Veteran Virologist Slams Mainstream Media’s “Misinformation” About An Effective COVID Treatment

To a media unrelentingly hostile to Donald Trump, this meant that the president could be portrayed as recklessly promoting the use of a “dangerous” drug. Ignoring the refutation of the VA study in its May 15 article, the Washington Post cited a Brazil study published on April 24 in which a COVID trial using chloroquine (a related but different drug than hydroxychloroquine) was stopped because 11 patients treated with it died. The reporters never mentioned another problem with that study: The Brazilian doctors were giving their patients lethal cumulative doses of the drug.

On and on it has gone since then, in a circle of self-reinforcing commentary. Following the news that Trump was taking the drug himself, opinion hosts on cable news channels launched continual attacks on both hydroxychloroquine and the president. “This will kill you!” Fox News Channel’s Neil Cavuto exclaimed. “The president of the United States just acknowledge that he is taking hydroxychloroquine, a drug that [was] meant really to treat malaria and lupus.”

Washington Post reporters Ariana Cha and Laurie McGinley were back again on May 22, with a new article shouting out the new supposed news:

“Antimalarial drug touted by President Trump is linked to increased risk of death in coronavirus patients, study says.”

The media uproar this time was based on a large study just published in the Lancet. There was just one problem. The Lancet paper was fraudulent and it was quickly retracted.

Keep reading

Only 42% Say They Will Submit To COVID-19 Vaccine, New Poll Finds

A new Yahoo News/YouGov poll has found that just 42 percent of Americans say they plan to get a coronavirus vaccine when it becomes available.

The figure represents an all time low, having fallen from 55 percent in early May, 50 percent in late May, and 46 percent in July.

Keep reading

New COVID-19 restrictions will be needed for anti-vaxxers

To anti-vaxxers, I have one message: our tolerance for your wilful ignorance is over. We cannot afford, morally or economically, to give any ground to those who choose not to be vaccinated against COVID-19.

Let me be clear. I’m not advocating that we vaccinate people against their will. That would be wrong. We must ensure that the safety of our community is the number one priority. That means that participation in everyday life cannot put others at risk. If you do not want to be vaccinated against COVID-19, you ought to bear the consequences of that decision.

As a community, we should consider to what extent we allow organisations to prevent those who object to being vaccinated against COVID-19 to enter their premises, participate in their activities and, in some circumstances, seek their employment.

Governments have gone some way to doing this by implementing policies such as withholding family tax benefits and preventing children from being accepted into childcare unless vaccinations are proven. Further restrictions would be a natural extension of these policies.

Restaurants could be allowed the right to refuse entry to those who are not vaccinated against COVID-19. Businesses, especially those involved in the care or service of vulnerable communities, might be allowed the right to refuse employment to those without a COVID-19 vaccination. Organisers of mass gatherings could deny the sale of tickets on this basis.

Keep reading

5 Ways “The New Normal” is Getting Worse and Worse

From mandatory masks to mandatory tests to mandatory track-and-trace, the roll-out is on. It’s been a big few days for the New Normal narrative and, through the deliberately cultivated haze of confusion, it’s not hard to see the world they want to build is taking shape.

Keep reading