Early in the pandemic, National Geographic published an article about Mary Mallon, the Irish immigrant dubbed “Typhoid Mary” by a New York City tabloid in the early 1900s. National Geographic tries to be non-political, so the article focused on Mary Mallon’s role in helping clarify for the public health profession the dangers posed by so-called “superspreaders” in disease outbreaks, explaining how investigators linked her to more than 50 cases of typhoid fever, even though she herself never became sick. If we needed more evidence of the power of super spreaders, early in the Covid pandemic, a so-called super spreader event at a Boston hotel sponsored by the biotech company Biogen likely launched the spread of Covid to as many as 300,000 people.
I’ve been thinking more about Typhoid Mary over the last few months, as Covid has not only persisted in our lives, but has morphed into an ever-more abrasive political issue, with any number of states enacting prohibitions on actions that could limit super spreaders (or even regular spreaders), like requirements to wear masks, engage in testing, and even to become vaccinated. In the days of Mary Mallon, it would have been totally astounding to have major political leaders, like the governor of Florida, going to court to prevent schools from requiring their students to wear masks while in school at a time when children are getting sick from a pandemic at ever-increasing rates.
When you review the case of Mary Mallon, you realize how far we’ve transitioned as a society from focusing on protecting the health of the community at large to abandoning such protections in the interests of some strange idea of personal “freedom.”
Mary Mallon worked as a cook in wealthy New York households in the late 1800s and early 1900s, It took a lot of careful investigating by New York City public health authorities to link her with the transmission of 54 cases of typhoid fever, even though she never became ill herself.
When the public health authorities finally made the case that she was the cause of many serious illnesses, Mallon reacted something like the moms who show up at school committee meetings today and berate and threaten officials who want to require that students and teaches wear masks. According to the National Geographic article, a public health sleuth found Mallon in the Park Avenue household where she was the cook, “When confronted with his evidence and a request for urine and feces samples, she surged at (the investigator) with a carving fork.” Had there been an internet in those days, we might have heard her try to blame 1G or 2G wireless for making people sick, or possibly a conspiracy from the Austro-Hungarian empire, or maybe all the new horseless carriages showing up on New York’s streets. Millions of ordinary people would have become instant experts on the origin of typhoid and its treatments.
Mallon kept moving around as investigators closed in on her. “Finally, Mallon was escorted by (a public health investigator) and five policemen to a hospital where—after a nearly successful escape attempt—she tested positive as a carrier for Salmonella typhi, a bacteria that causes typhoid. This would later be confirmed by more tests. She was quarantined in a small house on the grounds of Riverside Hospital. The facility was isolated on North Brother Island, a tiny speck of land off the Bronx.”
Mallon fought her enforced quarantine as a violation of due process and went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. But according to National Geographic, she lost when the court refused to hear her case, saying “it must protect the community against a recurrence of spreading the disease,” The city would release her in 1910, on condition she not work as a cook. But she never could earn the same money doing other household chores, so she went back to cooking, under phony names. When she was connected to an outbreak of typhoid involving 25 people in a maternity hospital in 1915, she was sent back into forced quarantine, this time for the remaining 23 years of her life. When she died in 1938, nine people attended her funeral.
Even public health officials realized after their encounters with her that the penalties against Mary were a tad extreme, and the practice of locking super spreaders or sick people on isolated islands transitioned during the time she was kept forcibly isolated, into voluntary isolation at home. Today, of course, even that is seen as akin to capital punishment by some in our society, for whom it’s unthinkable to even demand that people in public or private settings wear masks to reduce the spread of Covid.
But isn’t it in reality a sign of respect for those around us when we decide to wear masks or get vaccinated? I found myself reacting that way yesterday when I was arranging for a utility repair person to come to my house to update some equipment. “Have you and others in your household been vaccinated?” asked the utility rep on chat. For just a moment, I pushed back mentally about the very personal question, but then I answered, “Yes.” After all, I wanted that repair person to encounter as little risk as possible coming into my home. As it turned out, the utility would still have sent a repair person, because the next question asked: “If anyone hasn’t been vaccinated, are you willing to wear a mask and keep at least six feet” from the repair person? Once again, I answered affirmative.
I have the same attitude about going into supermarkets, big box stores, and sending children to schools. Everyone who is exposing themselves to public contact—especially the cashiers and stock workers and teachers– deserves the respect of the public in the interests of avoiding Covid. What is so difficult to embrace about such basic principles of decency and respect for the community you live in? Unfortunately, we have moved so far in the opposite direction, of damn the community, that I suspect Typhoid Mary might today be viewed in certain areas of the country as a freedom fighter, and those attempting to look after the community at large as communists.
Hi David! Long time! Typhoid Mary is a sad story, and should give a little perspective on the blessing we have living in a time of antibiotics and vaccines.
I have asked these questions so many times about how to we love our neighbors well in this era of information overload and political tribalism. I keep coming back to “keep it local”, and do what is loving and in service of the person right in front of you, rather than trying to apply or analyze policies on a grande scale. I love what Dostoevsky says about this: “The more I love humanity in general the less I love man in particular. In my dreams, I often make plans for the service of humanity, and perhaps I might actually face crucifixion if it were suddenly necessary. … But it has always happened that the more I hate men individually the more I love humanity.”
So bravo for loving the repair guy, even though it involved answering a personal question about a vaccine that probably doesn’t eliminate your ability to spread Covid, or wearing a mask that probably doesn’t really do much good anyway. You helped him do his job, with hopefully a little less fear and hassle.
Welcome back, Shawna. I very much appreciate your “local” perspective. And your inclination to be kind and considerate of those who are vulnerable in this pandemic.
The science is clear that masks don’t work. https://mafaky.org/47mask/
It’s also clear that healthy people don’t get sick. Terrain > Germ
There is also significant evidence that masks do help, per this review of studies (note the last sentence–you need community involvement): “A primary route of transmission of COVID-19 is via respiratory particles, and it is known to be transmissible from presymptomatic, paucisymptomatic, and asymptomatic individuals. Reducing disease spread requires two things: limiting contacts of infected individuals via physical distancing and other measures and reducing the transmission probability per contact. The preponderance of evidence indicates that mask wearing reduces transmissibility per contact by reducing transmission of infected respiratory particles in both laboratory and clinical contexts. Public mask wearing is most effective at reducing spread of the virus when compliance is high.”
https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118
My point was that if masks are of just some help in reducing spread of the disease, we should use them when in large groups or in public places like stores and schools. Wearing masks is easy to do, and doesn’t take a lot of energy. If you’ve ever watched little kids wearing masks, they get very used to them very quickly, forget they are wearing the masks. It seems pretty clear in states with both mask and social distancing mandates, together with high vaccination rates, hospitalizations in this latest Covid variant outbreak are lower than in states prohibiting or limiting mandates, and lower vaccination rates.
The logical reason for all this flip-flopping 0n mask wearing is because actual science is being ignored. From the start, the available research has been rather consistent: Mask wearing does not reduce the prevalence of viral illness and asymptomatic spread is exceedingly rare and virtually nonexistent.
The following video presentation by Viral immunologist Dr. Byram Bridle is worth watching… Note the size of the largest small aerosol droplet (62 microns) versus the size of the virus (1 micron) versus the filtering capacity of various masks (80-500 microns)
As well, the side effects of wearing a mask are clinically relevant and they dare not be ignored and overlooked, especially in children.
mask efficacy
The link below goes to a website posting a letter from Okanagan Health Professionals, to the Provincial Medical officer Henry, Minister of Health Dix and British Columbia Premier Horgan. It is well written : rich in detail. Asking questions that a decent govt. would answer
Open letter from Health Professionals in the Okanagan
https://cariboosentinel.ca/2021/09/14/open-letter-to-dr-bonnie-henry-adrian-dix-and-premier-john-horgan/
On its second to last page, under Masks, it cites a website where the testimony given by Bonnie Henry – under oath – in the Hayes Commission 2015, quotes her admitting that any evidence re efficacy of wearing a mask is “scant”. For the last 19 months, Dr Henry told British Columbians that face coverings prevent transmission of the phenomenon merchandised as “SARS2 Covid19”. Yet she admitted under cross-examination [ in quotes set out at the Canlii website / below ] that she knew then, that masks are in-effective.
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onla/doc/2015/2015canlii62106/2015canlii62106.pdf
Dr Henry was involved in settlement of the labor dispute between the Health Sciences Association and the BC Nurses Union which ended in December 2019. In her capacity as Provincial Medical Officer, she signed the Memorandum of Agreement acknowledging that wearing a mask on the hospital floor was a matter of personal choice. That settlement relied on EVIDENCE obtained in the Kaplan Commission in Ontario. At pages 44 to 50 of his Report, Commissioner Kaplan ruled that there was not enough evidence either pro or con, to determine if the wearing of a mask made any difference to transmission of influenza virus on the floor of a ward. That ruling is the last word on the question in Canadian jurisprudence.
URL to Kaplan Report
https://www.ona.org/wp-content/uploads/ona_kaplanarbitrationdecision_vaccinateormask_stmichaelsoha_20180906.pdf
I know that Memorandum exists, because the head of the Nurses Union told me so, a year ago. She said I could not have it, because “it’s confidential”. The NDP administration has my 3 separate Freedom of Information demands for it. But refuses to obey the FoI & PoP Act … a law they brought in in 1993 !
All the while she was casting her spell … droning-on about “cases ! cases !! cases !!!” on live tv every day, co-ercing people to put it on …. she knew the face diaper doesn’t make a bit of difference to transmission of a virus.
The face of the SARS Covid HOAX = saint Bonnie-with-the-red-shoes © = is a consummate liar, having conspired with Dix, Horgan and Farnworth to perpetrate FRAUD upon British Columbians.
………. Quotes from Dr Henry’s testimony to the Hayes Commission
On cross-examination Dr. Henry reluctantly admitted (at paragraph 161 of the arbitration decision) that there was not a lot of evidence to support the suggestion that asymptomatic shedding actually leads to effective transmission of the virus.
At paragraph 178 of the arbitration decision, the arbitrator notes that Dr. Henry concluded after admitting that “I am not a huge fan of the masking piece”, that “there is not a lot of evidence to support mask use…”
At Paragraph 219 Dr. Henry’s evidence is summarized in part as follows:
“It is a challenging issue and we have wrestled with it. I am not a huge fan of the masking piece. I think it was felt to be a reasonable alternative where there was a need to do- to feel that we were doing the best we can to try and reduce risk. I tried to be quite clear in my report that the evidence to support masking is not as great and it is certainly not as good a measure.”
In the arbitration, the Nurses Union submitted that Dr. Henry was instrumental in the introduction of the “vaccinate or mask” policy in British Columbia (paragraph 256) and therefore Dr. Henry’s objectivity was suspect. The arbitrator preferred the evidence of other experts over Dr. Henry and her colleagues’ evidence.
The arbitrator noted that Dr. Henry defended the vaccine or mask policies as a way of preventing transmission from unvaccinated healthcare workers to their patients before symptom onset, or in cases of asymptomatic infection (paragraph 287). However, the arbitrator also noted (at paragraph 294) that while Dr. Henry stated there was “some evidence that people shed prior to being symptomatic and some evidence of transmission” but “there is not a lot of evidence around these pieces” two other experts who testified on behalf of the hospital, one of whom Dr. Henry acknowledged her expertise, both admitted that the evidence of asymptomatic spread was “scant”.
The arbitrator held (at paragraph 297), while “bearing in mind the concessions made about the quality of the evidence by Dr. McGeer and Dr. Henry”, that the following opinion of another expert was more accurate:
“Although asymptomatic individuals may shed influenza virus, studies have not determined if such people effectively transmit influenza… Based on the available literature, we found that there is scant, if any, evidence that asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic individuals play an important role in transmission.”
The arbitrator held that the patient safety purpose and effect of masking was not established on the evidence and that the “vaccine or mask” requirement was reduced to a “coercive tool”, a situation that would be troubling if made out. The arbitrator also noted (at paragraph 326) Dr. Henry’s recognition that the wearing of a mask could be reasonably regarded as a “consequence” for failure to consent to vaccination.
To this day, we don’t know if ol’ Mary was poisoning her bosses / customers over the years. If she wasn’t a killer, then maybe she is able to handle toxic foods better than her “clients.”
But blaming her based on stool & pudding samples was a great way for Rockefeller et al to promote the germ theory for profit…..while blaming us unvaxxed/unmasked/unsanitary super-spreader bioweapons for making everyone else sick. Similar to how subjective evidence was used to blame(“link”) a bunch of Ay-rabs for the demolition of 3 WTC towers, Pentagon & creation of that hole in Shanksville. I’m still confounded that you promote raw milk, which has been blamed for typhoid fever over a hundred years….but you admire Murderna for a virus that was “contrived” as the cause of all this pneumonia(everything except kitchen sink) the past 20 months.
I agree with you David, but I think you’ll have a difficult time with this post. This whole movement, which is based on anti-vaccine, got it’s impetus from the deceits about previous vaccines that DID have such additives as formaldehyde in them and WERE dangerous.
This new generation of shots is better; it relies on deep refrigeration rather than preservatives to increase shelf life, but the damage to shot reputation is done, and personal freedom for some, would seem to to take precedence over infecting and perhaps killing others.
Steve, you are certainly correct that I’ll have a tough time selling this post here. I’m not sure the difficulties with the Covid vaccine are entirely a function of problems with earlier vaccines. For the most part, even with their deficiencies, the earlier vaccines have reduced deaths and injuries to a much greater extent than causing them. I think at this point, opposition to the Covid vaccines has become a convenient and opportune issue for conservative Republicans desperate to prevent Democrats from claiming any success in reducing the Covid dangers.
You state, “I think at this point, opposition to the Covid vaccines has become a convenient and opportune issue for conservative Republicans desperate to prevent Democrats from claiming any success in reducing the Covid dangers.”
I agree with your statement above that this Covid narrative has definitely (from its inception) been politicized by both the left and the right. I disagree however with your Covid vaccine analogy… The Covid vaccine is readily accepted and promoted by both the left and the right in your country and Canada… Where they tend to differ is in the use of mandates and coercion schemes implemented to enforce the vaccines use.
No, Republican-dominated states like Florida, Texas, and others have enacted laws prohibiting any hint of vaccine requirements; for example, Florida wouldn’t allow cruise ship companies to require passengers have vaccines. Not coincidentally, these states have enacted laws making it more difficult to vote, or obtain abortions. That’s all in line with the Republican agenda.
David, in your comment I replied to you were referring to “opposition” to Covid vaccines not “requirements”.
Both Texas and Florida do not oppose the use of the Covid injection, they in fact recommend it … What they oppose are coercion tactics, mandates and passports and that is where democrats and republicasn tend to differ.
Let’s put it this way, Ken: By refusing to allow any requirements, or to allow any businesses or school districts within their borders to enact requirements (or any mandates, such as those requiring masks), the pols in these states are catering to anti-vaxxers, encouraging their vote. It’s all done in the guise of “choice,” but the pols know that there will never be any chance of approaching herd immunity in such circumstances, and the blame for continuing outbreaks can then be pinned on the Dems.
The following interview by Megyn Kelly with Dr. Jay Bhattacharya just goes to show the politicized and monetary driven nature of this “so-called novel” Corona virus disease.
So, when Mary came to work in a client’s home, did everyone in the household immediately come down with typhoid? Or did some of the rich people also remain healthy? Why were those healthy rich people not forcibly tested to see if they harbored the bacteria? Seems like a typical case of the poor being made scapegoats for the problems of the rich.
Today we have unmasked parties thrown by the Trumps, the Obamas, other members of the rich and famous, but it’s the Sturgis motorcycle rally or arena events that are called “superspreaders.”
You may want to read the National Geographic article I linked to. The investigation was pretty thorough, and the evidence was clear that the outbreaks correlated most convincingly with the presence of Mary Mallon. There have also been a number of books written about Mary, the most recent one just a few years ago, “Fever.” It portrays Mary more sympathetically than National Geographic, but no arguing with the investigator conclusions.
David,
There was a relevant and parallel event occurring at the same time that Mary Malone was imprisoned… the scheme to pasteurize milk.
As I stated in a previous comment, “History is indeed a matter of perspective”. And as I also stated from the beginning of this so-called pandemic, “attempting to control the spread of a virus, especially one that is air born, is futile and counterproductive”…
The 1906 book, “The Jungle” American journalist Upton Sinclair (1878-1968), depicts how working-class poverty, deep-rooted corruption and discrimination nurtured crowded and dirty living conditions. “Food supplies were unreliable, impure, and limited to such a degree that nutrition was an ongoing problem”. Clearly, if people were living in such squalor and under such stress it’s not hard to imagine the horrid conditions that livestock including milking cows were subjected to. The problem of disease and illness at that time was complex and multifaceted and required a complex and multifaceted solution. Pasteurization and quarantine were band aid and problematic solutions to deep-rooted issues.
Fear of disease led to public health hysteria and that hysteria coupled with a narrow militaristic approach to disease is what resulted in Mary Mallon (1869 – 1938) to spend the rest of her life in quarantine. Indeed, and it is that same attitude and approach that resulted in the controversy and division between raw milk and pasteurized milk adherents. A hysteria driven attitude and approach that exists to this very day and one that I personally have had to deal with because I chose to feed my children raw milk and refused to have them vaccinated. Which came to a head when certain people found out that I was feeding my premature twins a formula that consisted of raw milk, raw honey and fresh non chlorinated spring water from the well… I was considered an unfit parent by some, yet those twins grew into adulthood without well baby visits and without their bodies being contaminated with toxic vaccines.
Mary Malone was merely one of many unfortunate victims of a reductionist approach to disease, coupled with superstition, ignorance and discrimination. Most people tend to ignore the fact that Improved living conditions is what brought about a dramatic decline in diseases such as diphtheria, whooping cough and measles. What they also fail to recognize or comprehend is that the mortality rate for those diseases had declined almost to zero before any vaccines were developed for them. The fact that typhoid fever declined with no vaccine for it is a testimony in itself.
Thomas Jefferson sums it up well, “There is no justification for taking away individuals’ freedom in the guise of public safety
A vaccine had actually been developed for typhoid fever in 1896, before Mary Mallon was imprisoned, but it was never deployed in the U.S. because, as you suggest, sanitation improved significantly. You seem to be saying Mary Mallon should have been allowed to knowingly spread a serious communicable disease–your right, but I’m just glad you weren’t in charge then.
As for pasteurization, it became mandated after repeated failures by raw milk producers in big cities around the country in the late 1800s and early 1900s. The hysteria developed after repeated widespread outbreaks of disease. Yes, it may have been a bandaid, but it solved the immediate problem for big city leaders of lots of people, especially children, dying from preventable infections–an intolerant situation for most any political leader.
I’ve always been a big fan of Thomas Jefferson for his bravery and commitment in declaring American independence from Great Britain. But he wasn’t the be all and end all on political philosophy and governing…as just one example, he went along with permitting slavery in the U.S. Constitution and owned slaves until he died.
Sorry about that… I was thinking of the vaccine for typhus (1970) a different disease with very similar symptoms to typhoid. The vaccine for typhoid developed in 1896 wasn’t officially evaluated until 1950 and not widely used due to side effects.
Having read the National Geographic article on Mary Mallon, I have to say that it is in no way a comprehensive account of her work as a cook and her impact on the families she served. The investigator quoted, George Sopor started out with the idea that “typhoid can be spread by one person serving as carrier.” He was looking for confirmation of that bias, and he found circumstantial evidence in the fact that Mary Mallon had been cook for a few families that had members get sick with typhoid.
There is no information about how many people for whom Mary cooked did NOT get typhoid, nor about the health status of any other close contacts of those families. There is no information about what kinds of tests found Mary to test positive for salmonella typhi, and whether the other people in the household and their social circle were also tested, to see if anyone else could have been positive for the bacteria. There is no explanation as to why removal of her gallbladder was considered a “cure” for Mary’s “carrier” status. And there is no information about how widespread in general was typhoid fever during that time period, in the greater NYC area. (Just like the covid vaccine pushers remind us, you can’t conclude that a certain adverse event is caused by the vaccine when you don’t know what the frequency of that event – like miscarriage, or myocarditis – is in the general population.)
I see no evidence in the NG article that refutes my hypothesis that Mary Mallon was persecuted as a scapegoat for the health problems of the rich families for whom she was a servant.
You really seem to be objecting to process that led to Mary’s imprisonment. She sued for lack of “due process,” which is another way of saying she didn’t think she got a fair shake by the system. As National Geographic points out, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear her appeal. Case over.
excellent analysis, Rose B … just posing the basic questions that an objective forensic scientist would start with
Gee, David, I guess you would applaud the Dred Scott decision also, and say “Case over”? Or every single other decision? The US Supreme Court is now your god?
Good point. Certainly when it comes to racial issues, American courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have been during much of the 19th and early 20th centuries accomplices in such things as segregation and various discriminatory state laws. However, on matters of public health, it’s been a different story. Federal and state courts in general have long been supportive of regulators, inclined to trust their investigations and conclusions. That’s certainly been the case on matters involving food rights, including raw milk. Court have backed regulators based on much flimsier evidence than that developed by the Typhoid Mary investigators. So you may see holes in the investigation of Mary Mallon, but in the legal sphere, those decisions have held up.
Confucius say… man who wears mask alone in car…wears condom alone in bed.
Thought it was very funny.
That’s about as far as I get into this kicking of the proverbial bee hive.
It just does not make things any better.
What makes things better is this. When countries get their act together. Things are much much better.
Universal mask wearing when appropriate… universal vaccination. Denmark comes to mind. They are doing great. They are not divided and they believe in their government and love their queen.
I know this because I have family in Denmark. It’s not Tyranny! It’s trusted leadership.
It also helps to have universal nutrition programs and mandatory vacation time. Yes, part of their pay is put into an account for time off in the sunshine. The Danes understand that health is wholistic and starts with eating well.
They are not perfect but they sure kick our butts all day long. They are also happy.
Don’t be the Confucius guy ❤️??
what’s amusing, is = a generation after averting its eyes from ruling properly on the genocide of innocents then called for in Henry Kissinger’s “Global 2000”, the Supreme Court of the US of A is now making noises like it will reverse itself on Roe versus Wade.
Hey ! … things change
Physician for Informed Consent state…
“Table 2 shows that 0.45 mL of an undisclosed excipient is part of the composition of the diluted vaccine solution. Because the entire solution in a multi-dose vial measures 2.25 mL, that excipient comprises 20% of the solution and potentially 20% of each vaccine dose.
The undisclosed ingredient is also not disclosed in the vaccine package insert. If the American people don’t know the identity of an ingredient in an FDA-approved vaccine, how is informed consent possible?”
https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download?fbclid=IwAR2ceqQLD9ej_HTvh04aEubr4y1bgXCCFc9NG1O8gcTravvx54VXDRglnIk
Indeed, how can a family physician advise a client with allergies if he or she does not have access to a complete list of the ingredients in the injection? And likewise, how can governments in all good conscience penalize and fine businesses if they refuse to participate in state authored coercion tactics that threaten individuals with the loss of their jobs if they refuse to receive that so-called “approved” injection?
With respect to Mary Malone, she may have been the first to be labelled as a spreader, she wasn’t the only one. There were others as well who were labelled as spreaders and who apparently infected 2-3 times more people and resulted in more deaths attributed to Mary, yet they were not, for various reasons, treated as harshly as Mary because they had families/children to look after…
Mark,
Your Confucius quote excellently encapsulates the overall flip-flopping, contradiction and foolishness of this so-called pandemic…
It’s nearly impossible…if not impossible to
Hold a science based conversation on the topic of CV19. For very argument there are arguments against and for. The world of science is at war with itself. It is divided along with the rest of our nation. It’s nearly impossible to even quote scientists. So many are at odds with each other. Then there are the completely fake science groups that just make stuff up or misstate data or findings. It’s a new world with the internet and all the influencers preaching to their flocks.
Instead I look to international examples of countries that have addressed Covid and are now beyond it. Sadly… the USA has provided a horrible example of how not to conduct itself when under a challenge.
Mark,
Unfortunately, rather than encouraging objectivity and the freedom to question, those who control the dissemination of science including medical science have become more concerned with fostering consensus… And as Dr Michael Crichton stated “There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”
Consensus science when politicized and treated as doctrine fosters an elitist and tribal mentality where individuals including scientists are expected to tow the line and are no longer free to question and exercise differing points of view… Indeed, a mentality that has continued to be repeated throughout the centuries.
Galileo Galilei comes to mind in stating, “In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.”
Control, the prerequisite for power corrupts, absolute control, the prerequisite for absolute power corrupts absolutely… The essence of evil.
“What are the unintended consequences of vaccine passports?”
https://www.rebelnews.com/what_are_the_unintended_consequences_of_vaccine_passports?utm_campaign=el_comply2_9_24_21&utm_medium=email&utm_source=therebel
Ken,
But…. If a theory or hypothesis is to be trusted and beloved it must be repeatable.
That’s why consensus and peer review comes in.
One scientist with a wild theory is fine but if it can not be repeated by others then it is pretty useless.
I think that’s where things start falling apart.
One set of facts please. Gravity pulls and falls in one direction here on earth under normal circumstances. That’s toward the center of earths mass.
I think I can get most everyone to agree with that notion.
What I have a hard time with is when two people read a study and come to completely different conclusions. Some times this is entirely appropriate.
One example comes to mind. The Dr Chris Gardner study on lactose intolerance performed at Stanford years ago.
He concluded that raw milk did not have any traits that addressed lactose intolerance.
One look at the study design and data told a different story.
So I concluded that raw milk after the 8th day did start an acclimation curve.
The study stopped to soon.
Of the nearly 400 subjects that responded to the Stanford study only 16 actually made it into the project. What happened to the rest of the 370 subjects that had bad reactions to drinking pasteurized milk?
They were ignored.
One of the greatest faults of science is the bias that occurs in the attempt to serve political purpose.
True inquiry seeks the whole truth.
Mark
Mark,
Theories and hypothesis are to be questioned and challenged… If they are trusted and beloved then that is symbolic of devotion or if you will a religious belief.
Consensus/general agreement is fine I suppose until it is disproven… How many times throughout the course of history has scientific consensus been disproven? How many times has scientific consensus been used to marginalize, manipulate, control, and persecute people and scientists with a different point of view? And worse still, how many times has scientific consensus served as the justification for experiments performed on people considered inferior for the greater good?
Consensus aught not be viewed as the be all and end all with respect to the rightness and wrongness of a scientific Hypothesis or theory… This is exactly what led to the persecution of Galileo when he presented evidence supporting Nicolaus Copernicus’ mathematical model suggesting that the earth revolved around the sun (heliocentrism). At that time the scientific community backed by the government and the church used general agreement/consensus with Aristotle’s geocentric model as a basis to reject and marginalize Galileo’s supporting observations (via the use of a telescope) for the Copernicus model.
Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis, sometimes described as “the saviour of mothers” is another example. As a result of his opposition to medical consensus he was harassed by the medical community in Vienna and eventually dismissed from the hospital.
The list is endless… Individual freedom of expression is all important, once censorship and coercion rears its ugly head in order to defend a general agreement then you can be certain that something is terribly wrong and that truth is being circumvented. Michael Crichton’s sentiment with respect to consensus is more on target, “Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had… The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus”.
Ken,
I agree that your list of examples rings true.
The lens of true discovery also rings true. I think it is pretty well affirmed that the earth is so what round. Gravity pulls towards the center of mass or the earth.
Perhaps ignorance is the profound problem. We speak to early and before we get enough information to actually know.
I guess the biggest question is this: when does ignorance end and brilliant knowledge begin.
A struggle for another day.
Can someone among the vaccine skeptics explain a few of the contradictions around Covid vaccination:
-Why are monoclonal antibodies, which are lab-produced antibodies, okay, while vaccines, which are lab-produced proteins meant to stimulate the body to produce its own antibodies, verboten? This from an article about the contradiction quotes an infectious disease expert: “Pushing antibodies while playing down vaccines, he said, was “like investing in car insurance without investing in brakes.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/18/health/covid-antibody-regeneron.html
-Why are vaccine skeptics willing to ingest a medication unproven for Covid, which is used primarily for treating parasites in horses (ivermectin)? The Financial Times reported in a recent article (headlined: “Poisonings rise as Americans treat covid with anti-parasitic drug”) that the FDA has received 49 reports of poisonings and other bad reactions from ivermectin this year, more than double last year….and that’s likely an understated number; for example, New Mexico alone has had 26 overdose cases this year, versus 2 last year. Here’s a link to article, but FT has a very strict paywall. ““You are not a horse. You are not a cow,” the FDA tweeted last month. “Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”
https://www.ft.com/content/9715bd16-bcb2-4bfc-bbd9-b7316d787698
-And if you want to see how political the whole issue has become, a recent poll showed that 86% of Democratic voters have been vaccinated, vs 60% of Republican voters. That’s showing up in covid illness data as well–red states have much higher hospitalizations and deaths vs blue states.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/27/briefing/covid-red-states-vaccinations.html
I am puzzled as to why people would endanger their health with some Big Pharma meds, and not with others (vaccines).
“The Politicization of COVID, with Tulsi Gabbard”
“And that they have the freedom to do so” … Indeed, a concept that appears lost to those promoting this cruel, unreasonable and arbitrary use of power or control.
David, you’re making some very big assumptions here. I have chosen my whole adult life to forgo vaccines, just based on a distrust of the medical industry, partially born of my realization that “health insurance” should really be called “doctor’s pay insurance,” since it covered most procedures recommended by a doctor, but nothing outside of that, like healthy food, exercise, rest when you need it.
Once I discovered chiropractic, raw milk and homeopathy I seldom took any pharmaceutical drugs at all, and haven’t used any since a round of antibiotics in 2010 when I had a lyme tick bite, and I’m not sure I would even do that now. Hence, I would not be one to recommend any of the vaccines or the pharmaceuticals that have been mentioned by doctors around the world as beneficial in treating “covid.”
That said, there are more dangerous drugs and less dangerous drugs. Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, as formulated for human use, are quite safe and effective when used as recommended by physicians familiar with their use. Of course it’s dangerous to self-prescribe any medication when you don’t know the protocols that have been found effective and relatively safe. And the “clinical trial” that was done with hydroxychloroquine last year used 8 or more times as much as those physicians use, and the trial certainly looks like it was designed to fail. Even looking at a relatively safe drug like aspirin, you can see how that large a dose would be harmful.
I don’t know enough about the antibody formulas to make any evaluation of them, so I won’t try to. But your description of a vaccine as “lab-produced proteins meant to stimulate the body to produce its own antibodies,” is completely inaccurate if applied to the currently available covid shots. The ones most used in the US are the mRNA vaccines, which use artificial mRNA, enclosed in a PEGylated lipid shell, to stimulate the body to produce spike proteins similar to but not identical to the ones said to be on the surface of the SARS CoV2 virus (which has never been isolated and purified in order to fully determine what its components are–or if it even exists). Then those spike proteins are supposed to stimulate the production of antibodies. BUT neither of those things was proven as part of the mRNA vaccine trials.
As far as politicizing the issue, both Democrats and Republicans have been doing that from the start: the Dems hyping the dangerousness of “the virus,” and calling for stricter and stricter lock-downs and other measures “to protect the vulnerable,” since their schtick is to paint themselves as protectors of the people. The Repubs have taken the opposite schtick, and painted themselves as the protectors of “freedom,” while not doing much, on a national scale at least, to protect people’s right to choose their own medical treatments. Many Republican governors have taken executive measures to prohibit forced vaccination or mask wearing, but not all: Massachusetts has some of the most draconian covid rules, and has a Republican governor. So it’s no wonder that people’s opinions and behaviors will fall out along those lines, especially when people like you keep reminding them!
But don’t let the hype fool you. Resisting the Orwellian vaccine/ testing/ masking coercion is actually a bi- or multi-partisan endeavor.
Rose, appreciate the detailed response to my Qs. I respect your reliance on holistic practices and raw dairy, and I agree those can be helpful in strengthening one’s immune system, to help fight off the disease. If you’re questioning the existence of a virus as underlying the worldwide pandemic that’s killed nearly 700,000 Americans over the last year-and-a-half, I’m not sure there’s a lot to discuss in terms of the contradictions I pointed out. Chinese health officials published the genetic sequence of the virus in early January 2020; that step enabled Pfizer and Moderna to develop their vaccines in record time by creating the mRNA molecule, which provides a blueprint for proteins that act as antibodies. (My description was probably overly brief.)
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/01/china-releases-genetic-data-new-coronavirus-now-deadly
I just got home from a trip back east to attend a big food show.
On the flight I sat next to a hard core Republican. She was mid age and had just got married in Florida. It was interesting. She said she had just gotten Covid several weeks ago at her wedding and had become very sick. She said she did not get the Covid shot because it contained all kinds of things not good for you. As I sat next to her I noticed her obesity, her consumption of diet coke and bags of Doritos.
The contradiction between her concern for putting bad things into her body and what she does on a routine basis was stark.
I told her I got my Moderna as early as I could get it and am very happy about my vaccine experience. She said this: “you are a retired paramedic and you know about those things”.
Her entire presentation was very low intellect conflicted and clearly she followed a cult belief.
She also said she got married in Florida so she could be with Republicans and away from California.
Florida is where she got very sick from Covid.
Enough said.
Rose, I agree with you wholeheartedly. My mom says I had some shots as a child (I’m over 50 now), our daughter had one set and then I read a book by Dr. Mendelsohnn in which he laid the case for improved sanitation and nutrition being the reason childhood illnesses decreased (around the same time as vaccines were rolled out) and I did not have her take any more shots. As I work with young people today, I see so much loss of spark and energy and ability and in addition, I see so many allergies and asthma. Also, I saw family members who were vaccine injured. I have a niece who was progressing normally and then following a round of vaccines, began having multiple seizures and as a result will never be able to function normally in society.
What astounds me is that though I generally have voted republican, I have long been a proponent of small family farms, holistic health and living and alternative medicine and against big pharma, big ag and big government. Generally, in the raw milk world, we have shared those ideals, but now it seems like all those people are in favor of the pharmaceutical companies raking in billions of taxpayer dollars ($33 billion as of last months) on an EXPERIMENTAL gene therapy that has been causing astronomical numbers of adverse events and death which are being covered up and censored. And LOVE Biden’s choice of FDA czar who was head of MONSANTO!
I remember Mark speaking at food freedom rallies about the right to eat what you choose…seems to me that those in favor of the freedom to put the food of your choice in your body should also extend to medicine. And if you’re vaccinated and you believe it’s safe and effective, you should be fine, right?!
David,
The contradictions with respect to this entire fear and erroneous test-driven pandemic are mind boggling to say the least. Fear is indeed the harbinger of irrational behavior and contradiction.
Monoclonal antibodies and the neurotoxin Ivermectin are perceived options that I would personally steer clear of… along with several other toxic and harmful modalities (Remdesivir) promoted for treatment. That said, if someone twisted my arm and my only choice was between Ivermectin with an average cost of 24 dollars per patient and by far a far better and well-established safety record then Remdesivir with an average cost of 2000-3000 dollars for one five-day treatment then I think the answer is clearly obvious.
I too am puzzled as to why people would trust big pharma to produce a safe vaccine including these current so-called Covid vaccines, especially when considering the pharmaceutical industries previous deceitful track record and including the fact that that same industry has been granted immunity from liability.
The New York Times article you reference certainly does not jive with what is happening in Israel… The following article states, “Israeli citizens have been among the first to receive the rushed vaccine ever since it was made available. Now their government wants to use them as experimental guinea pigs for the even more hastily developed booster shot.
‘These people aren’t crazed right-wingers at all, many of them have been fully vaccinated and followed all the mandates up until now. These people are just not buying the lies anymore – they demand their freedom back.
‘The tyrannical health regime cannot hide the fact that natural immunity serves as much better protection from the virus than the experimental vaccine – and with no dangerous side effects.
‘In fact, one recent study by a team of researchers at Tel Aviv University showed the vaccinated are 13x more likely to catch new variants of the virus and are even MORE LIKELY TO BE HOSPITALIZED than those who have natural immunity.”
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/09/jab-broke-camels-back-thousands-protest-tel-aviv-israels-vaccine-passport-now-requires-citizens-take-booster-shot-considered-fully-vaccinated-video/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=PostSideSharingButtons&utm_campaign=websitesharingbuttons&fbclid=IwAR0MWclgSKxgH9ac6pwIlflNVRrhp_qwC0lRfe4RDred3JAUjKeUqL0m1Qc
What I was getting at in my comment about the contradictions is that many people are irrational in their decisions about preventing/treating covid. You say you’d take Ivermectin over Remdesivir to treat covid because it is cheaper and has a better safety record. But Ivermectin hasn’t been approved to treat Covid, so what kind of data do you have about its safety record in treating Covid? You seem to trust assertions from Robert Kennedy and Gateway Pundit over serious studies and data analysis.
I think you’re going to find Israel’s situation improving a great deal once they adjust to the fact that reducing Covid danger involves a combination of vaccination, social distancing, and masks…and once younger Israelis move beyond vaccine hesitancy. Where I live, in New England, and other areas of Northeast, Covid danger has been reduced significantly based on the fact that our area is approaching 80% vaccination rate and has kept some mask mandates, finally approaching herd immunity. Here’s an analysis comparing Covid dangers in blue states and red states:
“Vaccination has changed the situation. The vaccines are powerful enough to overwhelm other differences between blue and red areas.
“Some left-leaning communities — like many suburbs of New York, San Francisco and Washington, as well as much of New England — have such high vaccination rates that even the unvaccinated are partly protected by the low number of cases. Conservative communities, on the other hand, have been walloped by the highly contagious Delta variant. (You can find data for hundreds of counties here.)
“Since Delta began circulating widely in the U.S., Covid has exacted a horrific death toll on red America: In counties where Donald Trump received at least 70 percent of the vote, the virus has killed about 47 out of every 100,000 people since the end of June, according to Charles Gaba, a health care analyst. In counties where Trump won less than 32 percent of the vote, the number is about 10 out of 100,000.”
I suggest reviewing the data in this article–it’s very enlightening.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/27/briefing/covid-red-states-vaccinations.html
David,
The comparison I made for the two drugs was done merely to provide possible reasons as to why people are seeking the use of Ivermectin as opposed to Remdesivir. Ivermectin has been used on both animals and humans for decades. Despite the long list of side effects associated with its use, it is claimed to have a well-established safety track record superior to that of the antiviral drug Remdesivir. I tend to reservedly agree with that comperative claim. That said however, and as I stated at the beginning of my letter, I would steer clear of both Ivermectin and Remdesivir”.
Remdesivir (Veklury), although it too has been in use for many years to treat antiviral illnesses such as ebola, the extensive list of side effects should give us pause… notably those side effects related the drugs deleterious effect on the immune system and serious liver inflammation and damage.
Your emphasis on vaccines masks and social distancing “improving the situation”, is based on a reductionist perspective of disease that is flawed and misleading. I would suggest rather that the overall situation ill improve, not because of these toxic and clearly harmful Covid injections that are proving to be an abysmal failure with so-called immunity lasting less than six months, and disruptive protocols that are causing phycological and financial harm, but rather because of natural exposure… the true and only time-tested basis for lasting herd immunity. Tell me, will the powers that be willingly give credit where credit is due?
In the following video, Rand Paul (R-KY) challenges HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra. Although he equates natural immunity with the vaccine, he references an Israeli study that states that natural immunity “is actually better”.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4979775/senator-paul-asserts-natural-immunity-good-covid-19-vaccine
I did read the article… the New York Time continues to do what it does best during this so-called pandemic, politicize the Covid narrative and foster division.
I suggest you read the following letter posted on September 30 2021 by The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms as well as follow their reference to Government Covid statistical data for each of the Provinces in Canada.
“Justice Centre defends free speech, Dr Charles Hoffe, against College of Physicians”
https://www.jccf.ca/justice-centre-defends-free-speech-dr-charles-hoffe-against-college-of-physicians/?fbclid=IwAR0jtvtaW3MrmPL52gJC2iz1qrC9wndEL3u5KnhuNtG0pznd3p6u-IMUOUY
The letter states in part, “The Justice Centre represents Dr. Charles Hoffe, a rural physician from Lytton, British Columbia, who is under investigation by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia and the Interior Health Authority for allegedly promoting “vaccine hesitancy.” IHA suspended Dr. Hoffe’s emergency room privileges, resulting in the loss of half his income. Dr. Hoffe was accused of spreading misinformation about Covid after his office assistant posted a one-page Justice Centre Covid statistics fact sheet on the Lytton Health Centre noticeboard, which, using only government data, showed that the overall recovery rate from Covid at 99.97% is better than the rate for the seasonal flu… The investigation and disciplinary actions against Dr. Hoffe for expressing his concerns about vaccine safety occur against the backdrop of the recently announced mandate for vaccine passports in BC”.
This is the best interview of Dr. David Martin that I have listened to…
“Patents Prove COVID Fraud and Illegal Dealings”
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/10/03/david-martin-covid-fraud.aspx?ui=951cbd15371b1971775f4f53a24fc224c94efd6ee3d45899cddd34a4bfb2667b&sd=20111201&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20211003&mid=DM1008930&rid=1282253628
“Is COVID-19 a pandemic? Scientist discusses Canada’s all-cause mortality”
https://www.rebelnews.com/is_covid_19_a_pandemic_scientist_discusses_canada_s_all_cause_mortality?fbclid=IwAR1_L7Dg7Gdl1zh9jpsugQgPpfdAXZQmoKUCewBHD6pKM35W1aveRDxnWYg
Dr. Denis Rancourt looked at weekly all-cause mortality data in Canada by sex and by province, and concluded not only that COVID-19 was never a pandemic in Canada, but also that the way we responded to COVID-19 likely resulted in deaths of our elderly and young males.