Dipshit Moron Leong Full of Shit, 4th and 5th Waves Causing Lockdowns in Europe

[Leongsam]

Wrong. Let us know when you plan to say anything factual for once.

https://www.npr.org/2021/04/15/9877...rian-crisis-with-more-than-3-000-deaths-a-day


razil COVID-19: 'Humanitarian Crisis' With More Than 3,000 Deaths A Day

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Flipboard
• Email

April 15, 20215:56 PM ET

PHILIP REEVES
FacebookTwitter

A health worker treats a COVID-19 patient at a field hospital in Ribeirao Pires, greater Sao Paulo area, on Tuesday.
Andre Penner/AP
Health officials in Brazil say many hospitals are running dangerously short of sedatives and other crucial medications used for treating gravely ill COVID-19 patients.
They say some health services have already exhausted stocks of certain drugs, while others expect to do so within the next few days unless they receive fresh supplies.
The warning comes amid intense international concern over the spiraling pandemic in Brazil, where the average daily death toll has risen above 3,000, the highest in the world. To date, 365,444 people in the country have died of COVID-19, according to Brazil's health ministry.
Brazil's health crisis is being described as a "humanitarian catastrophe" by the international medical aid agency Doctors Without Borders (known by its French acronym, MSF), which has teams in parts of the country.
"The Brazilian authorities' ... refusal to adopt evidence-based public health measures has sent far too many to an early grave," MSF's international president Dr. Christos Christou said in a statement on Wednesday.
He said this has put Brazil in "a permanent state of mourning" and has caused "the near collapse of Brazil's health system."
Article continues after sponsor message


The alarm over the lack of medicines is being raised, in particular, by the country's richest and most populous state, São Paulo, which has so far registered almost one in four of Brazil's total COVID-19 deaths.
São Paulo's state government says its health services are facing "very serious" shortages, notably of muscle relaxants and sedatives needed for patients on respirators in intensive care units.
In a letter sent Tuesday to Brazil's Health Ministry, the state issued an urgent appeal for fresh supplies and accused the ministry of ignoring nine recent requests.
The scale of the problem has been underscored by a survey conducted by an organization representing local health officials: This found that more than two thirds of the 3,126 municipal health services in São Paulo were completely out of muscle relaxants, while 961 had no sedatives.
Front-line medical staff are reportedly turning to less effective alternative drugs, yet there have also been Brazilian media accounts of patients being tied by their arms to their beds to prevent them reacting violently to intubation when they wake up.
One of the country's leading news organizations, Folha de S. Paulo, recently published photographs and video of patients on respirators with their arms tied to the sides of their beds in a hospital in the northwestern city of Porto Velho.

Medicine shortages are adding to the already intense pressure on the country's intensive care units, where often exhausted and depleted staff are struggling to cope with a second wave of the pandemic, propelled by new variants of the virus. In parts of the country, patients have died while waiting for ICU beds to become available, according to medical staff and victims' families.
Overall occupancy rates for ICU beds have dropped slightly recently but remain critical in most of Brazil, according to a bulletin issued Wednesday by Fiocruz, a national health research institution. It said 16 of Brazil's 26 states have ICU bed occupancy levels of 90% or above. In São Paulo, it was 86%.
Brazil's Health Ministry has reportedly had significant problems buying anything close to sufficient quantities of medicines to cope with the surge in intensive care patients. It said Thursday that a large consignment of medicines donated by businesses was to be flown into the country in the coming hours, including sedatives, muscle relaxants and other drugs.
São Paulo has long been highly critical of the response to the pandemic by President Jair Bolsonaro, who has had four health ministers since the first coronavirus case was reported in Brazil early last year.
The state is far from alone.
Bolsonaro is facing ferocious criticism at home and abroad for scoffing at the threat of the virus, undermining social distancing and isolation measures, advocating unproven remedies, bungling the national vaccination program and discouraging people from being vaccinated.
The far-right president's position has become still more uncomfortable following a decision by Brazil's Supreme Court on Wednesday to give the go-ahead to a Senate inquiry into his government's handling of the pandemic.
Bolsonaro has argued throughout that lockdowns and other pandemic restrictions inflict more economic and social misery than the virus itself. He fell back on that defense again Wednesday, with a vaguely worded warning that there will soon be "enormous crises" in Brazil.
"I am not threatening anyone, but Brazil is at the limit," he told supporters, adding mysteriously: "I am waiting for the people to give a signal because the hunger, misery and unemployment is there."

You can copy and paste whatever articles you want but it does not change the stats and the stats show that Brazil is hardly the worst hit country when it comes to Covid. There are many that are far, far worse.

The graph will shoot up and then it will come down. That's how nature works. In the meantime just carry on with your life. Your chances of dying of Covid are very, very low.

 

[Leongsam]

View attachment 108618

Good try but that poll was taken in 2018 way before Covid was even heard of.

You need to raise your game if you're going to take me on. The devil is in the details.

 

[Leongsam]

 

[Leongsam]

gript.ie

Texas, Mississippi, and Michigan prove: Lockdown makes no difference. | Gript


3-4 minutes




In recent weeks, as we’ve covered the effect of Texas lifting its facemask mandate, and all Covid lockdown restrictions, some people who are cautious about the results have said “but what if Texas is just an outlier”?
It’s forty days now since the facemask mandate was lifted. Cases remain…. Stunningly low:

But it’s not just Texas. In the neighbouring state of Mississippi, facemask mandates were lifted fully a week earlier. They’ve now had nearly fifty days of mask-free living, and…..

Meanwhile, by contrast, here is the Northern US State of Michigan, where the weather is colder, and where the facemask mandate has just been extended to… children as young as two years old:

To look at those three graphs…. You’d nearly get the impression, wouldn’t you, that facemasks and lockdown are not the determining factor in whether the virus spreads. The states without restrictions are doing well, the state with significant restrictions (which have never really been eased) is facing a surge. That’s not what the experts would have told us to expect, now, is it?
But what is driving it? Vaccination levels, it must be said, are not massively different across the three states. Mississippi is much more rural than the other two, but all three states have big urban centres and large populations of poor people.
Could it be as simple as…. The weather? Average temperatures in Michigan, which is in the very north of the USA, are about 16 degrees centigrade, though the wind chill will make it feel much cooler than that. Average temperatures in Texas and Mississippi at this time of the year? Much more like 20 degrees, and it will usually feel a lot warmer than that.
It’s hard to look at these results, then, and conclude that human interventions are massively determinant in the course of the virus. Michigan, of course, has a liberal, Democratic Party Governor who takes the whole Covid thing very seriously indeed, as the facemasks-for-two-year-olds law suggests. Mississippi and Texas meanwhile have Republican Party Governors who almost refuse to enact any restrictions on a point of principle.
People will passionately debate, based on their political views, which approach is morally right. What’s hard to dispute though is that in terms of cases – at the moment – the restrictions or lack of restrictions don’t seem to be making much of a difference at all.
Back in Ireland, if it were a sane country, we’d be looking at figures like this from overseas and re-evaluating our own approach. At least two US states are achieving much better results than Ireland is with no lockdown at all, while a third, with a much more severe lockdown, is doing vastly worse than Ireland is, even with more vaccine distributed. What conclusions, pray tell, might we draw from that?

 

[Leongsam]

View attachment 108618

time.com

Will Trust in the Johnson & Johnson Shot Recover? Europe's AstraZeneca Experience Suggests Not
Tara Law

11-14 minutes


When the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended stopping use of the Johnson & Johnson/Janssen COVID-19 vaccine on April 13, they declared the action a “pause”—a brief intermission as the government investigates a possible link between the vaccine and blood clots in a small number of recipients. The agencies may lift that recommendation as soon as this week, and vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna shots has continued.

However temporary it might be, a recent YouGov/Economist survey suggests that the J&J pause has already hurt U.S. public trust in the vaccine: Before the announcement, 52% of respondents said that the J&J shot was safe, compared with just 37% after the pause. (Trust in the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines appears unaffected, and a separate Axios-Ipsos poll found that most Americans believe the pause was the right move.) Those findings have fueled a debate among scientists, researchers and others: is it wise to pause a vaccine’s use after only six blood clotting cases were identified after 6.8 million shots were distributed, given the potential blow to public trust?

To help answer that question, we can look to Europe. After France and Germany temporarily halted use of the AstraZeneca-Oxford University vaccine over similar blood clotting issues in March, skepticism of that shot among residents has increased precipitously, according to YouGov polling. Meanwhile, in the United Kingdom—where use of the AstraZeneca vaccine was limited by age, rather than paused entirely—distrust has held relatively steady.

If the J&J pause reveals key new data about the vaccine’s safety, it may prove worthwhile. But Europe’s experience offers warnings about the potential damage such a halt can cause. Obviously, the U.K., Germany, France and the U.S all have different on-the-ground realities, but each offers a valuable case study into the potential consequences of a vaccine pause in terms of public trust.
United Kingdom
In the U.K., confidence in the AstraZeneca vaccine took a minor hit after the blood clotting reports first emerged, but the British are still significantly more likely than the French or the Germans to see that shot as safe. Why?

For one thing, the country “went all stops out” to vaccinate as many people as possible from the start, says Heidi Larson, the founding director of the Vaccine Confidence Project at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. For example, public health officials decided to delay recipients’ second doses in order to administer first doses to more people—an untested approach that, for now, appears to have paid off. The speed of the U.K. rollout helped it build momentum, experts say. Moreover, as more people get inoculated and very few have severe side effects, those who felt cautious at first may eventually be convinced to get vaccinated themselves, says Scott Ratzan, a professor at the CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy and the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Health Communication.

AstraZeneca’s vaccine has also had slightly more time to succeed in the U.K. compared to other European countries. The British authorized the shot on Dec. 30, a month before the E.U. Accordingly, the shot has made up a relatively large proportion of all shots given in the U.K. (As of April 5, more than 20.6 million people there have received their first AstraZeneca shot, compared to 11 million Pfizer-BioNTech recipients). Furthermore, AstraZeneca’s shot was developed in the U.K., giving it a boost in the British public eye—for Brits, the vaccine “has been the pride of their country,” says Larson.

But perhaps most significantly, the U.K. had a unique response to the AstraZeneca concerns: rather than pause use of the vaccine entirely, British regulators on Apr. 7 restricted its use to people over the age of 30, as the clotting issues appeared to be a more serious concern for younger recipients. Polling data suggests that decision led to a relatively minor increase in distrust of the shot—in an April 7-8 YouGov poll, 13% of people in the U.K. said they viewed the AstraZeneca vaccine as unsafe—only a slight uptick from the 9% who said so in a previous poll conducted March 15-16, before the age restriction was issued.
Germany
Back in June of 2020, Germans were primed and ready to be vaccinated—about 68% said they would get a vaccine that’s “proven safe and effective,” compared to about 72% of Brits, according to a poll conducted at the time by Larson, Ratzan and other scholars published in Nature. However, Germans’ confidence in the AstraZeneca vaccine began flagging around the time Germany announced its pause on March 15: in a YouGov poll conducted March 15 to 16, just 32% of Germans said the AstraZeneca vaccine was safe, down from 42% a month before. As of April 18, Germany has administered about 17.6 million doses of the Pfizer vaccine, nearly 6 million doses of AstraZeneca, and about 1.8 million Moderna doses.

The AstraZeneca vaccine got off to a relatively slow start in Germany—the European Union didn’t authorize it until February, almost six weeks after approving Pfizer shots. Even after Germany began using AstraZeneca’s vaccine, confusion plagued its rollout. For instance, while European regulators initially recommended its use for anyone over 18, German officials said it should be given exclusively to people under 65, arguing that there was not enough data to support using it in older people. It took until March 4 for Germany to recommend AstraZeneca’s use in those over 65.

The key difference between Germany and the U.K. is how Berlin handled the AstraZeneca blood clotting reports. While the U.K. only limited AstraZeneca’s use by age, Germany on March 15 paused the vaccine’s use entirely. German Health Minister Jens Spahn said the decision was a “precaution” meant to give regulators time to investigate the issue. Germany announced it would start using the AstraZeneca vaccine again just three days later—though on March 30, the country tweaked its recommendations yet again, restricting its use to those over 60.

Furthermore, while the AstraZeneca shot may have had home court advantage in the U.K., its origin may have been a liability in Germany and elsewhere in Europe. The vaccine rollout was one of the U.K’s first major actions since leaving the European Union in January of last year, a move that sparked resentment around the bloc, and may have set the stage for E.U. distrust of the U.K. when it came to vaccination strategy. European Commission President (and German national) Ursula von der Leyen criticized the U.K.’s decision to authorize the AstraZeneca vaccine before Europe had, saying in early February that the country had compromised “safety and efficacy.”

Another, completely separate factor worth considering: on Jan. 25, the German newspaper Handelsblatt published an article claiming that the vaccine was only 8% effective in people over 65—an assertion that was swiftly debunked, but generated international headlines nonetheless.

These developments, especially the full pause, may have tarnished the shot’s reputation among Germans. That, in turn, could be a warning sign for the U.S.—Ratzan, for instance, warns that it could be a “real challenge” to restore Americans’ confidence in the J&J vaccine. “If [recipients] have a choice of other vaccines, they will likely want to take a two-dose vaccine that they believe is safer, that never has been paused, than a single-dose vaccine that may have a very, very small risk,” he says.
France
As it did in Germany, the AstraZeneca vaccine got off to a late start in France—it wasn’t distributed there until Feb. 6, about six weeks after Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccinations began. Also as in Germany, French regulators have flip-flopped on their age recommendations. And, most crucially, France, like Germany, fully paused AstraZeneca use for several days amid the clotting reports. As of April 18, France had administered about 12.3 million Pfizer doses, 3.4 million AstraZeneca doses and 1.3 million Moderna doses.

But unlike Germany, France was “very fragile ground” for a new vaccine to start with, Larson says. In 2016, France was found to be the most vaccine hesitant out of 67 countries surveyed, with 41% of respondents saying that they do not feel vaccines are safe, compared to a global average of 13%, according to polling conducted by Larson and others and published in The Lancet. In a similar Nature poll conducted this past June, only about 59% of the French said they wanted a COVID-19 vaccine even if it was proven safe and effective, compared to 71.5% of respondents overall across 19 countries. Experts say French distrust in vaccines has been fueled by a number of health-related scandals. After an unpopular swine flu vaccine initiative in 2009, for instance, 38.2% of the French population said they distrusted vaccines, compared to 9.6% beforehand.

The French government has also been criticized for bungling the vaccine rollout. Bureaucratic obstacles aimed at ensuring that people give consent for the vaccine, including mandatory consultations for the shot, have hindered speedy vaccination. Political messaging has been an issue, too. For instance, on Jan. 9—the same day European regulators approved the AstraZeneca shot—French President Emmanuel Macron incorrectly described it as “quasi-ineffective” for people over the age of 65. While he later said that he would be willing to take the shot, Macron’s comment “certainly didn’t help” vaccine confidence, says Larson.

Larson is quick to emphasize that no one factor has been the root cause of vaccine hesitancy in any given country. However, the U.S. should be wary of the way uncertainty over a vaccine’s status or safety can open the door for hesitancy to spread.

“I truly and deeply hope that a pause is genuinely a pause, and it doesn’t get into weeks and a month, because it will really undermine public confidence,” says Larson. “If there’s one message to the U.S. out of all this, it’s: don’t let the ambiguity drag on. Because every day just opens the space for misinformation, disinformation, anxiety, and confusion.”

 

[IMHDOCTOR]

You can copy and paste whatever articles you want but it does not change the stats and the stats show that Brazil is hardly the worst hit country when it comes to Covid. There are many that are far, far worse.

The graph will shoot up and then it will come down. That's how nature works. In the meantime just carry on with your life. Your chances of dying of Covid are very, very low.

View attachment 108624

We have asked you on numerous times to come in for your own good. It is useless to continue to bleat out lies and misinformation when we all know Masks and Vaccines are highly effective in combating COVID-19 as medical studies show.

Have you come to terms with your inner turmoil as yet? Are you not tired of the endless suffering and angst you feel inside? Why not turn a page, today, and admit you have failed in your life and it all came to nothing? All your decisions have led to where you find yourself today. You only have yourself to blame if you continue down this road of self destruction.

We are here to help you. We have pledged our lives to help those whom suffer from mental disorders such as yourself so why not end your pain? How much longer will you endure your inner anguish?

The sooner you come in and talk about your formative years the faster you can heal, instead of sticking to lies and innuendo.

kindly contact us for an assessment:

https://www.imh.com.sg/

Institute of Mental Health
http://www.imh.com.sg/
Buangkok Green Medical Park
10 Buangkok View
Singapore 539747

 

[IMHDOCTOR]

View attachment 108618

Most of our patients welcome the vaccine with open arms, and only those whom are mentally unwell seem to think otherwise. As you can see, many millions of people have safely been vaccinated and in those nations with sufficient immunizations the Pandemic has waned.

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel, as long as the vaccinations continue.

kindly contact us for an assessment:

https://www.imh.com.sg/

Institute of Mental Health
http://www.imh.com.sg/
Buangkok Green Medical Park
10 Buangkok View
Singapore 539747

 

[Leongsam]

as medical studies show.

There is your problem. Medical studies do not represent real world use.

If masks worked the data would show a statistically significant difference between regions where masks were used vs regions where they were not.

If you can show me the real world data that illustrates just how well masks work I'll happily revise my findings.

 

[IMHDOCTOR]

There is your problem. Medical studies do not represent real world use.

If masks worked the data would show a statistically significant difference between regions where masks were used vs regions where they were not.

If you can show me the real world data that illustrates just how well masks work I'll happily revise my findings.

So have you decided to do something about your issues or are you just going to continue to deflect? We know all about coping mechanisms here are the Institute. We know its painful for you to even face your own problems, and that it is much easier to go to some obscure website and feel better about making your own reality.

The problem is our DSM-V Diagnostic Manual clearly states that the inability for yourself to see the reality is the very definition of insanity. Since you cannot tell truth from fiction, you are therefore mentally insane.

You cannot be a happy person. There is no room inside your psyche for both functional contentment and with your inner grief. We see your pain and know that it must be hard to be you.

We cannot force you to help yourself. If you wish to take the first step we are here to help pool souls like you.

kindly contact us for an assessment:

https://www.imh.com.sg/

Institute of Mental Health
http://www.imh.com.sg/
Buangkok Green Medical Park
10 Buangkok View
Singapore 539747

 

[Leongsam]

So have you decided to do something about your issues or are you just going to continue to deflect? We know all about coping mechanisms here are the Institute. We know its painful for you to even face your own problems, and that it is much easier to go to some obscure website and feel better about making your own reality.

The problem is our DSM-V Diagnostic Manual clearly states that the inability for yourself to see the reality is the very definition of insanity. Since you cannot tell truth from fiction, you are therefore mentally insane.

You cannot be a happy person. There is no room inside your psyche for both functional contentment and with your inner grief. We see your pain and know that it must be hard to be you.

We cannot force you to help yourself. If you wish to take the first step we are here to help pool souls like you.

kindly contact us for an assessment:

https://www.imh.com.sg/

Institute of Mental Health
http://www.imh.com.sg/
Buangkok Green Medical Park
10 Buangkok View
Singapore 539747

OK I'll humor you. Mentally I'm fine because I don't worry about covid, masking and lockdowns.

The ones that you need to take care of are those that are cowering at home too afraid to go out in case they die of Covid.

 

[IMHDOCTOR]

OK I'll humor you. Mentally I'm fine because I don't worry about covid, masking and lockdowns.

The ones that you need to take care of are those that are cowering at home too afraid to go out in case they die of Covid.

As we have already tried to tell you, if you do not want to help yourself, there is little anyone can do. Only you can help yourself. We cannot force you to come in for treatment unless you want to change.

As you can see, you refuse to acknowledge your illness.

kindly contact us for an assessment:

https://www.imh.com.sg/

Institute of Mental Health
http://www.imh.com.sg/
Buangkok Green Medical Park
10 Buangkok View
Singapore 539747

 

[Leongsam]

The Lockdown Paradigm Is Collapsing
by Tyler Durden

8-11 minutes


Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The American Institute for Economic Research,
It’s taken much longer than it should have but at last it seems to be happening: the lockdown paradigm is collapsing. The signs are all around us.

The one-time hero of the lockdown, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, is now deeply unpopular and most voters want him to resign. Meanwhile, polls have started to favor Florida governor and lockdown opponent Ron DeSantis for influence over the GOP in the future. This remarkable flip in fortunes is due to the dawning realization that the lockdowns were a disastrous policy. DeSantis and fellow anti-lockdown governor Kristi Noem are the first to state the truth bluntly. Their honesty has won them both credibility.
Meanwhile, in Congressional hearings, Representative James Jordan (R-OH) demanded that Dr. Fauci account for why closed Michigan has worse disease prevalence than neighboring Wisconsin which has long been entirely open. Fauci pretended he couldn’t hear the question, couldn’t see the chart, and then didn’t understand. Finally he just sat there silent after having uttered a few banalities about enforcement differentials.
The lockdowners are now dealing with the huge problem of Texas. It has been fully open with no restrictions for 6 weeks. Cases and deaths fell dramatically in the same period. Fauci has no answer. Or compare closed California with open Florida: similar death rates. We have a full range of experiences in the US that allow comparisons between open and closed and disease outcomes. There is no relationship.
Or you could look to Taiwan, which had no stringencies governing its 23.5 million people. Deaths from Covid-19 thus far: 11. Sweden, which stayed open, performed better than most of Europe.
The problem is that the presence or absence of lockdowns in the face of the virus seem completely uncorrelated with any disease trajectory. AIER has assembled 33 case studies from all over the world showing this to be true.
Why should any of this matter? Because the “scientists” who recommended lockdowns had posited very precisely and pointedly that they had found the way to control the virus and minimized negative outcomes. We know for sure that the lockdowns imposed astonishing collateral damage. What we do not see is any relationship between lockdowns and disease outcomes.
This is devastating because the scientists who pushed lockdowns had made specific and falsifiable predictions. This was probably their biggest mistake. In doing so, they set up a test of their theory. Their theory failed. This is the sort of moment that causes a collapse of a scientific paradigm, as explained by Thomas Kuhn in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962).
A good example of a similar situation might be the Soviet economy under Nikita Khrushchev. He came to power with a promise that he would make the Russia economy under communism perform better than the United States. That was the essence of his famous promise “We will bury you.” He meant that Russia would outproduce America.
It did not happen. He failed and the theory he pushed failed alongside. And thus began the slow coming apart of communist theory and practice. Khrushchev had already repudiated the Stalinist terror state but never had any intention of presiding over the slow demise of the entire Soviet experiment in central planning. By setting up a test that could falsify his promise, he doomed an entire system to intellectual repudiation and eventual collapse.
The theory and practice of lockdownism could be going the same way.
In Kuhn’s reconstruction of the history of science, he argued that progress in science occurs not in a linear fashion but rather episodically as new orthodoxies emerge, get codified, and then collapse under the weight of too many anomalies.
The pattern goes like this. There is normal science driven by puzzle solving and experimentation. When a theory seems to capture most known information, a new orthodoxy emerges – a paradigm. Over time, too much new information seems to contradict what the theory would predict or explain. Thus emerges the crisis and collapse of the paradigm. We enter into a pre-paradigmatic era as the cycle starts all over again.
As best anyone can tell, the idea of locking down when faced with a new virus emerged in the US and the UK around 2005-2006. It started with a small group of fanatics who dissented from traditional public health. They posited that they could manage a virus by dictating people’s behavior: how closely they stood next to each other, where they travelled, what events they attended, where they sat and for how long. They pushed the idea of closures and restrictions, which they branded “nonpharmaceutical interventions” through “targeted layered containment.” What they proposed was medieval in practice but with a veneer of computer science and epidemiology.
When the idea was first floated, it was greeted with ferocious opposition. Over time, the lockdown paradigm made progress, with funding from the Gates Foundation and more recruits from within academia and public health bureaucracies. There were journals and conferences. Guidelines at the national level started to warm to the idea of school and business closures and a more broad invocation of the quarantine power. It took 10 years but eventually the heresy became a quasi-orthodoxy. They occupied enough positions of power that they were able to try out their theory on a new pathogen that emerged 15 years after the idea of lockdown had been first floated, while traditional epidemiology came to be marginalized, gradually at first and then all at once.
Kuhn explains how a new orthodoxy gradually replaces the old one:

When, in the development of a natural science, an individual or group first produces a synthesis able to attract most of the next generation’s practitioners, the older schools gradually disappear. In part their disappearance is caused by their members’ conversion to the new paradigm. But there are always some men who cling to one or another of the older views, and they are simply read out of the profession, which thereafter ignores their work. The new paradigm implies a new and more rigid definition of the field. Those unwilling or unable accommodate their work to it must proceed in isolation or attach themselves to some other group.

That’s a good description of how lockdown ideology triumphed. There are plenty of conspiracy theories out there concerning why the lockdowns happened. Many of them contain grains of truth. But we don’t need to take recourse to them to understand why it happened. It happened because the people who believed in them became dominant in the world of ideas, or at least prominent enough to override and banish traditional principles of public health. The lockdowns were driven primarily by lockdown ideology. The adherents to this strange new ideology grew to the point where they were able to push their agenda ahead of time-tested principles.
It is a blessing of this ideology that it came with a built-in promise. They would achieve better disease outcomes than traditional public health practices, so they said. This promise will eventually be their undoing, for one simple reason: they have not worked. Kuhn writes that in the history of science, this is prelude to crisis due to “the persistent failure of the puzzles of normal science to come out as they should. Failure of existing rules is the prelude to a search for new ones.” Further: “The significance of crises is the indication they provide that an occasion for retooling has arrived.”
Kuhn’s theory of scientific progress fits rather well with the rise and fall of lockdownism. They had a theory that converted many people away from traditional principles. That theory came with a test. The theory has failed the test – that much is becoming more obvious by the day.
The silence of Fauci in Congressional hearings is telling. His willingness only to be interviewed by fawning mainstream media TV anchors is as well. Many of the other lockdowners that were public and preening one year ago have fallen silent, sending ever fewer tweets and content that is ever more surreptitious rather than certain. The crisis for the fake science of lockdownism may not be upon us now but it is coming.
Kuhn speaks of the post-crisis period of science as a time for a new paradigm to emerge, first nascently and then becoming canonical over time. What will replace lockdown ideology? We can hope it will be the realization that the old principles of public health served us well, as did the legal and moral principles of human rights and restrictions on the powers of government.

 

[Leongsam]

The US states that have dropped all Covid restrictions.

These Seven States Have Dropped All Covid-19 Restrictions
Jemima McEvoy

5-7 minutes


Edit Story

Breaking|Mar 11, 2021,05:42pm EST|100,428 views

Topline
Oklahoma became the latest to lift virtually all Covid-19 restrictions on Thursday, bringing the total number of states that have chosen to fully reopen—despite warnings from public health officials—to seven, with a number of others also moving in that direction.

People gather at Lazarus Brewing Company for drinks on March 10, 2021 in Austin, Texas.
Getty Images Key Facts
Oklahoma: Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) said he will be signing an executive order on Friday that will roll back his few remaining coronavirus restrictions, removing limits on events and public gatherings, as well as the state-wide mask mandate (the state averaged 643 cases and 23.9 deaths each day over the past week).

Wyoming: Gov. Mark Gordon (R) announced March 8 that the state would repeal its statewide mask mandate and allow “bars, restaurants, theaters and gyms to resume normal operations” on March 16, but stipulated face masks will remain mandatory inside the state’s schools (the state averaged 7,343 cases and 1.3 deaths each day over the past week).

Texas: The largest state to remove all restrictions, Gov. Greg Abbott (R) announced on March 2 that Texas would be nixing its mask mandate and allowing businesses to reopen “100%” this Wednesday, banning jurisdictions from implementing local mask mandates unless they meet certain hospitalization metrics (the state averaged 4,909 cases and 189.9 deaths each day over the past week).

Mississippi: Gov. Tate Reeves (R) also decided to drop the state’s mask mandate and nearly all Covid-19 restrictions on March 2, with the limits lifted the next day (the state averaged 396 cases and 14.6 deaths each day over the past week).

Montana: Gov. Greg Gianforte (R) announced the end of Montana’s mask mandate on Feb. 12, removing the last of the state’s restrictions, though some local jurisdictions have kept face covering requirements in place (the state averaged 129 cases and 2 deaths each day over the past week).

North Dakota: The state opted not to renew its mask mandate, first enacted in November, when it expired in January 2021, ending North Dakota’s restrictions (the state averaged 78 cases and 0.4 deaths each day over the past week).

Iowa: Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) ended the last of the state’s restrictions, the mask mandate issued in November 2020, in early February (the state averaged 481 cases and 14.4 deaths each day over the past week).

 

[Leongsam]

Here is the trend for all the 7 states that have dropped all Covid restrictions.

 

[Leongsam]

 

[Leongsam]

Comparing North Dakota ND with other states at a similar latitude.

 

[Leongsam]

State data all from CDC just in case the usual morons accuse me of using fake data which seems to be their only comeback.

 

[IMHDOCTOR]

State data all from CDC just in case the usual morons accuse me of using fake data which seems to be their only comeback.

Where did it all go wrong for you? When was the first time you realized your life was unmanageable? Was it the financial losses? The lack of any real close relationships in your life?

These are all symptoms of your disease. We point them out because we can read you like an open book. We have already told you there is no way out, you have to face the music, or in your case you own pain.

Or do you just blame others? Notice how you are unable to take responsibility for your own actions? This is just yet another reason why we are able to hone into your core neurosis.

kindly contact us for an assessment:

https://www.imh.com.sg/

Institute of Mental Health
http://www.imh.com.sg/
Buangkok Green Medical Park
10 Buangkok View
Singapore 539747

 

[Leongsam]

Sorry left out Oklahoma

 

[capamerica]

As we have already tried to tell you, if you do not want to help yourself, there is little anyone can do. Only you can help yourself. We cannot force you to come in for treatment unless you want to change.

As you can see, you refuse to acknowledge your illness.

kindly contact us for an assessment:

https://www.imh.com.sg/

Institute of Mental Health
http://www.imh.com.sg/
Buangkok Green Medical Park
10 Buangkok View
Singapore 539747

Doc, I think he has a screw loose.