, much worse."