Posted originally on the conservative tree house on December 26, 2021 | Sundance | 208 Comments
They know if you’ve been sleeping… They know if you’re awake… They know if you’ve been vaxxed or not, So get vaxxed or meet the state.
Yes, the British people are about to discover how non-private their medical history actually is. U.K. authorities discussing ways to send vaccination and booster compliance squads to the homes of the unvaccinated.
(UK Daily Mail) – Door-to-door teams armed with Covid jabs will be sent to the homes of unvaccinated Britons in plans being considered by Ministers to reach the estimated five million people yet to be inoculated.
Discussions between the Department of Health, NHS England and No 10 over the past week have looked at a nationwide drive to send vaccine teams to areas with low uptake rates as a crucial way to avoid lockdown and other restrictions.
It is also seen as a way to get jabs to rural areas or households where people cannot easily get to a vaccination centre. (read more)
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on December 25, 2021 | Sundance | 538 Comments
Candace Owens likely felt some need to follow up on her interview with President Trump due to overwhelming opinion of Trump’s vaccine position. Unfortunately, she attempts to reconcile President Trump’s position by casting aspersions toward him [Daily Mail Article].
Mrs. Owens reconciles President Trump’s support for the three COVID-19 vaccines by saying he’s too old to understand the troublesome vaccine information and doesn’t use the internet for his research. WATCH:
President Trump’s position on the vaccines –as a tool in the arsenal to combat the pandemic– is essentially unremarkable. Trump supports the vaccines that were developed, under the goal of providing protection for people against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, by the scientific community. However, President Trump repeatedly insists that no one should be mandated to take the vaccine.
The essential Trump position has consistently been:
‘The American and international scientific and medical establishment have determined that SARS-CoV-2 represents a significant threat to public health. In response, the United States Center for Disease Control (CDC), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. National Institute of Health (NIH); in coordination with the World Health Organization (WHO) and various governments around the globe, have worked with scientists and pharmaceutical companies to develop vaccines to be deployed under emergency authorizations. Those vaccines are available for the American public to consider and use, if a person is worried about their health risk.’
That’s it, that’s the sum total of President Trump’s position.
Trump doesn’t feel people should be pressured, forced, coerced or mandated to take a vaccine. Nor should anyone be subject to discrimination or division based on their unique medical decision. Vaccination is an individual choice, and President Trump has said, repeatedly, he respects anyone’s decision either way, and the federal government should not be involved. From my perspective, this is non-controversial.
Additionally, despite the proclamations of many who have even written on these comment sections, this position is not only the same as Florida Governor ¹Ron DeSantis, but also identical.
Again, position encapsulated: “Here’s what the professionals who work for your federal government have come up with, use them as you see beneficial to yourself and your family.”
In addition to the vaccine development approach, in 2020 President Trump authorized the U.S. medical community to work collaboratively to immediately provide therapeutic options and antibody treatments as tools and resources for doctors and infected patients to use in treatment.
Critics of President Trump have argued that the former president should now be taking a strong position in opposition to the vaccines as a result of new information which undermines the original efficacy of them. The vaccines now require boosters, and the vaccines do not stop the spread of infection, ergo they are useless or potentially worse, might cause harm.
Despite these issues, the position of the United States government has not changed, and all of the previous U.S. medical institutions who advised on the original approach toward vaccination against the pandemic have not reversed their position. Those are the current decision makers for public health, not Donald Trump.
The public ire directed toward President Trump would be more appropriately targeted toward the professionals in the scientific and medical establishment who are in the current position to make a modification or reversal in their approach.
There are many people using hindsight to criticize President Trump saying: with revelations over the past two years the entire U.S. medical establishment no longer holds credibility. However, at the time those original pandemic mitigation decisions were made, and President Trump activated a Cornavirus Taskforce led by Vice President Mike Pence, how many American people really understood the political nonsense happening deep inside the CDC, FDA and NIH?
It’s fair to say almost no one knew how corrupt those institutions of U.S. public health were at the time when the first concerns of the COVID virus were raised. Similarly, few people knew how corrupt the FBI and U.S. intelligence apparatus was in 2016 when those institutions were spying on and targeting candidate Trump. Most of the identified revelations of historic corruption surface only as a result of investigations after the fact.
Approximately two-thirds of the American population have taken the vaccine shot(s), and a large number of them are currently in the process of getting boosters. We can only imagine what would happen if the U.S. government was to officially state the vaccinations are now determined to be detrimental in some manner or form. That’s why it is certain, regardless of the danger or lack thereof from the vaccination itself, the U.S. government will never, ever, reverse course on their claims of vaccine safety, or even value.
Expecting some entity or individual in the United States to be capable of forcing the United States government, or any medical institution within it, to admit they are potentially harming the public – is an exercise in futility. It will never happen. Ever. That Rubicon was crossed well over a year ago.
We are now at the point where the FDA is authorizing, under emergency use processes, just about anything the medical establishment tells them to authorize. Which, understandably, has resulted in even fewer people participating in anything the FDA, CDC and NIH come up with.
Is the COVID-19 virus, or any iteration of a variant therein, likely no worse than a severe flu strain? The answer to that has always been, maybe. When you layer on sunlight showing how political the FDA, CDC & NIH institutions are, the answer shifts to ‘more than likely.’ However, we are operating now with a hindsight that was not available before, and even now data is still kept from the overwhelming majority of the American people, and Big Tech has been instructed to do exactly that.
Candace Owens reconciles President Trump’s position by saying, “he’s old” and “he doesn’t use the internet for his own research.” To me that is not only curt and ridiculous, that position shows me Mrs. Owens does not understand the importance of the stable mindedness needed for success at the scale of a United States president.
I said at the early phase of the COVID fear and pandemic rising how we were fortunate to have Donald Trump in the White House, because his general disposition is to permit individual states and individual people to make their own decisions.
At a time, when COVID panic was at its apex, Trump could have gone full totalitarian dictator, and few would have flinched. But he didn’t… instead he urged calm and told the American people to act prudently, but do not allow fear to overcome us.
All of the issues around vaccines are related to scientific and medical community practices. Neither Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis is a scientist or a doctor, and they can only rely upon the opinions, suggestions and recommendations provided to them by experts in these fields.
It is one thing for you and me to have research-based opinions on vaccines that may or may not align with scientific consensus. It is another kettle-o-fish entirely for Donald Trump to have an opinion, where his public statements are weighted toward national policy for public health.
I specifically remember when President Trump told us from the White House podium that the media-driven hype over the COVID-19 “was a hoax,” and the industrial media complex, along with both sides of the political spectrum and the total scientific medical community, blasted him for downplaying the SARS-CoV-2 risk.
From where I sit, given the scale of what has taken place, President Trump’s current position is stable and non-controversial. Essentially, here’s the vaccine tools they say will help, decide for yourself.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on December 25, 2021 | Sundance | 346 Comments
CTH is just presenting data without too much interpretation on this study, because it could be analyzed two separate ways.
A Denmark study of vaccine effectiveness (VE) to “prevent infection“, and that’s a key point, shows both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine benefits essentially disappear after 90 days to six months. [Study pdf Here] Now, some people are interpreting the bottom line result to say the vaccine makes you more susceptible to Omicron variant infection after the 150 day point [SEE HERE]. However, I’m not sure that’s the key takeaway.
The data does show that during the 91 to 150 day waning period of vaccine effectiveness, the vaccinated group who used Pfizer were 76.5% more likely to be infected with a variant versus the unvaccinated population. And the vaccinated group who used Moderna were 39.3% more likely to be infected with a variant versus the unvaccinated population. [Note, all natural immunity groups (previously infected) were removed from the study]
Yes, the study shows the vaccinated groups are more likely to be infected with Omicron than the unvaccinated population.
However, ¹if the Pfizer vaccinated group within the total population is at or near 76%, and ¹if the Moderna vaccinated group within the total population is at or near 39%, then what this Denmark study actually shows is a non-existent benefit from vaccination toward the Omicron variant. Not, and I repeat NOT, a finding that the vaccination itself makes you more prone to infection from Omicron.
What we need to know is how many people in the total population are vaccinated, AND what percentage of that total vaccinated population used Pfizer and Moderna.
If the total population Omicron infection rates for both Pfizer and Moderna groups mirror the vaccination rates for Pfizer and Moderna, then the vaccine effectiveness is nil for the prevention of Omicron infection. To me, that seems the most likely scenario.
The study conclusion is that booster shots are needed and provide essentially a 54.6% reduction in the risk of Omicron infection for Pfizer, and a (small sample) 82.8% reduction of the risk of Omicron infection for the Moderna group.
Obviously, more data is needed before this Denmark outcome can be accurately interpreted.
People are rightly worried that the vaccination itself might make you dependent on the vaccine forever. Heck, there are people within the British government saying exactly that in their booster ad campaigns (see poster left).
Additionally, does the vaccine itself make you more prone to infection from a variant that defeats the vaccine-specific immunity response. That’s the basic issue within Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE):
“In some cases, antibodies can enhance virus entry and replication in cells. This phenomenon is called antibody-dependent infection enhancement (ADE). ADE not only promotes the virus to be recognized by the target cell and enters the target cell, but also affects the signal transmission in the target cell.” (LINK)
Does the vaccine only target one version of the infection, and then allow other versions to avoid those vaccine antibodies, thus requiring ever continuing vaccinations that chase ever changing variants? So far, the answer appears to be yes.
That said, this issue of vaccine effectiveness against ‘infection‘ remains interesting and should be pursued. The reason is simple, if the vaccine does not prevent infection, then the premise of vaccine passports and/or vaccine mandates are moot.
Remove the ability of the vaccine to prevent infection, which seems brutally obvious at this point, and the only remaining benefit is one of medical outcome. Does the vaccine make you less likely to have a severe medical condition after you are infected?
When CTH originally started looking at hospitalization rates, what we found was that the percentage of the vaccinated population in the hospital requiring treatment was almost identical to the percentage of the surrounding overall population who were vaccinated. Ex. If the vaccination rate in the total population was 80%, the hospitalization rate for vaccinated individuals was essentially 80%. These reviews implied originally the vaccine was useless against severe outcomes requiring hospitalization.
All of the research essentially admits that both vaccinated and non-vaccinated people can be infected with COVID-19 and each variant of it. There is no vaccine value toward preventing infection. The issue is: does the vaccine immunity help you overcome the infection?
When you throw in the myriad of pre-existing conditions like obesity, diabetes and heart disease et al that make people more susceptible to any kind of respiratory infection, even without SARS-CoV-2 in the equation, then does all this vaccine chasing really amount to chasing severe cold and flu viruses with a vaccine regime?
The bottom line is that people need to make their own decisions based on their individual circumstances and everyone needs to respect those decisions. I doubt there is anyone choosing to make themselves more vulnerable with their vaccination decision.
Convincing an adult to do something is an endless quest, because it transfers outcome responsibility to the requester. The only dependency benefit in the convincing argument comes from the perspective of government. Politicians would like nothing more than for your outcome in life to be dependent on them. That’s also the scenario that abusers work diligently to construct.
When I see severe control demands and aspersions cast by who/what I define as an abuser, that flag tells me to exit.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on December 24, 2021 | sundance | 337 Comments
On one hand, the Omicron variant of the Rona is so dangerous that forced vaccinations are mandated, thereby eliminating medical autonomy and freedom for all mankind. On the other hand, the Omicron variant of the Rona quarantine time is being reduced from fourteen days to five.
From the perspective of the global governing elite, a widespread Omicron variant might disrupt their services…. Something must be done.
(Via Wall Street Journal) – Government leaders are adjusting recommended quarantine periods to minimize workforce shortages and scrambling to boost testing capacity to limit the spread of the Omicron variant of Covid-19.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said Friday that critical workers—including those in education, healthcare, transportation, grocery stores and sanitation—who tested positive for the virus will be allowed to return to work after five days under certain conditions.
[…] Those returning will need to remain masked, Ms. Hochul said. “We need you again, we need you to be able to go to work,” Ms. Hochul added.
New York state’s move comes after the U.K. shortened its quarantine period to seven days for vaccinated people, and some airline executives wrote to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention seeking an adjustment in agency isolation guidelines to avoid disruptions to operations.
On Thursday, the CDC revised its isolation and quarantine guidelines for healthcare workers, partly to help hospitals have enough staff to deal with any rise in admissions due to Omicron.
Under the new CDC guidelines, healthcare workers can go back to work within seven days following a negative test, or potentially even sooner in a staffing crunch. Also, healthcare workers who are fully vaccinated and who got a booster wouldn’t need to quarantine after high-risk exposure to the virus. (read more)
Lawns must be mowed, dinners must be cooked, pools must be cleaned, laundry services must be provided, turndown services must continue, and pillows must be fluffed.
Quick, change the rules, this Omicron cannot be permitted to interfere in the lives of those who govern.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on December 24, 2021 | sundance | 281 Comments
Someone, anyone… please tell me you can see the problem here.
Canadian railway officials have a rather familiar method to segregate passengers and identify authorized vaccinated citizens who are traveling in railroad cars:
I do not know which is worse, that the railway line would put yellow stickers on people as they board railroad cars, or that someone would ask: “How should we identify vaccinated passengers?”, and an actual response would be, “Hey, I’ve got an idea“…..
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on December 24, 2021 | sundance | 239 Comments
Somewhere, someone -or some group of consensus marketing folks- made a decision to approve a marketing and branding campaign for booster shots in Great Britain. Here’s what they came up with:
What exactly is the forward messaging here?
Think about it.
The direct implication would appear to be that ‘once you get on the Ronacoaster you cannot get off until the ride’s over; and the ride will never be over’.
“In May, 2018, the WEF partnered with Johns Hopkins to simulate a fictitious pandemic dubbed ‘Clade X’ (Appendix 12) to see how prepared the world be if ever faced with a catastrophic pandemic. A little over a year later, the WEF once again teamed-up with Johns Hopkins, along with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, to stage another pandemic exercise called ‘Event 201’ in October, 2019 (Appendix 13). Both simulations concluded that the world wasn’t prepared for a global pandemic. A few short months following the conclusion of Event 201, which specifically simulated a coronavirus outbreak, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared that the coronavirus had reached pandemic status on March 11, 2020.”
The simulation covered the following scenarios:
Governments implementing lockdowns worldwide
The collapse of many industries
Growing mistrust between governments and citizens
A greater adoption of biometric surveillance technologies
Social media censorship in the name of combating misinformation
The desire to flood communication channels with “authoritative” sources
A global lack of personal protective equipment
The breakdown of international supply chains
Mass unemployment
Rioting in the streets
Conclusion: The accuracy of these “simulations” is more than a coincidence. The World Economic Forum (WEF) and its partners were planning for the release of a pandemic. After all of the above scenarios materialized, WEF founder Klaus Schwab said it was now time for the Great Reset.
“The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future” — Klaus Schwab, World Economic Forum
The above video shows 83-year-old Rep. Maxine Waters (D) calling for forced vaccinations and mandates. The image below shows her on a recent flight, maskless. The rules are meant to muzzle us — the Great Unwashed. There are countless examples of politicians failing to obey their rules, but pointing out how often it occurs should help people wake up to the reality of the situation.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on December 23, 2021 | Sundance | 694 Comments
President Trump gave an interview to Candace Owens for The Daily Wire. The full interview is only available for subscribers [link]; however, there is a segment released by Mrs. Owens where Donald Trump talks about the specifics of his position on the vaccine and the mandates.
President Trump supports the three vaccines that were developed during his administration, and is proud of the system he put into place to develop them and get them available to the public. However, President Trump does not support mandating the vaccine or forced vaccination for anyone, and believes that people should have the freedom to decide what is in their individual best interests. WATCH:
At approximately 05:10 of the interview, President Trump notes the specific issue of a government mandated vaccine developed by a private corporation, and the risk of corruption and conflicted interests involved. President Trump accepts that reasonable people would be skeptical of the vaccine itself and would have personal reasons not to participate.
Toward the very end of the interview Trump states he is proud of the accomplishment and will not “give up” on his belief of the vaccine development as a success during his administration. However, he sees the forced mandate as very detrimental to the economy and views the consequences of the mandate itself as a problem for national security.
Given the range of opinions on the issue of the vaccines overall, and the mandate specifically, President Trump’s position seems quite pragmatic and reasonable. He’s proud to have developed the vaccines, believes they are of benefit, but strongly respects individual choice, liberty and the freedom to decide for yourself and your family. I don’t see anything controversial in this position.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 