Follow the Science? How COVID Authoritarians Get It Wrong

[swordfish]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9115013/Two-thirds-COVID-vaccines-unused-Surgeon-General-warns-needs-better.html

Vaccine 'train wreck' rumbles on: California has vaccinated just 1% of its 40M residents while hundreds of Florida seniors camped out overnight to get shots - as Surgeon General warns US 'needs to get better quick' with two-thirds of shipped doses still unused

• Just 4.66 million COVID-19 vaccines have been administered across the US in the last three weeks despite federal officials having distributed 15.4 million doses to the states 
• It means more than two-thirds of the vaccines shipped within the US have gone unused and just 1.4 percent of the population has been vaccinated as cases, deaths and hospitalizations continue to surge across the US
• One in 930 Americans have now died from COVID-19 with the death toll surging past 353,000 
• There were 180,477 new infections across the country on Monday and a record 128,210 patients currently being treated for coronavirus in hospitals 
• Surgeon General Jerome Adams on Tuesday admitted that the largest vaccination campaign in US history, which has been in the works for months amid the pandemic, has been a 'little bit messy'
• He called on governors across the country to speed up the process by moving to the next priority groups if demand wasn't being met
• California Gov Gavin Newsom said on Monday that his state has only vaccinated 1 percent of the population
• Governors of New York and Florida have vowed to penalize hospitals that fail to dispense shots quickly 

In New York, hospitals must administer vaccines within a week of receiving them or face a fine and a reduction in future supplies, Gov Andrew Cuomo said, just hours before announcing the state's first known case of a new, more infectious coronavirus variant originally detected in Britain. 

'I don't want the vaccine in a fridge or a freezer, I want it in somebody's arm,' Cuomo said. 'If you're not performing this function, it does raise questions about the operating efficiency of the hospital.' 

New York hospitals on the whole have dispensed fewer than half of their allocated doses to date, but performance varied from one group of hospitals to another.

The NYC Health + Hospitals system, the city's main public hospital network, has only administered 31 percent of its allotment, compared with 99 percent for a few private hospitals in the state.

The CDC reported an even lower vaccine uptake for New York overall, saying fewer than one in five of the 896,000 doses shipped to the state since mid-December have been given.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio revealed on Monday that the city's hospitals vaccinated just 148 people across the five boroughs on January 1 - delivering just 13 doses per hospital.

It came as he promised to vaccinate 100,000 people every week going forward. 

 

The weakest link in the chain is at the end.  The mass distribution has not been flawless, but very effective.  Through it all, it appears that even with all his shortcomings with this pandemic, Governor Cuomo has the right idea.....

 

[swordfish]

[swordfish]

Up next - "SUPER COVID"

https://www.the-sun.com/news/2144783/more-super-covid-mutant-strains-surge-cases-virus-thrive/

[Muda69]

We Could Be Vaccinating Twice as Fast. The Government Won't Allow It.: https://reason.com/video/2021/01/16/we-could-be-vaccinating-twice-as-fast-the-government-wont-allow-it/

Quote

The COVID-19 vaccines made by Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech were developed and brought to market at a blistering pace, but their distribution has been hobbled by poor planning and rigid eligibility rules. The rollout was centrally planned in a way that didn't give local officials and health care workers enough flexibility to adjust to the realities on the ground—and to make tradeoffs between treating as many people as possible and strictly adhering to the rules.

The most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show that of the more than 30 million doses shipped, only about 11 million have been used. And those are mostly first doses: The Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines are both given as two identical shots, three and four weeks apart respectively. To ensure everyone who received the first dose is guaranteed a second one at the prescribed time, the government stockpiled one dose for every one shipped.

Alex Tabarrok, an economist at George Mason University who blogs at Marginal Revolution, has been promoting an idea called "first dose first," which the United Kingdom recently adopted. This approach would allocate all available vaccines to be used as first doses, while pushing off second doses for weeks (or even months) until production can catch up.

"That means you can give twice as many first doses," says Tabarrok, who consulted with the Trump administration, the World Bank, and foreign governments on optimal ways to incentivize rapid development of a COVID-19 vaccine. "You can have two people who are protected at an 80 percent efficacy rate, as opposed to one person who's protected at a 95 percent efficacy rate."

This week, the Trump administration reversed course on stockpiling doses, announcing that all doses held in reserve would be shipped. But there are no plans to follow the U.K.'s approach of vaccinating more widely by pushing off the second dose.

Tabarrok attributes this to a failure to think in terms of tradeoffs.

"What economists are good at," he tells Reason, "is making decisions under uncertainty and scarcity. And, it's being hard-nosed in…thinking about probabilities, thinking about risk, expected value."

As usual government is just part of the problem, not the solution.  And as one of the comments to this stored states:

 

Quote

Although 3% of Americans have received covid vaccines in the past 6 weeks, 5 – 10 times more Americans have/will acquired immunity via covid infection during the same 6 weeks, and far more did so during the preceding 9 months.

While studies (including ones by CDC and TX Health Dept) have found/estimated that 3 – 10 times more Americans were infected with covid than have tested positive, due to increased testing in all states, that ratio now appears 3 – 7 times. So about 5 times more Americans are being infected for everyone who tests positive.

Herd immunity occurs rapidly after two thirds (65% – 70%) of people (in families, workplaces, communities, counties and/or states) have been infected or vaccinated. But even if/when/after half of people have been infected or vaccinated, the risk of new infection declined by 50+%, which is now occurring in thousands of communities, hundreds of counties and dozens of states, led by the Dakotas.

So by the time 10% of Americans receive covid vaccines, herd immunity will have already protected most Americans from covid.

But Big Pharma, Democrats and left wing news media propagandists continue to deceive Americans to believe that herd immunity can/will only be attained via mass vaccinations.

98 US counties now have surpassed a 13% covid rate, and appear to have already (or within days or weeks of) achieving herd immunity, long before vaccines will have an impact. (Data as of 1/15/2021)

Crowley, CO – 28.8%
Dewey, SD – 23.0%
Norton, KS – 21.8%
Lincoln, AR – 21.8%
Bon Homme, SD – 21.5%
Bent, CO – 21.4%
Chattahoochee, GA – 21.2%
Trousdale, TN – 20.7%
Lake, TN – 20.6%
Buffalo, SD – 20.4%
Buena Vista, IA – 19.6%
Eddy, ND – 18.2%
Ellsworth, KS – 18.1%
Dakota, NE – 17.9%
Jackson, AR – 17.7%
Childress, TX – 17.5%
Alfalfa, OK – 17.4%
Lee, AR – 17.1%
Lafayette, FL – 16.9%
Foster, ND – 16.7%
Nobles, MN – 16.6%
Big Horn, MT – 16.6%
Seward, KS – 16.5%
Hale, TX – 16.5%
Menominee, WI – 16.4%
Lassen, CA – 16.4%
Pawnee, KS – 16.1%
Sheridan, KS – 16.0%
Logan, CO – 16.0%
Ford, KS – 15.8%
Walsh, ND – 15.8%
Wayne, TN – 15.6%
Texas, OK – 15.6%
Aurora, SD – 15.5%
Lee, KY – 15.5%
Morton, ND – 15.3%
Stutsman, ND – 15.3%
Potter, SD – 15.2%
Yuma, AZ – 15.1%
Nelson, ND – 15.0%
McKinley, NM – 14.9%
Santa Cruz, AZ – 14.8%
Lyman, SD – 14.7%
Burleigh, ND – 14.7%
East Carroll, LA – 14.7%
Lubbock, TX – 14.6%
Benson, ND – 14.5%
Dickey, ND – 14.5%
Sioux, ND – 14.4%
Davison, SD – 14.3%
Chicot, AR – 14.3%
Lincoln, CO – 14.2%
Madison, ID – 14.2%
Rolette, ND – 14.1%
Toole, MT – 14.0%
Crocket, TX – 14.0%
Cass, IL – 14.0%
Oglala Lakota, SD – 13.9%
Plymouth, IA – 13.9%
Griggs, ND – 13.8%
Finney, KS – 13.8%
Nemaha, KS – 13.8%
Colfax, NE – 13.8%
Faulk, SD – 13.7%
East Feliciana, LA – 13.7%
Lawrence, IL – 13.6%
Beadle, SD – 13.6%
Minnehaha, SD – 13.6%
Woodward, OK – 13.6%
Douglas, SD – 13.5%
Haywood, TN – 13.5%
Stark, ND – 13.5%
Lamb, TX – 13.5%
Gove, KS – 13.4%
Fayette, IL – 13.4%
Grand Forks, ND – 13.4%
Scurry, TX – 13.4%
Kearny, KS – 13.3%
Crawford, IA – 13.3%
Ramsey, ND – 13.3%
Potter, TX – 13.3%
Republic, KS – 13.2%
Golden Valley, ND – 13.2%
Whitfield, GA – 13.2%
Sanborn, SD – 13.1%
Henry, IA – 13.1%
Culberson, TX – 13.1%
Maverick, TX – 13.1%
Dodge, WI – 13.1%
Coddington, SD – 13.0%
Sevier, AR – 13.0%
Pickett, TN – 13.0%
Obion, TN – 13.0%
Sioux, IA – 13.0%
Jones, IA – 13.0%
Towner, ND – 13.0%
Madison, LA – 13.0%
Clinton, IL – 13.0%

 

[swordfish]

On 11/30/2020 at 1:57 PM, swordfish said:

Ok - Here are some numbers from https://www.census.gov/popclock/ 

and 

https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6 to put into your hat.

US Population:  331,780,397

US Covid Cases: 13,421,114 (4.0 % of the population have or have had the virus - Since March)

US Covid Deaths:  267,080 (1.9 % of CASES have actually died from the virus or had the virus while dying from something else)

Which (if my math is accurate) means everyone reading this has 8.05 to the -04 power (wtf that number is, but it is really small) % chance of dying from the virus.  Higher if you are elderly.  But nevermind that - Stay home and mask up!!

OH - and disregard the the fact that the CDC is now producing PIC death numbers now as one figure.  (Pneumonia, Influenza, Coronavirus) 

Update time:  1-18-21

US Population:  332,915,073 **went up**

US Covid Cases: 24,018,793 (7.2% of the population have or have had the virus - Since March of 2020) **Went up **

US Covid Deaths:  398,307 (1.6 % of CASES have actually died from the virus or had the virus while dying from something else) **% of case death went down)

Which (if my math is accurate) means everyone reading this has 1.20 to the -03 power (AGAIN - wtf that number is, but it is really small) % chance of dying from the virus.  Higher if you are elderly.  

OH - and DON'T FORGET the the fact that the CDC is actually producing PIC death numbers as one figure.  (Pneumonia, Influenza, Coronavirus) but never mentions that in the press......

[DanteEstonia]

On 1/18/2021 at 12:41 PM, swordfish said:

US Population:  332,915,073 **went up**

Population ALWAYS GOES UP. PEOPLE DON'T STOP HAVING KIDS.

[DanteEstonia]

On 1/18/2021 at 12:41 PM, swordfish said:

US Covid Deaths:  398,307 (1.6 % of CASES have actually died from the virus or had the virus while dying from something else) **% of case death went down)

So let's compare this to other diseases:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/03/04/coronavirus-flu-comparison/

Quote

Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, has said that the mortality rate for seasonal flu is 0.1 percent.

 

[Muda69]

12 hours ago, DanteEstonia said:

Population ALWAYS GOES UP. PEOPLE DON'T STOP HAVING KIDS.

Not always.  Not if the birth rate doesn't keep up with the death rate.  Case in point:  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/24/world/asia/japan-birthrate-shrink.html#:~:text=Japan has 512%2C000 fewer people,of Japan's increasing demographic challenges.

Quote

Japan has 512,000 fewer people this year than last, according to an estimate released on Tuesday by the country’s welfare ministry. That’s a drop of more than the entire population of the city of Atlanta.

The numbers are the latest sign of Japan’s increasing demographic challenges.

Births in the country — which are expected to drop below 900,000 this year — are at their lowest figure since 1874, when the population was about 70 percent smaller than its current 124 million.

The total number of deaths, on the other hand, is increasing. This year, the figure is expected to reach almost 1.4 million, the highest level since the end of World War II, a rise driven by the country’s increasingly elderly population.

 

[Muda69]

Yet Another Study Shows—Yet Again—That Lockdowns Don't Work

https://mises.org/wire/yet-another-study-shows-yet-again-lockdowns-dont-work

Quote

Although advocates for covid-19 lockdowns continue to insist that they save lives, actual experience keeps suggesting otherwise.

On a national level, just eyeballing the data makes this clear. Countries that have implemented harsh lockdowns shouldn’t expect to have comparatively lower numbers of covid-19 deaths per million.

In Italy and the United Kingdom, for example, where lockdowns have been repeatedly imposed, death totals per million remain among the worst in the world. Meanwhile, in the United States, states with with the most harsh lockdown rules—such as New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts are among the states with the worst total deaths.

Lockdown advocates, of course, are likely to argue if researchers control for a variety of other variables, then we’re sure to see that lockdowns have saved millions of lives. Yet research keeps showing us this simply isn’t the case.

The latest study to show the weakness of the prolockdown position appeared this month in the European Journal of Clinical Investigation, authored by Eran Bendavid, Christopher Oh, Jay Bhattacharya, and John P.A. Ioannidis. Titled “Assessing Mandatory Stay-at-Home and Business Closure Effects on the Spread of COVID-19,” the authors compare “more restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions” (mrNPI) and “less restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions" (lrNPI). More restrictive interventions include mandatory stay-at-home orders and forced business closures. Less restrictive measures include “social distancing guidelines, discouraging of international and domestic travel, and a ban on large gatherings.” The researchers compare outcomes at the subnational level in a number of countries, including England, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United States. This is then compared against countries with less restrictive measures, primarily Sweden and South Korea, where stay-at-home orders and business closures were not widely implemented.

The conclusion:

We find no clear, significant beneficial effect of mrNPIs on case growth in any country …In none of the 8 countries and in none out of the 16 comparisons (against Sweden or South Korea) were the effects of mrNPIs significantly negative (beneficial). The point estimates were positive (point in the direction of mrNPIs resulting in increased daily growth in cases.

That is, the more restrictive lockdown measures pointed to worse outcomes.

This data suggests the theoretical underpinnings of the lockdown philosophy is wrong. As summed up by Bendavid, et al,

The conceptual model underlying this approach is that, prior to meaningful population immunity, individual behavior is the primary driver of reductions in transmission rate, and that any NPI may provide a nudge towards individual behavior change, with response rates that vary between individuals and over time. lrNPIs could have large anti-contagion effects if individual behavioral response is large, in which case additional, more restrictive NPIs may not provide much additional benefit. On the other hand, if lrNPIs provide relatively small nudges to individual behavior, then mrNPIs may result in large behavioral effects at the margin, and large reductions in the growth of new cases.

Translation: mild measures encouraging caution on exposure to others probably lessens the spread. Therefore, more stringent measures will surely do an even better job of limiting the spread!

But this doesn’t appear to be the case. Rather, the authors suggest those areas with lower covid mortality are areas where the public pursued low-hanging fruit in terms of slowing the spread. This included cancelling large, crowded events, and limiting travel. More stringent requirements on top of this appeared to produce no beneficial effect, and, if anything, had the opposite of the intended effect.

This study, of course, is just the latest in a long line of similar studies calling into question the assumption—for it is only an assumption—that harsh lockdowns lower mortality.

For example, back in May, researchers in The Lancet concluded that “hard lockdowns” don’t “protect old and frail” people, nor do they decrease mortality from Covid-19. Later, a July study in The Lancet stated: “The authors identified a negative association between the number of days to any lockdown and the total reported cases per million, where a longer time prior to implementation of any lockdown was associated with a lower number of detected cases per million.”

In an August 1 study, also published by The Lancet, the authors concluded, “Rapid border closures, full lockdowns, and wide-spread testing were not associated with COVID-19 mortality per million people.”

A June study published in Advance by Stefan Homburg and Christof Kuhbandner found that the data “strongly suggests" that

the UK lockdown was both superfluous (it did not prevent an otherwise explosive behavior of the spread of the coronavirus) and ineffective (it did not slow down the death growth rate visibly).

In fact, the overall trend of infection and death appears to be remarkably similar across many jurisdictions regardless of what nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are taken by policymakers.

In a paper published with the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), authors Andew Atkeson et al.found that covid-19 deaths followed a similar pattern “virtually everywhere in the world” and that “Failing to account for this familiar pattern risks overstating the importance of policy mandated NPIs for shaping the progression of this deadly pandemic.”

Refusing to be daunted by these holes in the official narrative, lockdown advocates often insist that lockdowns must be tolerated because “it’s better to be safe than sorry.”

But this is a highly questionable notion as well.

Lockdowns and other forms of mandated isolation bring with them a host of health problems of their own. As Bendavid, et al note, restrictive NPIs:

Include[e] hunger, opioid-related overdoses, missed vaccinations, increase in non-COVID diseases from missed health services, domestic abuse, mental health and suicidality, as well as a host of economic consequences with health implications– it is increasingly recognized that their postulated benefits deserve careful study.

Perhaps not surprisingly, data on excess mortality during the covid-19 pandemimc suggests only two-thirds of excess mortality can be medically connected to covid-19. As explained in a study in JAMA:

Some people who never had the virus may have died because of disruptions caused by the pandemic,” says Dr. Steven H. Woolf, the director emeritus of the Virginia university’s Center on Society and Health and first author of the study. “These include people with acute emergencies, chronic diseases like diabetes that were not properly cared for, or emotional crises that led to overdoses or suicides.”

Increase in dementia deaths were especially notable.

And these effects can also be felt in the long term, and as I showed in an April 30 article, unemployment kills. Economic crises, such as this one made worse by mandatory shutdowns and stay-at-home orders, leads countless “years of life lost” through more suicide, heart disease, and drug overdoses.

Moreover, given the nature of the shutdowns and who is affected, this has lopsidedly affected women and especially Hispanic women, who are heavilty represented among the workforce behind the service industry businesses shut down by government-imposed business closures.

The cumulative effect can be quite large. In a new study from Francesco Bianchi, Giada Bianchi, and Dongho Song from the National Bureau of Economic Research, the authors conclude that the economic fallout—in terms of unemployment and its effects—will lead to nearly 900,000 deaths over the next 15 years.

Of course, not all of the economic pain that coincided with the covid-19 panic of 2020 can be blamed on forced shutdowns. Many people would have likely minimized contact with others voluntarily out of fear of the disease. This would have indeed caused economic distortions and greater unemployment in some sectors of the economy.

But, as Bianchi, et al admit, the lockdowns “contributed to further reduce economic activity” above and beyond normal voluntary reactions to covid-19. Combining these facts with what we know from the new Bendavid study—namely that voluntary measures accomplished the bulk of mitigation—suggests the "further reduction" in economic activity produced no additional health benefits. That is, the portion of economic destruction wrought by forced shutdowns was inflicted upon the public for nothing. 

Prior to 2020, of course, this was common knowledge. In a 2006 paper in Biosecurity and Bioterrorism called “Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza” by Thomas V. Inglesby, Jennifer B. Nuzzo, Tara O’Toole, and D.A. Henderson. The authors conclude:

The negative consequences of large-scale quarantine are so extreme (forced confinement of sick people with the well; complete restriction of movement of large populations; difficulty in getting critical supplies, medicines, and food to people inside the quarantine zone) that this mitigation measure should be eliminated from serious consideration.

Yet, “public health” bureaucracts suddenly decided in 2020 that decades of research was to be thrown out the window, and lockdowns were to be imposed on hundreds of millions of human beings.

Mantaory Lockdowns vs. Voluntary Social Distancing

It should be noted that none of these researchers questioning the lockdown narrative expresses any problem with voluntary measures to reduce exposure to disease. Few are even likely to oppose measures like avoiding mass indoor gatherings of crowds.

But those sorts of measures are fundamentally different from mandated business closures and stay-at-home orders. The problem with mandatory lockdowns—in contrast to voluntary social distancing—is highlighted by the fact that they indiscriminately rob vulnerable populations of the services and assistance they need. And by "volnerable populations" I mean anyone who is vulnerable to any life threatening condition. Although we're being conditioned to believe that deaths from covid are the only deaths worth noticing, the fact is the world includes people who are vulnerable to suicide, to drug overdoses, and to economic ruin—which brings countless secondary effects in the form of health problems. By denying these people the freedom to seek an income and secure the social and medical support they need during lockdowns, we are essentially saying those people are expendible, and it's better to tilt the scales in favor of covid patients. 

But as the mounting evidence discussed above suggests, the lodckdowns don't even produce the desired effects. So vulnerable people suffering from depression, untreated cancer, and other life-threatening conditions were forced to simply suffer un-aided for no justifiable reason. This was done to fit a political narrative, but it was based on a batch of bad assumptions, half-baked science, and the arrogance of politicians. 

 

[swordfish]

Yet, “public health” bureaucrats suddenly decided in 2020 that decades of research was to be thrown out the window, and lockdowns were to be imposed on hundreds of millions of human beings.

Yeahbut......Science.....aaaannnndddd Dr. Fauci......we need to get rid of Trump.......Yeah - IT'S TRUMPS FAULT.......

[swordfish]

https://nypost.com/2021/01/28/ny-nursing-home-covid-deaths-50-higher-than-stated-ag-probe/

New York’s nursing-home death toll from COVID-19 may be more than 50 percent higher than officials claim — because Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s administration hasn’t revealed how many of those residents died in hospitals, state Attorney General Letitia James announced Thursday.

In a damning, 76-page report, James also said that some unidentified nursing homes apparently underreported resident fatalities to the state Department of Health and failed to enforce infection-control measures — with more than 20 currently under investigation.

The bombshell findings could push the current DOH tally of 8,711 deaths to more than 13,000, based on a survey of 62 nursing homes that found the state undercounted the fatalities there by an average of 56 percent.

The report further notes that at least 4,000 residents died after the state issued a controversial, March 25 Cuomo administration mandate for nursing homes to admit “medically stable” coronavirus patients — which James said “may have put residents at increased risk of harm in some facilities.”

“As the pandemic and our investigations continue, it is imperative that we understand why the residents of nursing homes in New York unnecessarily suffered at such an alarming rate,” James said.

“While we cannot bring back the individuals we lost to this crisis, this report seeks to offer transparency that the public deserves and to spur increased action to protect our most vulnerable residents.”

Vivian Zayas — who founded the Voices for Seniors advocacy group after her mom, who lived in a Long Island nursing home, died of COVID-19 last year — said that “our jaws dropped” upon reading James’ report.

“The attorney general’s report shows that Cuomo’s book on his great leadership during the pandemic is a fraud,” she said.

“It’s a fraud and insult to the families. He’s a fraud and his book is a fraud.”

Asked about the finding during a morning news conference, Mayor Bill de Blasio said, “We have to make sense of this. We have to get the full truth. … And we have to be honest about the numbers.”

“These are our loved ones that we lost,” de Blasio said.

“It’s someone’s grandma, it’s someone’s mother or father, aunt or uncle. This is families missing someone dear to them.”

He added: “Among all the other pain that we went through in 2020, this was arguably the worst part of it.”

Bill Hammond of the Empire Center, a government watchdog group that has sued the state DOH for access to its data on the deaths of all nursing home residents, called James’ report “independent confirmation of a lot of the concerns and criticisms that have been raised.”

“It highlights major discrepancies in the reporting on deaths and makes clear that state policy and oversight of nursing homes was at least one factor in the tragic loss of life,” he said.

Cuomo’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment, with a spokesperson saying officials were still reviewing James’ report.

But Cuomo, despite the controversial March directive issued by his Health Commissioner Dr. Howard Zucker, has repeatedly acknowledged the danger that the coronavirus posed to nursing homes and their elderly residents.

“All you need is one person — an air-conditioning repairman, a delivery person —  and once that virus gets in the nursing home, it’s fire through dry grass,” he said in June.

The following month — amid sustained outrage over the March 25 directive, which was revoked on May 10 — the DOH issued a report blaming the spread of the coronavirus in nursing homes on asymptomatic staffers.

James’ report does not increase the number of overall deaths in the Empire State from the coronavirus, which stands at an estimated 42,887 confirmed and suspected COVID-19 cases, according to Johns Hopkins University case tracker.

The state DOH puts the number at 34,579, but that tally only includes confirmed deaths.

James’ report shows that nursing homes were even deadlier than previously thought — potentially accounting for nearly one in every three coronavirus fatalities in the state.

The report also revealed that many nursing homes mishandled patients sick with the disease by failing to properly isolate residents who tested positive for COVID-19.

In addition, it says that nursing home managers often failed to screen and test employees for the virus, demanding that sick staff continue to care for residents or face punishment or termination.

Sad.  Not at all surprised though.

Right Wing Conspiracy Theory - In order to get the numbers up quickly to scare the public into submission so this was his way to support the overall Left-wing plan to get Trump out of office.....

 

 

[swordfish]

Governor Cuomo's response - "Who cares, - they died."

https://nypost.com/2021/01/29/gov-cuomo-blames-politics-amid-covid-19-nursing-home-report/

 

“But who cares — 33 [percent], 29 [percent] — died in the hospital, died in a nursing home? They died.”

During a news conference in Albany, Cuomo also defensively claimed, “Where this starts, frankly, is a political attack.”

Cuomo blames ‘politics’ amid damning COVID nursing home report by Dem AG

Cuomo repeatedly tried to blame officials from the administration of former President Donald Trump, specifically citing former Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Michael Caputo, whom the governor described as a protege of veteran Republican strategist Roger Stone.

Cuomo also repeated his assertion that the directive was based on federal guidance and said, “I believe everyone did the best they could.”

“I believe the federal government, the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], gave the best guidance they could, based on the information they had,” he said.

“I believe everyone did the best they could.”  (Now that the election is over, I can say that)

 

[Muda69]

Boris Johnson Is Doling Out £10,000 Fines for Starting Snowball Fights During COVID-19

https://reason.com/2021/01/29/boris-johnson-uk-government-fines-covid-restrictions-snowball-fights/

Quote

"We live in a land of liberty," said Boris Johnson, the prime minister of the United Kingdom, at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. "It's one of the great features of our lives that we don't tend to impose those sorts of restrictions on people in this country, but I have to tell you we will rule nothing out."

He definitely didn't rule anything out.

The country has now instituted one of the most rigorous lockdowns in the world. Under Johnson's guidance, those in England are forbidden from leaving their homes unless they have a "reasonable excuse," which includes shopping for food, going to a medical appointment, attending religious services, and exercising no more than once a day.

That may not sound like a far cry from some of the stay-at-home orders in the United States, namely the one California Gov. Gavin Newsom recently lifted. But Johnson's government ups the ante beyond even Newsom's, in that the former is not afraid to take harsh punitive measures against those who step out of line. West Yorkshire Police recently issued £10,000 fines—the equivalent of about 13,700 U.S. dollars—to two men, aged 20 and 23, in Leeds, England.

Their crime: organizing a snowball fight.

"It was a very welcome relief…a welcome laugh that people needed," said one of the men, who, along with his friend, used social media to advertise the gathering. "I know many students who are extremely depressed, and stressed with online exams and have had little support. Mental health is equally as important as physical health…so many young people and students really have nothing to keep them going at this point."

Household mingling is strictly prohibited in England—indoors or outdoors. Single adults who live alone and single parents with children under 18, however, may form "support bubbles," which must only consist of one other household. Fines of £800 apply for anyone who attends a gathering of more than 15 people, and organizers face that ruinous £10,000 fee.

That draconian approach is not the exception, but the rule. Earlier this month, two women in Derbyshire were "surrounded" by police after they drove five miles to go on a remote walk together. The catch: They were each carrying hot drinks, so the cops classified it as a picnic and increased the punishment. Driving for exercise is "not in the spirit" of the current era, said the police.

The women each faced £200 fines, which were later dropped after a backlash. Whether or not the two men in Leeds will be so lucky remains to be seen.

Police State.

 

[swordfish]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9208673/New-York-City-New-Jersey-declare-states-emergency-Winter-Storm-Orlena-hits-East-Coast.html

NYC is on course for one of worst snowfalls since 1869: Slow-moving nor'easter dumps two inches of snow EVERY HOUR - as Cuomo warns 'this is as serious as a heart attack' and says New Yorkers should expect to be home for two days

• If forecasts hold and New York City gets 24 inches of snow, it would mark fourth-biggest snowfall the city
• The last time it snowed more than 24 inches was in January 2016, when 27.3 inches of snow was recorded in Central Park - the record for a New York City snowfall; city also got a little over 24 inches on February 12, 2006
• More than 100 million people across the Midwest and Northeast face snowy conditions through Tuesday
• The worst of the weather for the Northeast is expected Monday when the heaviest of snowfalls are expected 
• Governors and local leaders declared states of emergencies in New York City, New Jersey, and Philadelphia
• More than 1,500 flights have been canceled from the Midwest to the Northeast due to winter storm Orlena  

Governor "Who cares - They died" Cuomo this week - 

 

 

[DanteEstonia]

On 1/29/2021 at 12:57 PM, swordfish said:

Governor Cuomo's response - "Who cares, - they died."

When I am running for public office, I will never use pronouns, as Tories, like you, will twist the meanings behind the pronouns. 

[swordfish]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9219379/Why-coronavirus-cases-falling-fast-New-infections-drop-44-three-weeks.html

Why ARE coronavirus cases plummeting? New infections have fallen 44% in the US and 30% globally in the past 3 weeks and experts say vaccine is NOT the main driver because only 8% of Americans and 13% people worldwide have received their first dose

• On Wednesday, a total of 110,679 new coronavirus infections were reported with a seven-day rolling average of 135,904, a 44% decline from the average three weeks earlier
• The decline appears to be a global phenomenon, with new infections falling worldwide for the past three weeks in a row, the World Health Organization said Monday  
• Hospitalizations have fallen nearly 30% from a peak of of 132,474 on January 6 to 92,880, the lowest figure seen since November 29
• Currently, 44 states are seeing a decline in cases with just Alabama, Louisiana, Montana, New Jersey, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania trending upward, according to Johns Hopkins data 
• California's 21,451 new confirmed cases on Tuesday are about one-third the mid-December peak of 54,000
• New York recorded 8,215 new infections on Tuesday, down from the record-high of 19,942 new cases reported on January 15
• Health experts say it is too soon for vaccines to be playing a major role in the decline with just 8% of the population having received the first shot and fewer than 2% being fully immunized 

(IMHO) - Totally predictable.  

1)  President Biden took office 14 days ago.

2)  President Trump is now FORMER President Trump.

Now we can start accurately counting actual COVID cases and not use the PIC (Pneumonia, Influenza, Covid) number anymore.  Which would mean we should start seeing an increase in flu cases.  (Again - IMHO)

 

 

 

[Muda69]

Mandated Pandemic Hazard Pay for Grocery Store Workers Prompts Store Closures, Lawsuits: https://reason.com/2021/02/04/mandated-pandemic-hazard-pay-for-grocery-store-workers-prompts-store-closures-lawsuits/

Quote

California's grocers are up in arms about city-level hazard pay laws that require them to compensate employees with "hero pay" wage premiums during the pandemic.

The California Grocers Association (CGA) has filed several suits in federal court to overturn these laws, while individual companies have announced that the new costs are forcing them to close stores.

On Wednesday, the CGA filed a lawsuit challenging the City of Oakland's ordinance. The law, which passed on Tuesday and goes into effect immediately, requires some grocers to pay their workers a $5 hourly premium on top of whatever wage they were making before.

The law applies to employees at any "large grocery store," defined as any store with at least 15,000 square feet that "sells primarily household foodstuffs for offsite consumption." The law only applies to stores operated by companies with 500 or more employees nationwide.

Employers will be on the hook for that hazard pay until Oakland qualifies for the "yellow" tier in California's Blueprint for a Safer Economy reopening scheme, which places counties in one of four color-coded tiers based on the severity of the pandemic. Yellow, the least restrictive tier, is supposed to indicate minimal spread of COVID-19.

The CGA's complaint makes two arguments against Oakland's hazard pay law. One is that it's preempted by the National Labor Relations Act. Another is that the law violates the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause by requiring only some grocery stores to pay the extra $5 an hour.

This, the suit says, has nothing to do with the city's stated goals of protecting workers and everything to do with rewarding a connected interest group of employees represented by the United Commercial and Food Workers (UFCW).

"By design, the Ordinance picks winners and losers. It singles out large grocery companies with unionized workforces (i.e., UCFW 5's members) without providing any reasonable justification for the exclusion of other employers or frontline retail workers," reads the complaint. "The City's stated objectives are merely an attempt to impose a public policy rationale on interest-group driven legislation for labor unions."

The CGA has raised near-identical claims in two other lawsuits. One was filed against the city of Long Beach last month. The other, launched yesterday, targets the city of Montebello. Both jurisdictions are requiring grocery stores to pay workers an extra $4 per hour in hazard pay.

On Monday, the grocery store chain Kroger's announced that it would be closing two grocery stores it operates in Long Beach, a Ralph's and a Food 4 Less, because of the increased costs imposed by the city's hazard pay ordinance.

A spokesperson for the company told the Los Angeles Times it had already spent $1.3 billion throughout the pandemic on bonus pay to workers and on safety measures to protect employees. From March through May of last year, the company provided a $2-an-hour pay bump, which was replaced by one-time bonus payments later that year.

Those store closures haven't dissuaded cities from moving ahead with their own hazard pay laws. Proponents argue any store closures are just a scare tactic.

"They absolutely can afford this increase," Los Angeles Councilman Paul Koretz said at the Tuesday city council meeting where a $5 hazard pay increase for grocery store workers was approved, reports the Times. "They absolutely should be paying this increase. And if they shut down stores, it's just out of spite."

It's a strange theory that grocery stores are greedy enough not to want to pay out hazard pay, but not so greedy that they don't mind shutting down profitable stores out of "spite."

The more likely possibility is that companies are shutting down stores that can't absorb a sudden, massive increase in their labor costs.

Grocery store workers are obviously operating under increased risks during the pandemic, and there's an understandable desire to want to reward them for that extra assumption of risk.

But COVID-19 doesn't eliminate the trade-offs and unintended consequences that come with top-down wage controls.

Some grocery store workers will see pay increases under these policies, while others will lose their jobs or have their hours cut. Consumers, many of whom are themselves struggling with the pandemic's economic fallout, will absorb these pay increases through higher prices or avoid them by shopping at stores that aren't subject to the mandates.

Even in a pandemic, central planning is hard.

"Hero pay" reminds me of this quote from "Hoosiers", the best sports movie ever made:

"Heroes come pretty cheap around here … if you can put a ball through an iron hoop, people treat you like a god."

We can now add "sling bologna from behind a deli counter" to the list of hero qualities......................

 

[swordfish]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9239805/Iranian-cleric-says-Covid-19-vaccine-turns-people-gay.html

Iranian cleric says Covid-19 vaccine turns people gay

• Ayatollah Abbas Tabrizian made the claims on messaging platform Telegram 
• 'Don't go near those who have had the COVID vaccine,' he wrote 
• Homosexuality is a crime in Iran and is punishable by execution  

 

Too funny not to share!  🤣  I guess the vaccine is now going to be illegal in Iran.

[Muda69]

AOC and Schumer Want Taxpayer Funding for Covid-19 Funerals

https://mises.org/wire/aoc-and-schumer-want-taxpayer-funding-covid-19-funerals

Quote

US residents whose family members died with or of covid will be eligible to receive $7,000 for funeral and related expenses, New York senator Chuck Schumer (D) and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D) announced.

During a briefing in Queens on Monday, February 8, the duo announced that $267 million of the federally funded funeral benefits would go to low-income families in New York alone. The package, Schumer added, is part of a $2 billion disaster funds program run by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that will provide benefits to families nationwide.

In her speech, Ocasio-Cortez explained that families “are having to pay for the storage of the bodies of their own loved ones” in addition to covering the funeral and burial expenses.

“This is wrong,” she added.

The announcement was received warmly on social media, so it wasn’t a surprise to see few people questioning the duo’s intentions.

But if the goal is to help those impacted by the pandemic, why did neither Democrat bring up plans to provide aid to the families who lost loved ones to various state governments’ responses to the coronavirus?

An Undeserving Bunch

Following the first reports of infections, most states had stay-at-home orders in place as early as March 2020. While some governors started lifting some of the restrictions in June, the majority kept them in place, tightening restrictions once again by Thanksgiving.

By now, we already know that the forced business shutdowns created a pattern of destruction that will be hard to remedy. According to Yelp’s data, 97,966, or 60 percent, of the 163,735 businesses listed on the platform that closed between March and August won’t reopen. To many of these small business owners and their employees, unexpected closures meant poverty, depression, and lack of access to healthcare, all problems that also lead to deaths.

According to some estimates, deaths associated with factors other than coronavirus make up at least one-third of all excess deaths during the pandemic.

Deaths of despair, which include suicide and drug abuse, have been on the rise everywhere in the country since the beginning of the lockdowns, as well as deaths caused by delayed or interrupted medical treatment. The rate of domestic abuse is also growing, putting a greater number of lives at danger. One would think congressmen would try to use the lockdown-related data to push yet another benefits package. However, they all seem to play down the deaths and suffering caused by governments’ shutdown orders.

Before pushing for funeral expense reimbursements for families whose loved ones had covid, Ocasio-Cortez tried to play down the Democrats’ support for lockdowns by blaming Republicans who don’t wear masks for “forcing” states to shut down.

"Here’s what’s ironic to me: all these Republicans, all these people who were anti-shutdown, were the same people who weren’t wearing masks, who forced us to shut down in the first place," she said in an Instagram Live video.

Despite her claims, two of the states hardest hit by the pandemic, California and New York, were also two of the first to enact mask mandates. But on Monday, February 8, the New York congresswoman had no words of sympathy for the families whose loved ones died due to the tyrannical mandates enacted by governors such as New York’s Andrew Cuomo, who now believes that lockdowns have gone too far.

“We simply cannot stay closed until the vaccine hits critical mass. The cost is too high," he tweeted following the inauguration of President Joe Biden.

If Schumer and Ocasio-Cortez are indeed working to help the low-income families who lost loved ones in 2020, they are letting down a great number of Americans (and immigrants).

 

[swordfish]

2 hours ago, Muda69 said:

AOC and Schumer Want Taxpayer Funding for Covid-19 Funerals

https://mises.org/wire/aoc-and-schumer-want-taxpayer-funding-covid-19-funerals

 

You gotta be kidding me.

I literally thought this was a joke until I read it, then checked it.  

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-relief-bill-2-billion-funerals-victims/

[Muda69]

Berkeley Dorms Guarded by Cops Who Only Let Students Out To Eat, Use the Bathroom, or Get a COVID-19 Test: https://reason.com/2021/02/10/california-student-dorms-guarded-by-cops-who-only-let-them-out-to-eat-and-use-the-bathroom/

Quote

Students at the University of California, Berkeley are paying for the privilege of living in police-enforced lockdown. The university, which is dealing with a surge of COVID-19 cases, has decided to use draconian means to make sure virus spread stays limited. "The self-sequester mandate for UC Berkeley students living in the dormitories, originally intended to end Monday, has been extended for another week, with stricter security measures in place to enforce quarantining," noted SFGate yesterday.

The new security measures include campus cops roaming dormitory halls looking for students leaving their rooms for unapproved reasons. The only permissible reasons to leave your dorm room at Berkeley are for meals, bathroom breaks, or getting a COVID-19 test.

Those reasons no longer include individual outdoor exercise as of this week. "We are working with the city of Berkeley to determine whether outdoor exercise may be permitted, and we will provide more information on this in the near future," the university told students.

Students found in violation of these rules face the threat of suspension and being thrown out of student housing. The mandate extends until February 15.

Aside from being bad for student morale and mental health, the scheme seems much more likely to lead to dicey encounters between campus security and students than to have any effect on public health.

 

[swordfish]

https://nypost.com/2021/02/11/cuomo-aide-admits-they-hid-nursing-home-data-from-feds/

Governor Cuomo’s top aide privately apologized to Democratic lawmakers for withholding the state’s nursing-home death toll from COVID-19 — telling them “we froze” out of fear the true numbers would “be used against us” by federal prosecutors, The Post has learned.

The stunning admission of a cover-up was made by Secretary to the Governor Melissa DeRosa during a video conference call with state Democratic leaders in which she said the Cuomo administration had rebuffed a legislative request for the tally in August because “right around the same time, [then-President Donald Trump] turns this into a giant political football,” according to an audio recording of the two-hour-plus meeting.

“He starts tweeting that we killed everyone in nursing homes,” DeRosa said. “He starts going after [New Jersey Gov. Phil] Murphy, starts going after [California Gov. Gavin] Newsom, starts going after [Michigan Gov.] Gretchen Whitmer.”

In addition to attacking Cuomo’s fellow Democratic governors, DeRosa said, Trump “directs the Department of Justice to do an investigation into us.”

“And basically, we froze,” she told the lawmakers on the call.

“Because then we were in a position where we weren’t sure if what we were going to give to the Department of Justice, or what we give to you guys, what we start saying, was going to be used against us while we weren’t sure if there was going to be an investigation.”

DeRosa added: “That played a very large role into this.”

After dropping the bombshell, DeRosa asked for “a little bit of appreciation of the context” and offered what appears to be the Cuomo administration’s first apology for its handling of nursing homes amid the pandemic.

But instead of a mea culpa to the grieving family members of more than 13,000 dead seniors or the critics who say the Health Department spread COVID-19 in the care facilities with a March 25 state Health Department directive that nursing homes admit infected patients, DeRosa tried to make amends with the fellow Democrats for the political inconvenience it caused them.

“So we do apologize,” she said. “I do understand the position that you were put in. I know that it is not fair. It was not our intention to put you in that political position with the Republicans.”

Assembly Health Committee Chairman Richard Gottfried (D-Manhattan) immediately rejected DeRosa’s expression of remorse, according to the recording.

“I don’t have enough time today to explain all the reasons why I don’t give that any credit at all,” said Gottfried, one of the lawmakers who demanded the death-toll data in August.

State Senate Aging Committee Chairwoman Rachel May (D-Syracuse) — who was battered during her re-election bid last year over the issue of nursing-home deaths — also ripped into DeRosa, saying her former opponent had launched another broadside earlier in the day.

“And the issue for me, the biggest issue of all is feeling like I needed to defend — or at least not attack — an administration that was appearing to be covering something up,” she said.

“And in a, in a pandemic, when you want the public to trust the public-health officials, and there is this clear feeling that they’re not coming, being forthcoming with you, that is really hard and it remains difficult.”

Assemblyman Ron Kim (D-Queens), who took part in the call, told The Post on Thursday that DeRosa’s remarks sounded “like they admitted that they were trying to dodge having any incriminating evidence that might put the administration or the [Health Department] in further trouble with the Department of Justice.”

“That’s how I understand their reasoning of why they were unable to share, in real time, the data,” Kim said.

“They had to first make sure that the state was protected against federal investigation.”

Kim, whose uncle is presumed to have died of COVID-19 in a nursing home in April, also said he wasn’t satisfied with DeRosa’s apology.

“It’s not enough how contrite they are with us,” he said. “They need to show that to the public and the families — and they haven’t done that.”

In addition to stonewalling lawmakers on the the total number of nursing home residents killed by COVID-19, Cuomo’s administration also refused requests from the news media — including The Post — and fought a Freedom of Information lawsuit filed by the Empire Center on Public Policy.

Instead, it only disclosed data on the numbers of residents who died in their nursing homes.

But after Attorney General Letitia James last month released a damning report that estimated the deaths of nursing-home residents in hospitals would boost the grim tally by more than 50 percent, Health Commissioner Howard Zucker finally released figures showing the combined total was 12,743 as of Jan. 19.

Just a day earlier, the DOH was only publicly acknowledging 8,711 deaths in nursing homes.

In a Wednesday letter to lawmakers, Zucker said the total number of nursing home residents killed by COVID-19 had increased to 13,297 That number jumps to 15,049 when assisted living/adult care facilities are factored in.

The controversy generated by James’ report led to an infamous news conference at which Cuomo callously dismissed the matter of where nursing home fatalities actually took place.

“Who cares [if they] died in the hospital, died in a nursing home? They died,” he said.

During Wednesday’s conference call, DeRosa said it appeared the DOJ was no longer focused on New York’s nursing home deaths.

“All signs point to they are not looking at this, they’ve dropped it,” she said.

“They never formally opened an investigation. They sent a letter asking a number of questions and then we satisfied those questions and it appears that they’re gone.”

In a prepared statement, Cuomo spokesman Rich Azzopardi said, “We explained that the Trump administration was in the midst of a politically motivated effort to blame democratic states for COVID deaths and that we were cooperating with Federal document productions and that was the priority and now that it is over we can address the state legislature.”

“That said, we were working simultaneously to complete the audit of information they were asking for,” he added.

The DOJ declined to comment.

 

In other words - "We lied to protect ourselves from the Feds, but it was Trump's fault"....

"The end should justify the means, since we got Trump out, so sorry bout that, let's move on".

 

 

[swordfish]

 https://nypost.com/2021/02/12/cuomo-aides-admission-on-nursing-home-coverup-sparks-calls-for-probe/

 

The stunning admission by Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s top aide that the administration withheld the state’s nursing home death toll out of fear that the damning numbers would “be used against us” by the feds has sparked bipartisan calls for a thorough probe — and prosecution of the governor.

“Governor Cuomo, the Secretary to the Governor, and his senior team must be prosecuted immediately – both by the Attorney General of New York State and the U.S. Department of Justice,” US Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) wrote in a statement.

“This bombshell admission of a coverup and the remarks by the Secretary to the Governor indicating intent to obstruct any federal investigation is a stunning and criminal abuse of power,” Stefanik continued.

Wow, just wow.

Honestly though, how far does anyone think this will go?  The Emmy award winning Governor who was portrayed as the rock during the early days of the pandemic while throwing stones at Trump when in reality Trump gave him EVERYTHING he asked for (remember the Javits Center, the Red Cross Ship, the 40,000 respirators he needed, that only 4,000 was actually used, and he was a hero for letting other states use a few).  I have to think this is worse than the boy who cried "Wolf".  He was crying "Wolf" AS the Wolf.

THEY ( and I mean the Democrat Party) needed this thing (COVID) to be as bad as it could be and the Emmy award winning Governor certainly helped advance the narrative.  IMHO - criminally......

 

 

[swordfish]

https://nypost.com/2021/02/12/ny-dems-want-cuomos-covid-powers-gone-amid-nursing-home-bombshell/

A group of Democratic state senators demanded Friday that Gov. Andrew Cuomo be stripped of his emergency authority to deal with the coronavirus crisis in the wake of The Post’s revelation that his administration covered up nursing home death data because of a pending federal probe.

“While COVID-19 has tested the limits of our people and state — and, early during the pandemic, required the government to restructure decision making to render rapid, necessary public health judgments — it is clear that the expanded emergency powers granted to the Governor are no longer appropriate,” the 14 lawmakers said in a prepared statement.

“While the executive’s authority to issue directives is due to expire on April 30, we urge the Senate to advance and adopt a repeal as expeditiously as possible.”

The move came shortly after Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins (D-Yonkers) issued a rare rebuke of the governor.

“Crucial information should never be withheld from entities that are empowered to pursue oversight,” Stewart-Cousins said in a prepared statement.

 

It appears the rats are leaving the ship, fearing it will sink.  IMHO - They can see this was actually criminal action by Governor and don't want it to rub off on them.

 

[Muda69]

State-Mandated Vaccines Are a Moral Minefield

https://mises.org/wire/state-mandated-vaccines-are-moral-minefield

Quote

The covid-19 pandemic we are living in has showed how much power states and governments can exercise on our lives. Several daily activities which we all considered as perfectly normal just one year ago—e.g., meeting friends at the pub, throwing parties, etc.—are now prohibited or discouraged by many governments around the Western world. However, we should ask, Is it legitimate for governments to coerce their citizens into whatever (the former believe) it takes to contain a pandemic?

Take, for instance, the issue of state-mandated vaccinations: Is it legitimate for government to force its citizens to take vaccines? I think it’s not, and I will argue why I think so—even though I have nothing against vaccination per se.  I simply maintain that whether to take a vaccine—or any other substance, for that matter—should be a free-willed individual choice, something government should have no concern with.

Individual Self-Ownership

As human beings, we are acting entities: in other words, our nature is defined by our ability to act—i.e., employing (scarce) means having alternative uses in order to achieve our preferred (alternative) ends. By its very nature, action (as I have defined it) stems from free will: animals and inanimate objects do not act—they simply behave according to instinct and physical, unmotivated laws.

What does our acting nature as human beings entail? It entails that we are to be self-owners—namely, our being (body, mind, will, etc.) is our own natural and absolute property. Why is it so? Because were we (human beings) not self-owners, we could not act. Indeed, any kind of action requires the employment of (at least) the following means: nature-given resources, time, and labor. Thus, were we to be deprived of our self-ownership, we could not possibly act. In fact, we could neither employ our labor—broadly conceived as any kind of human effort—nor decide how to allocate our own time, because neither of them—not being owned by ourselves—would be under our control. Thus, the very concept of action requires ownership over: (1) a physical body carrying out that action and (2) a mind purposively choosing ends (to be attained) and means (to be employed) during that same action.

That said, should the reader think my definition of human beings as acting beings arbitrary, I invite him/her to consider the following: you cannot disprove my definition. In fact, as I have already argued elsewhere, the action axiom cannot be disproved, because while trying to do so, one would be acting as well, thus engaging in a performative contradiction—and that’s why action is an axiomatic attribute of human nature.1

We reach, hence, a first philosophically very intuitive answer to our opening question: state-mandated vaccinations, being an invasive act carried out by the government against individual self-ownership, are to be regarded as ethically illegitimate.

The Problem with a Positive "Right to Life"

That said, a skeptical reader might consider my concise argument so far as philosophical quibbling. So, let’s try to make an even more concrete argument. Consider the thesis generally upheld by advocates of state-mandated vaccination: government must have the prerogative to impose vaccination, because otherwise people not willing to take vaccines would not only potentially harm themselves, but even cause damage to immunodeficient people who cannot—because of their unfortunate health—take vaccines themselves. Hence, the argument goes, in order to preserve the “right to life” (or “right to health”) of the latter, government—representing the majority of people—can legitimately vaccinate unwilling people.

But try to think carefully about this argument—especially the “right to life” part. How do we define this “right to life” we are dealing with? Are we to define it as a “positive” right—i.e., a right giving someone (say, A) a valid claim to impose upon someone else (say, B) a positive command? In other words, do we think that rights can take the form of “A can insist on B doing such and such, and if B refuses, his refusal is to be considered an aggression against A”?

Of course, if we accept the most fundamental of all rights—the right to self-ownership, which stems from the irrefutable action axiom—we cannot conceive of rights as “positive.” In fact, any “positive” right—being an invasive act against individual self-ownership—is clearly a prima facie violation of individual “natural” rights. There is no place, in the libertarian natural ethics stemming from the action axiom, for A to coerce B into doing something against B’s own free will.

As Rothbard very lucidly explained it,

it is impermissible to interpret the term “right to life,” to give one an enforceable claim to the action of someone else to sustain that life. In our terminology, such a claim would be an impermissible violation of the other person’s right of self-ownership….[T]he very concept of “rights” is a “negative” one, demarcating the areas of a person’s action that no man may properly interfere with. No man can therefore have a “right” to compel someone to do a positive act, for in that case the compulsion violates the right of person or property of the individual being coerced….[I]n the free society, no man may be saddled with the legal obligation to do anything for another, since that would invade the former’s rights.2

 

 

To set forth the argument against state-mandated vaccinations even more cogently, think of a less (I hope) controversial example. Let’s assume A is on the verge of death, and that he can be saved only by a blood (or bone marrow, or kidney, etc.) donation from B; would then A be legitimately entitled to B’s blood? I contend that he would not be, because B’s body is solely B’s property and any type of interference with his free-willed enjoyment of that property is to be considered an illegitimate invasion of his property rights. Quoting Rothbard again, there are “no human rights which are not also property rights,”3 and this holds true as well when it comes to pandemics and vaccinations.

Conclusion

Every human being has the natural (rationally derived from axiomatic premises) right to employ his/her own body the way s/he would like to; therefore, we cannot accept governments invading our individual selves. Moreover, rights can be only “negative,” that is, they can only entitle us to demand that others abstain from aggressing against us—i.e., from invading our own bodies and other material properties.

Governments have no right to coerce their citizens into taking vaccines. The decision whether to take a vaccine or not, whatever the reasons behind it might be (individualistic risk-benefit analysis, altruistic and charitable considerations, etc.), should rest solely on individual free-willed choices.

Agreed.