Coronavirus

Don't Surrender to the Pandemic Control Freaks

They'll never be satisfied in a world of balanced risks.

|

When, exactly, do we get to return to normal life? Is it when every single person is vaccinated? Is it when lockdowns finally demonstrate any effectiveness at fighting COVID-19? When we've driven all our kids nuts and small businesses bankrupt with restrictions? When disease is completely eradicated around the time the sun sputters out? Or will it be when the pajama class is finally bored with lording it over the rest of society and decides it's time to come up for air? It's a question requiring an answer as our lords and masters show every inclination to once again tighten the screws to address a never-ending public health emergency.

A year and a half into the pandemic, every American 12 and older who cares to be vaccinated against COVID-19 has had the opportunity to get a shot. That's important, because all of the available vaccines are extremely effective at reducing the dangers of infection for their recipients.

"All authorized COVID-19 vaccines demonstrated high efficacy (≥89%) against COVID-19 severe enough to require hospitalization," according to current Centers for Disease Control Guidance that includes consideration of the Delta variant that has so many people concerned. "In the clinical trials, no participants who received a COVID-19 vaccine died from COVID-19."

That's about as much assurance as you can ask of a world that offers no guarantees of safety. Epidemiologists have warned for months that COVID-19 is probably a permanent part of our lives, so we need to learn to tolerate it as one risk among many.

"The pandemic seems to be shifting to an endemic situation, meaning the virus could remain a constant presence," notes a July news piece from the Medical University of South Carolina. "We have to figure out how to live with it, I think," comments Dr. Michael Sweat, a public health expert with the school.

So, we can get on with our lives, right? After all, we have a lot of digging out to do. Millions of children lost a year of education and struggled with mental health issues. Jobs and businesses evaporated as the world sheltered in place, usually by command of the powers that be. And fundamental human liberty took a body blow from which it may never recover when the political class took advantage of public fear to expand its power—not just in traditionally authoritarian countries but even in nominally liberal ones. 

"As COVID-19 spread during the year, governments across the democratic spectrum repeatedly resorted to excessive surveillance, discriminatory restrictions on freedoms like movement and assembly, and arbitrary or violent enforcement of such restrictions by police and nonstate actors," observed Freedom House.

Worse, we sacrificed liberty, prosperity, and our children's sanity for little in the way of good reason.

"We find that shelter-in-place orders had no detectable health benefits, only modest effects on behavior, and small but adverse effects on the economy," according to University of Chicago researchers. 

That means we should finally turn our backs on a year-plus of authoritarian policy failures inspired by the Chinese government's draconian crackdowns and get on with life, right? 

Not so fast! Pandemic-fueled control freaks aren't yet done messing with us in the name of public health.

This week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced a new eviction moratorium that even the Biden-supporting Washington Post editorial board called "almost certainly illegal" and even President Joe Biden concedes is "not likely to pass constitutional muster." But what a wonderfully effective way to drive small property owners into bankruptcy and force them to sell out to large investors who are well-positioned to prosper once tenants start paying rent again.

We're also seeing the much-dreaded debut of vaccine passports under a variety of names, as localities move to demand proof of a shot as a permission slip to enter bars, gyms, and restaurants. It's a pointless move given that the vaccinated are already well-protected against catching COVID, transmitting it to others, or getting seriously ill if they do contract it, so the risk is borne primarily by the unvaccinated who have chosen to accept that risk. But what an opportunity for transforming normal activities like buying lunch or going to the gym into privileges to be dispensed or withheld at government whim!

But this comes after the return of mask mandates intended, it seems, to keep vaccinated people who are already protected against the virus from passing it to people who don't think the virus is much of a threat and have rejected vaccination. 

"Leaning heavily on masking and distancing is what we did when we didn't have vaccines," points out Aaron E. Carroll, the chief health officer for Indiana University. "Hospitalizations and deaths are rising in some areas not because someone didn't wear a mask at the ballgame. They're occurring because too many people are not immunized." 

That said, Carroll gets to keep his control freak membership card, since he advocates mandatory vaccination. It's a measure that, he concedes, would require "enormous political capital to enforce," not to mention the use of violence to compel people to take shots they don't want and that aren't necessary to protect those who are protected because they already volunteered to be inoculated. That policy might involve some risks of its own. 

Once again, vaccination is widely available in the United States and the unvaccinated have chosen that status. They've made their own decisions and assumed the resulting dangers, just like people who smoke, eat too much, ride motorcycles, or go rock-climbing. In a free society, people have the right to make their own risk assessments, even if others don't approve, and the rest of us should get to live our lives without limiting ourselves because of the decisions made by others.

COVID-19 has been an unpleasant ordeal for the entire planet, but perhaps not so awful as the policies inflicted on us in the name of public health. It's time to move beyond pandemic panic to rebuild our prosperity, raise our kids, and reclaim our freedom. If the control freaks don't like that, well, they're another affliction we can do without.

NEXT: Fugitive Telemetry

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Once again, vaccination is widely available in the United States and the unvaccinated have chosen that status. They’ve made their own decisions and assumed the resulting dangers, just like people who smoke, eat too much, ride motorcycles, or go rock-climbing. In a free society, people have the right to make their own risk assessments, even if others don’t approve, and the rest of us should get to live our lives without limiting ourselves because of the decisions made by others. Exactly.

    1. “people have the right to make their own risk assessments”

      What evidence is there that people who haven’t been vaccinated have conducted risk assessments, or that these risk assessments are informed and meaningful?

      1. Other than the signed consent?

        1. Fantastic work-from-home opportunity for every0ne… Work for three t0 eight a day and start getting paid inSd the range of 17,000-19,000 dollars a month… Weekly payments Learn More details Good luck…

          See……………VISIT HERE

          1. Fuck off Karen.

            1. Fantastic work-from-home opportunity for everyone… Work for three to eight a day and start getting paid inSd the range of 17,000-19,000 dollars a m0nth… Weekly payments Learn More details Good luck…

              See……………VISIT HERE

              1. My last pay test was $9500 operating 12 hours per week on line. my sisters buddy has been averaging 15k for months now and she works approximately 20 hours every week. i can not accept as true with how easy it become as soon as i tried it out. This is what do,…………… READ MORE

            2. Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening…VCz And i get surly a check of $12600 what’s awesome is I m working from home so I get more time with my kids.

              Try it, you won’t regret it!…….. VISIT HERE

          2. These are 2 pay checks $78367 and $87367. that i received in last 2 months. I am very happy that i can make thousands in my part time and now i am enjoying my life. Everybody can do this and earn lots of dollars from home in very short time period. Just visit this website now. Your Success is one step away Copy and Paste —-> ­­­­Visit Here

        2. Since I started with my online business, I earn $25 every 15 minutes. It sounds unbelievable WSe but you won’t forgive yourself if you don’t check it out. Learn more about it here…

          This is what I do……………. VISIT HERE

      2. Who says the government’s risk assessments are informed and meaningful?

        1. Tuccille is implying that the risk assessments of those who are unvaccinated are informed and meaningful. Dubious at best.

          1. How so? All misinformation has been scrubbed from the internet.
            Or are you saying people aren’t qualified to make their own decisions?

            1. “How so? All misinformation has been scrubbed from the internet.”

              That doesn’t guarantee an informed and meaningful risk assessment.

              1. It’s difficult to be properly informed when the establishment is infested with democrats.

                1. “It’s difficult to be properly informed ”

                  I agree but I don’t blame democrats or any other political party.

                  1. Much if the information Fauci and the administration has issued has been skewed or an outright lie. The democrats ar completely in charge.

                    Who else would you like me to blame?

                    1. My last pay test was $9500 operating 12 hours per week on line. my sisters buddy has been averaging 15k for months now and she works approximately 20 hours every week. i can not accept as true with how easy it become as soon as i tried it out. This is what do,…………… READ MORE

                2. And Trumpers and right wing propaganda..l

                  1. These are 2 pay checks $78367 and $87367. that i received in last 2 months. I am very happy that i can make thousands in my part time and now i am enjoying my life. Everybody can do this and earn lots of dollars from home in very short time period. Just visit this website now. Your Success is one step away Copy and Paste —-> JOBS APP

              2. i guess having the govt forcing you to take the gene therapy is the only way to prove you’ve done a ‘proper’ risk assessment?

                1. That would prove nothing.

                  1. ya think?!

                2. Nah. Let’s wait a few more months and see how natural selection plays out. Plus, can’t wait to hear all those well informed risk assessments whine about how their coronavirus hospitalization bankrupted them.

                  1. You really don’t know how natural selection works, do you?

            2. Is it MISINFORMATION, or TRUTH that has been scrubbed?

              ANd YES that is EXACTLY what he is saying, whether he means to or not.

          2. Meaningful by who’s standard? Yours? Mine? The government’s? What you need to demonstrate is where does the government derive any authority to force someone to get a vaccine or deny them freedoms and rights if they don’t? I’m vaccinated but if someone opts not to, that’s their business – not mine, not yours and certainly not the government’s. Why are we so obsessed with living other people’ lives for them?

            1. “What you need to demonstrate is where does the government derive any authority to force someone to get a vaccine or deny them freedoms and rights if they don’t?”

              I don’t need to demonstrate anything. Tuccille claims that people who haven’t been vaccinated have done some kind of risk assessment. It’s bullshit.

        2. Nothing is more ignorant than calling this a “vaccine”.

      3. “What evidence is there that people who haven’t been vaccinated have conducted risk assessments, or that these risk assessments are informed and meaningful?”

        None of your business, asshole. Fuck off.

          1. Steaming pile of lefty shit heard from. Fuck off and die.

          2. What a witty rejoinder. Any other gems you wish to impart?

        1. It becomes my business when your bullshit becomes my problem. Go fuck yourself.

          1. Right back at you, dipshit.

      4. Every sentient being, including humans, makes risk assessments every day. Even amoebas move away from risks. We don’t need “evidence” to determine that humans have made risk assessments. The fact of risk assessments is inherent (except for comatose or 100% crazy people I suppose). What those risk assessments are, we intuit from behavior.

        1. ” Even amoebas move away from risks. ”

          Even amoebas respond to incentives. I suggest the reason why people still haven’t been vaccinated is because many judge the incentives to do so are too paltry. That makes a lot more sense than the idea that they’ve brushed off their epidemiology texts and conducted a risk assessment.

          1. Risk assessment isn’t just about calculating probability of death under different options. It factors in incentives, costs, lost opportunities, convenience, and more subjective things like tolerance for being bossed around, all of which are valid parts of the calculation.

            Sure, most unvaccinated people didn’t carefully review dozens of peer reviewed studies. But then I strongly suspect many public health authorities failed to consider the non-medical factors and defer to the “experts” in those fields.

            1. “But then I strongly suspect many public health authorities failed to consider the non-medical factors and defer to the “experts” in those fields.”

              Politicians in democracies don’t want to be seen as responsible for any preventable deaths under their watch. That’s also a big factor in their decisions.

              ” It factors in incentives, costs, lost opportunities, convenience, and more subjective things like tolerance for being bossed around, all of which are valid parts of the calculation.”

              This is my point. The extreme difficulty in making an informed, meaningful risk assessment. Tuccille assumes that those who haven’t been vaccinated have made such a risk assessment, which is to be treated as sacrosanct. I’m pointing out the falseness of the assumption.

              1. Those idiots don’t know what’s good for them! They should just listen to you!

                1. “They should just listen to you!”

                  Better yet they could get up to speed on the latest that epidemiology and virology has to offer. Without that their ‘risk assessment’ is worthless.

                  1. Using your logic, in order to drive my car each day I would need to be an automotive engineer and a race car driver. I mean, honestly, how else could I asses the risk of dying or potentially killing someone else. Wait, does that mean I also have to be trained as an EMT and potentially a trauma surgeon? I’ve really got to hit the books if I intend to go out for that evening drive.

                    1. “Using your logic, in order to drive my car each day I would need to be an automotive engineer and a race car driver.”

                      You can drive your car each day because of past experience and your faith in skills of the experts who designed and built it. Not because before you turn the key for the first time each morning you do some half assed risk assessment.

                    2. trueman is full of shit and should be know as such:
                      mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
                      “Spouting nonsense is an end in itself.”

                      The smug/stupid trueman assumes idiocy will be confused with profundity; his mommy told him he was smart.
                      Fuck off, asshole.

              2. It’s not that difficult to assess the risk. The death rate of COVID-19 (roughly 0.6%) was known since about March 2020 from the cruise ship case data. People were also quickly aware that COVID-19 was much more dangerous if you were over 65 years old, and/or had certain chronic health conditions.

                It’s not that surprising that some people would avoid taking an experimental vaccine to prevent an illness that was likely not that dangerous to them personally. Some people are conspiracy theorists or anti-vaxxers in general, but I suspect most people who are hesitant just don’t see the tradeoff as being worthwhile. And it’s not just like a normal flu shot, many people get sick for a whole day after the second dose.

                1. “It’s not that difficult to assess the risk.”

                  It’s a moving target. And changing and transforming every day. It’s not like volcanic eruptions or meteor strikes.

                  “Some people are conspiracy theorists or anti-vaxxers in general, but I suspect most people who are hesitant just don’t see the tradeoff as being worthwhile. And it’s not just like a normal flu shot, many people get sick for a whole day after the second dose.”

                  I have no problem with vaccines but I agree that it might be worthwhile to hold off on getting vaccinated. WHat’s on offer today may be improved on tomorrow. And public health may decide to sweeten the pot, incentive wise. ie more money in your pocket. I agree the death rate is not impressive. This is a good thing. If we are smart we can use this as a dry run on how to deal with a pandemic of greater deadliness which will inevitably be coming some time in the future.

                  1. Well if my behavior has been so risky, how have I avoided getting the virus for 18 months so far? Why do I have to worry about variants when I’m already as immune as anybody can be?

                    1. “how have I avoided getting the virus for 18 months so far? ”

                      Are you sure you’re human? Not a robot programed to only think it is human.

                      “Why do I have to worry about variants when I’m already as immune as anybody can be?”

                      There will be new variants and new viruses. Your luck could run out tomorrow. If I were to ask you what were your chances of catching it tomorrow, it would be impossible for you to give me an informed number based on all the available and relevant information on the matter.

                    2. trueman is full of shit and should be know as such:
                      mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
                      “Spouting nonsense is an end in itself.”

                      The smug/stupid trueman assumes idiocy will be confused with profundity; his mommy told him he was smart.
                      Fuck off, asshole.

                    3. If I were to ask you what were your chances of catching it tomorrow, it would be impossible for you to give me an informed number based on all the available and relevant information on the matter.

                      Zero.

                  2. its a moving target… that grows less risky day by day.

              3. Politicians in democracies don’t want to be seen as responsible for any preventable deaths under their watch. That’s also a big factor in their decisions.

                If that was the case, fast food restaurants would have been banned decades ago.

          2. And if someone haughtily goes on about their day without brushing off their epidemiology texts and conducting a risk assessment, what then? You make them, because you know better? Joe Biden or John Roberts makes them, because they know better? Not my world, and I will fight you if you want to make it mine.

            1. “And if someone haughtily goes on about their day without brushing off their epidemiology texts and conducting a risk assessment, what then?”

              Then they haven’t done a risk assessment, proving me right yet again.

              1. But so what? So they haven’t done a risk assessment? What then? If you have no proposal, then you’re just masturbating and trolling and might as well stfu and let the big boys talk.

                1. “But so what? So they haven’t done a risk assessment? ”

                  Tuccille claims they have. Take it up with him and leave me out of this.

                  1. You’re the one claiming they haven’t. Don’t insert yourself into the conversation if you want to be left out of it, faggot.

                    1. Take it up with Tuccille. He’s the one claiming they’ve done it when they haven’t done it. I’m simply pointing it out.

              2. Gee, nothing could ever go wrong under an authoritative meritocracy, right? I mean, we can each be issued a set of scores relative to different topics, and then for any given issue, those with higher rank get to order others around..

                1. “Gee, nothing could ever go wrong under an authoritative meritocracy, right?”

                  There’s plenty to go wrong. Look around you, moron. You want perfection, sitting around draped in white robes, on clouds, listening to harp music, they call it paradise.

                  1. trueman is full of shit and should be know as such:
                    mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
                    “Spouting nonsense is an end in itself.”

                    The smug/stupid trueman assumes idiocy will be confused with profundity; his mommy told him he was smart.
                    Fuck off, asshole.

          3. I suggest the reason why people still haven’t been vaccinated is because many judge the incentives to do so are too paltry. That makes a lot more sense than the idea that they’ve brushed off their epidemiology texts and conducted a risk assessment.

            So IOW, they may not have conducted their risk assessment to *YOUR* satisfaction… How dare they!!!

            1. “they may not have conducted their risk assessment ”

              Correct, and my satisfaction is irrelevant. An uniformed risk assessment is not a risk assessment.

              1. I was wearing my “uniform” and was informed when I made my risk assessment. How about that!

                I think your point is irrelevant. In many cases, it wasn’t possible to effectively assess risk because the channels that normally supplied the information became undependable. For all the talk of “vaccines” as an example, we don’t have anything available that matches the most commonly used and trialed definition of that kind of immunity delivery mechanism. Instead, we have other immunity granting mechanisms that had demonstrated risk of use LESS THAN 10 YEARS ago. People are still allowed to make decisions with the information they have, hard stop. I made a decision because of health conditions to get the messenger RNA shots. However, if a traditional vaccine is not offered in its stead, I won’t be getting another shot, “uniformed” or not.

                1. “I think your point is irrelevant. In many cases, it wasn’t possible to effectively assess risk because the channels that normally supplied the information became undependable.”

                  Surely it’s Tuccille’s point that is irrelevant. He’s the one claiming that those who are still unvaccinated remain so as a result of their risk assessment.

                  1. You’re claiming they haven’t done so; got any proof of this?

                    1. Of course I have proof.

          4. Wasn’t a lot of issue getting people to take, say, the polio vaccine.

            Wonder why.

      5. We don’t need to have evidence, nor proof that their assessments are “informed and meaningful”. In a free society, people are assumed to have agency. to have the right (and effectively, the duty) to make these decisions for themselves. If we want to remain a free society, then that assumption must remain in place. It often seems like many in the medical profession (as well as in government) would prefer a society in which their own judgements supersede those of ordinary citizens. That must not be allowed.

        1. That is, indeed, a much greater risk than any virus

        2. “In a free society, people are assumed to have agency. to have the right (and effectively, the duty) to make these decisions for themselves.”

          It’s not the right or the duty I have any trouble with. It’s the ability to make such a risk assessment. An informed and meaningful risk assessment, based on scientific understanding.

          1. They won’t be any worse at it than all of the champs “following the science”. We are going to start masking kids again because of a week of out-of-control butt-fucking that went on in Provincetown.

            1. What we need is for science to come up with a virus with a moral conscience.

              1. If only; every progressive would get instantly knocked off.

          2. I assume you also extend this to voting?

            1. I’m not much of a voter.

              1. Thank god for small favors.

          3. When you made your risk assessment, did you consider the fact the there are no CDC approved vaccines, only experimental vaccines which are being used under Emergency Use Authorizations? (Note – if we ‘officially’ come out of this emergency will the EUA stop?) Did you fully consider the side effects of an unknown vector being injected into your body? How did you evaluate long term side effects when they literally cannot be determined because the vaccines in question all have less then 1 year of historical usage?

            1. “When you made your risk assessment”

              I haven’t made any risk assessment. I haven’t even flipped a coin to decide the matter. I know nothing about epidemiology and don’t have the time or inclination to start. If I ever get vaccinated, it will be because I was adequately incentivized to do so. ie offered enough money or threatened with imprisonment etc.

              1. Lol. Word

              2. >>threatened with imprisonment

                probably going to require this.

                1. I read in Reason NYC is offering people $100 to get vaccinated. I suggest upping that by an order of magnitude, and it would almost certainly still be cheaper than imprisoning those who choose to remain unvaccinated.

                  1. there might be a money ceiling for me but I’m not in life for the money I’m in it for the love so it will be a vaulted money ceiling.

                    1. If not money, how about love? Scantily clad nurse giving an optional handjob?

                      How about a year of free wifi? What better way for the democrats to funnel public funds to their sponsors in silicon valley. And if republicans ever make it to power again, free gas and oil.

                    2. trueman is full of shit and should be know as such:
                      mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
                      “Spouting nonsense is an end in itself.”

                      The smug/stupid trueman assumes idiocy will be confused with profundity; his mommy told him he was smart.
                      Fuck off, asshole.

                  2. Vaccine lotteries for the win.

              3. I haven’t made any risk assessment.

                So you have less of a sense of self preservation than the aforementioned amoeba? That’s sad.

                1. I’m just lazier than the average amoeba.

          4. “It’s the ability to make such a risk assessment. An informed and meaningful risk assessment, based on scientific understanding.”

            It’s none of your business, asshole. Fuck off.

          5. >>>An informed and meaningful risk assessment, based on scientific understanding.

            spit take. lol

            1. Maybe if you pray to Jesus long and hard, he’ll do your risk assessment for you.

              1. looks like yours is more a prayer than mine.

                where’s the line so you know you’ve reached informed *and* meaningful *and* scientific understanding?

                1. It lies beyond a mere flip of the coin or following the advice of the last TV pundit you watched. If you feel you’ve made an informed and meaningful risk assessment, you can tell us more about this line and whether you were able to cross it.

                  1. fair enough.

          6. Yes, this is why people like you irritate me. You possess a fraction of my cognitive ability and knowledge, yet continue to gibber in a lecturing fashion.

            You really must stop. You embarrass yourself.

      6. This is Tony-level stupidity.

      7. Pretty low. Getting vaccinated is pretty much all upside.

        1. You still have to drag yourself down to the some medical facility and go through whatever rigamarole the staff deem appropriate to inflict upon you.

          1. Being an adult sucks sometimes. 🙂

          2. LOL, when I went to get vaccinated they gave me a goody bag with candy and some coupons and a tuff. I did my best to endure the ordeal. 🙂

            1. Does the bag fit over your head?

        2. except all the downsides.

        3. It isn’t. You’re just not smart enough to understand that. You also lack much capacity for independent thinking. Which is typical of democrats.

      8. what business is that of yours?

        1. Words have meaning. And words are all our business.

          1. IOWs, none of your business?
            Fuck off, asshole.

          2. Dein Ausweis, bitte.

      9. We can put mtrueman in charge. It’s got it all figured out. It can make all the individual, informed and meaningful risk assessments for us.

      10. So to have basic freedoms, you need to have conducted an “informed and meaningful risk assessment” – deemed such by whom?

        Many of the “unvaccinated” may be people who’ve had Covid and trust natural immunity (good idea? Maybe. I don’t know, but neither does anyone else!).

        Many of the “unvaccinated” are also children and young adults who stand very little risk of serious illness from the disease.

        The question at the start of the article is correct: When does this end?

        So answer that question, anyone who thinks that free, available, and effective vaccines aren’t the end:

        What is the point that you’ll believe this is all over?

        Or are mask mandates and vaccine passports a feature of life going forward forever?

        1. I have no problem with informed risk assessments.

          “Or are mask mandates and vaccine passports a feature of life going forward forever?”

          It’s not impossible. There will be other pandemics in the future, you can bet on it.

          1. To put it simply, freedom is messy, scary, and often annoying. So apparently, not for you.

            1. “To put it simply, freedom is messy, scary, and often annoying.”

              Spoken like a true member of the herd.

              True freedom is lonely and exhilarating.

              1. A true member of the herd would claim other people haven’t made informed risk assessments without evidence.

                1. As Leon Trotsky said, Some questions answer themselves.

          2. Yep I remember the cause about “informed risk assessment in the constitution” specifically what mtrueman defines as “informed risk assessment”. Your argument is same as every authority argument. I know better.

            1. “Your argument is same as every authority argument. I know better.”

              Knowledge is power. The more you know, the more control over your life you will have. Control and freedom which you seem to reject. You are another self deluded member of herd.

              1. Sounds like he has pretty good knowledge and control, and you’re assmad that he won’t do what you think he should do. Oh well, not his problem.

        2. Right there in the opening paragraph is, “promote the general welfare”. That would include public health initiatives in a pandemic.

          1. The same ones that failed 100 years ago, incidentally.

          2. That isn’t a catch all for anything government feels like doing. This is why federal powers are enumerated. You’re probably not smart enough to understand that.

          3. “Right there in the opening paragraph is, “promote the general welfare”. That would include public health initiatives in a pandemic.”

            Only to pathetic lefty shits like you and shitstain.

          4. Given how impressively they fucked up last year…why should they receive benefit of the doubt?

      11. You don’t have to prove how long you analyzed and research the choices on your ballot before you mail it in either.

        1. Because politics is politics and science is science. There’s a lot of chemistry in politics but it’s the wrong type of chemistry. We call it personal chemistry, that magical process that attracts people to put their faith in a person or a set of ideas.

          1. trueman is full of shit and should be know as such:
            mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
            “Spouting nonsense is an end in itself.”

            The smug/stupid trueman assumes idiocy will be confused with profundity; his mommy told him he was smart.
            Fuck off, asshole.

          2. You don’t converse, you gibber.

      12. “What evidence is there that people who haven’t been vaccinated have conducted risk assessments, or that these risk assessments are informed and meaningful?”

        NONE OF YOUR GD BUSINESS

      13. The vast majority of “unvaxed” are black and Latino Americans. Although I am ok with the vax, many in the communities of color, are not. This movement toward “vax passports” (of any time, be it a letter, a smart phone app, showing your jab document etc) is to create a segregated society (like in NYC) that will have the effect of discriminating against millions of people of color who have not, nor likely ever WILL get the vax. Anyone who cannot see this is the entire point, is missing the point.

        1. It probably didn’t help that before Biden usurped the presidency he and his Marxist friends told black people that Trump was using the vaccine to harm black people like the Tuskegee experiments. Now that Biden occupies the White House, the vaccine is totally safe.

      14. “What evidence is there that people who haven’t been vaccinated have conducted risk assessments, or that these risk assessments are informed and meaningful?”

        What evidence is there that people who have been vaccinated have conducted risk assessments, or that risk assessments are informed and meaningful.

        I suggest the you access the VAERS data to see the hundreds of thousands of adverse events and deaths associated with these, so called, vaccines. I would also note that the author claims they are efficacious, however, the statistic cited only claims that they are effective at reducing hospitalizations NOT preventing the recipients from getting Covid. If vaccinated individuals can get the illness then, of course they can pass it to others.

        Aren’t vaccines supposed to prevent you from getting the disease? Do you want a mild case of Polio?

        I am personally making an informed and educated decision to remain unvaccinated with an entirely new medical technology that has no long term safety data that also appears to offer little protection from an illness with a 99.9% survivability rate.

        1. “What evidence is there that people who have been vaccinated have conducted risk assessments, or that risk assessments are informed and meaningful.”

          That’s not the claim Tuccille was making in the article.

          “I suggest the you access the VAERS data to see the hundreds of thousands of adverse events and deaths associated with these, so called, vaccines.”

          I suggest you wait. There could be a new vaccine on the way with some of these problems ironed out. All vaccines have some fatalities, that’s always been the case.

          “I am personally making an informed and educated decision to remain unvaccinated with an entirely new medical technology that has no long term safety data that also appears to offer little protection from an illness with a 99.9% survivability rate.”

          You’ll be lucky if the next pandemic is a respectful of your unease as the covid 19 has been.

          1. All vaccines have some fatalities, that’s always been the case.

            What a benighted assertion. Have you reviewed the data? This “vaccine” alone has 500k+ reported adverse events, including 12k deaths (https://www.medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=CAT&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19). The total death count for all vaccines is 21k. So over half of those reported deaths are for this one vaccine alone. “Some fatalities”. Disingenuous parry.

            You’ll be lucky if the next pandemic is [as] respectful of your unease as the covid 19 has been.

            You’re the one blathering on about risk assessment. If another pandemic comes around with, say, a 25-50% mortality rate, perhaps HReardon will review the data and decide to get vaccinated. But we’re talking about COVID-19, not some hypothetical future threat. Stay on topic.

            1. He can’t stay on topic. He never will. Because his premise and reasoning are always flawed.

      15. Big Brother loves you.

        I do not.

      16. What evidence is there that it’s any of your god-damned business what risk assessment someone else makes for him- or herself? Who decides whether someone else’s decision is “informed and meaningful” or not? Do you want to second-guess every decision everybody else makes about how they are going to live? If so, FU. If not, then STFU.

        Have a nice day.

        1. “Who decides whether someone else’s decision is “informed and meaningful” or not? ”

          People who know what they are talking about.

          1. trueman is full of shit and should be know as such:
            mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
            “Spouting nonsense is an end in itself.”

            The smug/stupid trueman assumes idiocy will be confused with profundity; his mommy told him he was smart.
            Fuck off, asshole.

          2. Guess that leaves you out.

      17. What is the objective standard by which a risk assessment can be evaluated as “meaningful?” What is the objective standard by which a risk assessment can be evaluated as “informed?” Why are “meaningfulness” and the quality of being “informed” important criteria in evaluating risk assessments?

        1. There’s no objective standard. This is medicine!

          “Why are “meaningfulness” and the quality of being “informed” important criteria in evaluating risk assessments?”

          Would you pay someone to conduct a meaningless, uninformed risk assessment on your behalf? No? You have your answer.

      18. What?! There’s a pandemic?! There’s a vaccine?! Why didn’t someone tell me?!

      19. You are assuming that those who agreed to vaccination made informed and meaningful risk assessments. I imagine some did. I have no doubt many just lined up like lemmings.

      20. “ What evidence is there that people who haven’t been vaccinated have conducted risk assessments, or that these risk assessments are informed and meaningful?”

        The same evidence that exists that the vaccinated have conducted risk assessments. Most of them just know they were told to do this and if they don’t they hate America and will die intubated.

        So basically no evidence. Think of it as abortion where we don’t mandate a woman display her risk assessment white paper for your approval. She doesn’t do that because it’s none of your f@$&! business.

        The same applies here. Worried about Covid? Stay home. You don’t get to force medical treatments on other people so you can feel safe getting a haircut.

      21. And what happens when the official purveyors of information are liars?

      22. Is that the standard you’d like to set for personal liberty, that each of us needs to prove our informed judgement by submitting our own thorough risk analysis report to the authorities? Are you thinking this would be just for Covid vaccines or other risks too?

    2. This is ridiculous. Why are people such babies? Get vaccinated and wear a mask. You’d think they were being asked to jump off a tall building. Have any of your highly independent people noticed that there are a lot of the unvaccinated dying? Just wondering.

      1. How, exactly, is that MY problem?

        If the unvaccinated die, c’est la vie. Life is life. The figures are certainly not showing anything resembling an uptick in deaths.

    3. This sounds good, but as usual, Reason ignores the actual legal situation. We are already not free. Are insurers allowed to sort people into risk pools based on vaccination status for any vaccines at all? Are hospitals allowed to refuse to serve the unvaccinated? To my knowledge, we do not have these, you know, what do you call them, freedoms.

      The freedoms are perfectly reasonable demands from service providers. A couple of years ago, I read about an Oregon couple whose unvaccinated child got tetanus from an injury on their farm. The month-long emergency, intensive care, the helicopter evacuation to a hospital, and the physical therapy for recovery cost over million dollars. After the incident, they still declined to get their child routine vaccinations even against tetanus. Who bears the cost for their choice? I’m betting that they didn’t pay and that we all pay instead. Worse, with infectious diseases, institutions like hospitals and their responsible patrons pay because the institutions become sites of transmission and breakthrough cases, which occur for every disease. (When I lived in China, I knew a vaccinated American who got the mumps, which is endemic in China.) Hospitals and doctors should not be obliged to serve people on any terms at all. As free people, the operators of a hospital or a medical practice should be able to say that you must get the vaccination or seek treatment somewhere else. Similarly, insurers should be able to say that you can forego vaccination, but disease occurring without a vaccination is not covered. If you don’t support these options for service providers, you do not support freedom.

      I am fine with saying that people don’t have to get vaccinated as long as I am not forced by law to share the cost of another person’s decision. The people raising a cry against vaccine mandates are not negotiating within the existing regime and offering a palatable compromise to everyone else, the compromise of allowing themselves to be sorted into separate categories and to be subject to discrimination by private parties. Until they accept the costs of freedom, they cannot rightly be claiming a freedom. Instead, they’re claiming a privilege.

      You can choose one of two options. The first option is to demand the freedom to go your own way and accept the costs and risks associated with discrimination by other parties. The second option is to rely on legal protection in access to a so-called public accommodations and to take the vaccine as the price for the protection. I don’t care what a person chooses, but the person must choose one of the two option. Trying to have both kinds of benefit is unprincipled and dishonorable.

      1. But we should be forced to share your delusion.
        If you’d like to cease existing, you have the ability to make that happen.

    4. #1 – It’s not a “vaccine”. It is an experiment altering your cells.
      #2 – It’s not a “vaccine”, however, it accumulates heavily in the ovaries… meaning it may be a very effective form of birth control.
      #3 – The shots allow healthy people to carry the virus unmitigated. This means they spread the virus and are long term hosts of the virus, allowing it to keep mutating… genius!

    5. They’ve made their own decisions and assumed the resulting dangers, just like people who smoke, eat too much, ride motorcycles, or go rock-climbing.

      Did Tuccille notice that one of those is not like the others? People that have poor diets, ride motorcycles, or go rock-climbing are only posing additional risk to themselves.* Smokers, however, are restricted from engaging in their habit in places that would impose risks on people that didn’t make the choice to smoke.

      Leaving oneself vulnerable to an infectious disease by forgoing getting a vaccine doesn’t just increase one’s own risk, but increases the risk to everyone with whom they come into contact. If employers, businesses, or other groups of people don’t want to accept the risk of being around the unvaccinated, they shouldn’t have to.

      *Spongehound points out correctly that there is also the shared financial costs of their choices to consider. Are personal choices that increase health risks accounted for in health insurance and the use of emergency services, for instance? Being free to make personal choices has to include accepting all of the consequences of those choices. Otherwise, they are just looking for a free ride.

      1. JasonT20 is a virus

  2. Or will it be when the pajama class is finally bored with lording it over the rest of society and decides it’s time to come up for air?

    The blue checks have demonstrated they are very comfortable in the role of blanket decision maker, and show no sign of wanting to relinquish that power.

    1. After a year of this bullshit, the pajama class has done pretty much everything necessary to ensure that they can live comfortably through perpetual lockdown.

      First, you have the full on leaders. They ignore all the rules, comfortable that they can get a pass from voters for every transgression just as long as they blame everything on those no good, lousy kids.

      Then you have the Pajama middle class. These are the professionals- Gen X thru Millennials- who love this lockdown. Secretly so many of them have gotten tired of the rat race- driving Ava or Chandler to their softball games and math tutor, then popping on in to work for hours on end. The lockdowns fixed all that complexity. Let them stay home, start a sour dough culture, even get a dog.

      To be sure, the Pajama Middle Class gets restless and needs to blow off some steam every now and then. But they know that their leaders will give them cover. Lift lockdown long enough for that week trip to the beach. Maybe in a bit, do a plane ride to hawaii. But they know they need to get it done quick, because then their leaders will lock down again, and they can go back into Staycation mode. Worst case scenario, they break the rules a little- maybe go mostly peacefully protest in the streets, or go to their local bar/restaurant that has the back door open. They know their leaders will look the other way, and everyone can blame it on those rednecks who won’t do like they do (when everyone is watching, anyway).

      Now it is true that they have some boomers also supporting them. These are, frankly, the saddest of the lot. Convinced that death is at their door, I’ve watched so many of my elderly neighbors shut off from the world and sit in their homes- perpetually watching CNN to tell them when it is safe to venture back out into an increasingly deadly and scary place. They are the helpless and hopeless, and it is pretty pathetic what the other two classes in their party are doing to them.

      1. You left out the people who actually like being scared. Much like tween girls flocking to horror movies, or the latest vampire saga, they feel some thrills when tickled with threats of personal danger. And, like in movies, when they know the risk is not real, the vicarious excitement is even better.

        1. No, I think those are the pajama middle class. Girls at the horror movies don’t actually like to be scared. They like giggling and screaming and bonding with their friends. At no moment are they actually afraid for their lives. They are just enjoying the experience. The scary movie is just the excuse that allows them to yell, scream and hug.

          The Staycationers are the same. It is the experience of staying at home, stress free, no rat race. Uber Eats for dinner, rather than going shopping. Kids cared for by netflix rather than shipped from activity to activity. “Being scared” is just the excuse they use to opt out of modern society. That’s why they hate people who are not scared- because they put the lie to their convenient excuse.

      2. I can imagine a cross plot of human behaviors, specifically “Like to tell others what to do” vs “Like to be told what to do”. The best labels I can come up with quickly for the quadrants are:
        Libertarians
        Sheeple
        Pajama Class
        Royalty

        You guys can figure out how they plot. And how they distribute in the US population and political parties.

        1. So I see Tony is the intersection of sheeple and pajama class, with delusions of royalty. Although he is a pretty huge queen.

      3. “done pretty much everything necessary to ensure that they can live comfortably through perpetual lockdown”

        Profits of Amazon have doubled during the lockdowns of last year. What’s your excuse?

        1. Non-sequiter.

  3. Every day I thank Biden for delivering the vaccine and shutting down the virus like he promised during the campaign. In his fight against this terrifying delta variant, he can do whatever he wants — lockdowns, mask mandates, anything — as long as he doesn’t close our borders. Because that would prevent Reason.com’s benefactor Charles Koch from importing cost-effective foreign-born labor.

    #LibertariansForBiden
    #OpenBorders
    #(EspeciallyDuringAPandemic)

    1. Stock market was up yesterday. How much did Koch’s wealth increase? Inquiring minds always want to know.

    2. That’s sarcasm, right? Gawd, I hope so.

  4. No. The beatings will continue until compliance is habituated.

    1. as localities move to demand proof of a shot as a permission slip to enter bars, gyms, and restaurants…

      They always start small. Until proof of vaccination compliance is required to attend school, go to work, travel, buy groceries…

      If someone can think of a peaceful means of ending this assault on our Civil Rights in the name of Covid bullshit, I’m all ears.

      Excellent article, BTW.

      1. If free and fair elections still exist in the slightest capacity, there’s hope on the horizon.

        But if Texas secedes first, I’m packing my bags and getting my drawl back.

  5. When, exactly, do we get to return to normal life?

    When returning to a normal life doesn’t create a high risk of a newly abnormal ‘normal’. eg where the medical system breaks down for everyone because some ideologues want to pamper the unvax in their delusions.

    Like it or not, there is no one-size-fits-all solution here – except for nihilists. High vax places damn well need to start rolling back the pajama class and the Karens and the techlords and bureaucrats who have profited immensely from creating an abnormal life.

    That same effort at this point in low vax areas is advocating murder.

    1. Or just let people make decisions for themselves based on their specific situation. The vaccine is available to anyone that wants it.
      If a hospital would deny services to an unvaccinated person they should be doing that to smokers l, drug abusers and overweight folks too. Advocating for any of that is advocating for murder.

      1. JFree has allowed his fear and self righteousness to turn him into an authoritarian.

        1. JFree has allowed his fear and self righteousness to turn him into an authoritarian monster.

          1. He always was, this just unmasked it all.

        2. He was always an authoritarian, he’s just using this to finally let himself be free.

      2. Chumby the problem is that Jfree and ilk has an idea for normal safety, people like him don’t realize that what you are saying is. Normal is just a person in powers opinion away and they may never get back to doing anything if they keep on that thought train and then be destroyed when they find out something they are or do is not normal and they need to be fixed.

        1. No – I consider ‘normal’ in the US to be – ‘people have access to hospitals’. I’ve lived in countries where ‘there really are no hospitals available for now’. They are – Third World shitholes.

          Maybe you and your ilk really are ok heading towards that. Certainly it fits with what appears to me to be more nihilism than libertarianism.

          1. You live in fantasy

    2. Why didn’t the medical system break down with overrun hospitals last year, before there was a magical vax?

      1. It did in NYC for a week or two. And hmm – let’s compare:

        2020 – late Mar -There were about 15,000 total confirmed cases (active) and 5,000 new per day. Nationwide. With a virus of R equal 2+ that can quickly drop to 1 with NPI/lockdown/etc
        2021 – now – several hundred thousand active cases with roughly 100k new per day of which 10+k new hospitalization. With a virus of R equal 8 that won’t drop below 1 until local areas reach herd immunity.

        The only advantage now is that many areas will hit herd before hospitals. And the vulnerable crowd is younger which will directly affect hosp more than death.

        1. So why did the hospital ship and field hospital go unused if the regular hospitals were overwhelmed?

          1. Because OMB?

          2. Possibly due to Cuomo’s plan that reduced the number of vulnerable people.

            1. That’s one way of putting it… Oof.

        2. More broadly, hospitals across the U.S. in 2020 were furloughing employees and many were threatened with having to shutter permanently because they weren’t generating any revenues. That is much closer to reality than your anecdote about NYC.

          In Seattle and other areas they built up massive outdoor tent hospitals that were never even used.

          1. That just means many places locked down/etc for little reason. It doesn’t mean NYC hospital system didn’t break for a couple weeks.

            ‘Reality’ is not one or the other. It is BOTH.

            1. So you are going to use NYC, home to 28,000/sq mile with an unknown Rona running rampant to where we are now? What happened in NYC in 2020 is of not much value relative to where we are now. Even in areas of limited vaccination, the rates are significant. Vaccination rates are skewed down by the under 18 crowd who is at almost no risk. Over 18, it’s over 50% in every state, and that says nothing of the huge chunk of the population with natural immunity.

              1. to compare to where we are now.

            2. It was both primarily because NYC reacted so poorly to the outbreak and the rest of the cronies who didn’t know how to mitigate said, in essence, we are all NYC let’s do that.
              Had NYC worked within their system of hospitals, many by the way, and mitigated the outbreak while also not allowing a mass exodus to all parts of the state and country (Upstate NY, Conn, MA, RI, Fl, New Orleans etc} there would have been a slower development across the country and an easier response.
              Cuomo and New York performed horribly, spread the fear and panic and then dumped the blame on the Feds. Cuomo is a horrible governor.

              1. Cuomo is a thief, traitor, and sexual predator.

    3. Who decides?

      1. Local. From the beginning, I advocated this being done as a militia-type effort. Partially because its local. Partially because it’s much easier for a militia-focused effort to declare victory, return to normal, and go home.

        Course everyone seemed to choke at that idea. And now they’re wondering why its not going to end. Duuuh.

        1. Haha. Yeah j, you’ve had all the answers from the beginning.

          WE DIDN’T LISTEN!

          What a doosh.

    4. “When returning to a normal life doesn’t create a high risk of a newly abnormal ‘normal’”

      Were you ever a libertarian? Because this is the statement of a paternalist totalitarian.

      “You kids can have this Freedom back when you’ve shown me that you can use it properly! This tough love hurts me more than it hurts you.”

      Governments should not be allowed to condition basic freedoms based on whether or not enough of its subjects have stuck needles in their arms. Full. Stop.

      After decades of fighting the War on Drugs- where the government claimed enormous powers all to tell people what chemicals they COULD put in their body- many of the same “freedom lovers” turned around to grant the government enormous powers all to tell people what chemicals they SHALL put in their body.

      Freedom is messy. In a free world, people will be ODing on drugs. They will be assholes to each other for petty reasons like religion or race. And they will also be Free.

      Why don’t you just change your name to JSafe since that is really what you love so much. It certainly isn’t freedom given the absurd- and unlikely- conditions you’ve placed on ending lockdown.

      1. Freedom is messy.

        Yes. But it is not a world where some people adopt a post-modern relativism about basic facts (say – these bullets don’t really kill or maybe I am not responsible for the bullet once it leaves the gun) – so I can wave a gun around shooting at people. It’s THEIR problem to get out of the way. Not mine. I’m not aggressive. I’m free. Stop oppressing me.

        Or maybe that’s exactly what freedom does mean to you.

        1. Lol. For millions of years, humans have been walking around living their lives. But now, because of a natural pathogen is doing what natural pathogens have done for millions of years, you have decided that walking around, living my life is tantamount to firing a gun blindly into a crowd.

          Yeah…I’m the one coming up with new meanings of freedom…sure.

          Seriously, change your name to JSafe.

          1. But now, because of a natural pathogen is doing what natural pathogens have done for millions of years,

            Actually the last time that happened here in the US on any scale was over a hundred years ago. Just in case you’re wondering, that’s a lot more than a human lifetime. Which is – well – exactly the sort of measure that one might expect of a philosophy based on – well – individual humans.

            One might indeed argue that in a country founded on We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that one might expect said government to at least try to secure some ‘life’ for people. Whether it works or not – well that’s different.

            Or maybe you can try your fatalism argument. We all die. You will too. Might as well be sooner than later. Nothing anyone can do. Freeeeeedom. Good luck with that.

            1. Maybe that government could at least try to secure some consent from the governed? If they don’t consent to being injected then the government, SERVING BY CONSENT, says ‘ok’. Just a thought.

            2. Except the 1918 flu was an order of magnitude deadlier.

          2. Make that JAsshole.

          3. Remember, to Marxists, freedom is slavery. They are upside down people.

          4. “For millions of years, humans have been walking around living their lives.”

            In social groups. We are highly evolved to be part of and depend on society. Individualism becomes nihilism when the ties between the individual and society are not recognized.

            1. “…Individualism becomes nihilism when the ties between the individual and society are not recognized…”

              Mike does a fine job with sophistry. Ask him about fire extinguishers.

            2. Which is exactly what YOU are doing by insisting that everyone bow to the collective will without legitimate justification.

              1. And that’s giving the benefit of doubt that the collective will even is mass vaccination, rather than just the will of a minority who are psychotic collectivists.

          5. JTraitor or JMarxist would be more appropriate.

      2. “Were you ever a libertarian? Because this is the statement of a paternalist totalitarian.”

        No, it is not. It is a statement consistent with being a grown-up libertarian with some sense of social responsibility.

        1. Your bullshit is noted, but it remains a statement of a paternalist totalitarian, period.

          1. As we all know by now, when white Mike says libertarian it means dimwitted collectivist totalitarian

            1. And he keeps insisting on the same discredited assertions about the danger posed by KungFlu.

    5. You don’t get it Jfree your non abnormal will never exist. Wake up.

      1. Not only does it exist. It is the virus itself that indicates when it is wise to return to normal. When it shifts from pandemic/epidemic to endemic. That will mean we are at/near actual herd immunity. It also means we no longer need to think about hospitals breaking.

        If we were paying as much attention to the virus as to DeRp, returning to normal would not be difficult.

        1. Your perception of the actual risks of the virus are completely inaccurate. Which makes your assessment of the situation completely invalid.

    6. “When returning to a normal life doesn’t create a high risk of a newly abnormal ‘normal’. eg where the medical system breaks down for everyone because some ideologues want to pamper the unvax in their delusions.”

      Stuff your PANIC flag up your ass and fuck off.

    7. I love how you just totally ignore the places that have been open almost the whole time. If the rules are what stops the crisis, why is there no crisis in Georgia?

      1. Ooh golly. You want me to pay attention to Georgia?

        Whoops this didn’t take much looking – South Georgia hospitals feel the strain Excerpts:

        said Jan Jones, director of patient care services for the system, which operates hospitals in coastal Glynn and Camden counties. “As soon as a patient is discharged from our critical care unit, or worse, is deceased, there’s another patient to put in that bed. It’s like a revolving door that we can’t stop.”

        That’s a sign of a hospital that is close to breaking. Possibly already at capacity.

        Good luck to you all. But really maybe you should stop listening to pols trying to whisper sweet nothings and coo at you.

        1. The article highlighted them being short staffed, amongst the histrionics. I’d blame something else too if I were the CEO.
          Same news outlet has a front page article about restaurants not being able to hire even with 401k and paid vacations. Not sure if GA is still giving enhanced UI benefits.
          Given the low vaccination rates they are claiming for the area and the high obesity rates, coupled with other risk factor conditions, it looks like folks with high risk factors for serious complications from covid have not been vaccinated. It is unfortunate and also a “dog bites man” story.

        2. https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization

          15% of beds are taken by covid patients.

          87% beds taken total.

          1. Thanks for the link. I just looked at 26 medical facilities in metro Atlanta, and the majority of them had available inpatient beds and ICU beds.

            BTW, how many “Certificates of Need” (CoN)have local and state governments rejected over the years? Reason has documented the negative consequences of the government rejecting such plans for new or expanded medical facilities. Part of the reason for the rejections was to reduce competition.

            Since when in a “free” country do you need permission from the government to build a medical facility? Why wouldn’t you have the right to do so, if you have the right to life, liberty, and property, and government supposedly exists to protect your rights? Why are we using central planning?

    8. With 60 to 70 percent vaccinated, and probably another 25 percent having been exposed already, herd immunity is here. Some variants may get around that but will get less dangerous over time, The medical industry is in no danger of breaking down.

  6. If the control freaks don’t like that, well, they’re another affliction we can do without.

    Careful, J.D. That’s bordering on “hate speech”.

  7. I know several people who survived Covid easily- no negative symptoms – they went to work daily, just remotely. . They also are not vaccinated for what appear to be good reasons – mostly “What would be the point for additional risk? ” But they now have documentation issues with work mask policy/etc. I am fine being around them. I don’t need to know anyone’s status. ( I also know some who died from it or suffered greatly from it. There is truth to the risk – especially to those over 70 and overweight people)
    But No to card carrying. No to mandatory injections. I notice that more people are wearing masks at the grocery store now. The media is still pushing fear.
    For full disclosure, I have spent the last 8 months working to improve the manufacturability of face masks and these masks have essentially paid my salary. I recently spent time at a mask factory in the US. Nobody there was wearing one.

    1. I recently spent time at a mask factory in the US. Nobody there was wearing one.

      Because they know they do nothing to stop virus transmission.

    2. I could not believe the nonsense on NPR yesterday. Some doctor was going on about people who have survived COVID needing to get vaccinated anyway. She explained how not everyone got an immune response from the disease, while the vaccines caused certain immune response.

      Not only does this violate everything we know about diseases, from chicken pox and on (yes, you can get the common cold hundreds of times, but there are thousands of variants of the virus out there) — and if you get a real, symptomatic case of COVID, you can be sure you got an immune response from it – because you are still alive. If you have no immune response, you never get better.

      Plus, a simple empirical: there are still just a couple hundred cases of people getting symptomatic COVID, then getting it again — and most of these are people with serious other problems, including the immuno-compromised. But we are hearing every day about “breakthough” cases where people are catching serious COVID after being vaccinated. How is this possible, unless the doctor is lying (deliberately or cluelessly) about people not getting immune responses from having the disease?

      And if they are lying to us about that, why should we believe them on anything else?

      1. Is there not an easy answer here by getting people’s antibody response to the virus tested. If you have had the virus and wish to forgo the the vaccine you should be asked to test for you immune response. It that response is with the range for vaccinated people you should be consider to be at low risk. If your response is below range for vaccinated people you should be advised to get vaccinated.

        It would be simpler to get vaccinated and many who have had the virus have still chosen to be vaccinated. This would be a way to address those remaining.

        1. shut the fuck up retard

        2. Yes, but I think the antibodies fade over time. The immune system is still ready to respond, but there are no active antibodies floating around in the vaccinated or infected a year after … just the machinery is in place to crank out the antibodies of needed (helper T cells or somesuch).

          Meaning it is technically hard to measure antibody response in either case.

          1. No. Circulating antibodies may fall below the limits of detection but they are still present, otherwise we would have never defeated polio or smallpox without perpetual boosters.

            Those circulating antibodies ARE the “machinery in place” that signals the return of an infections agent.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complement_system

        3. If you want to engage in sex, you need to prove that you don’t have any STD. And certainly, if you are a woman you need to prove that you can care for a baby or show the potential partner that you are using some sort of birth control- in fact, maybe you ought to take an abortofactant in xi’s presence just to show that you aren’t failing to do a medical procedure that would prevent financial harm to xi.

          Once we can invade peoples’ medical privacy as a condition of doing what humans have done for millions of years, the sky’s the limit!

        4. “…If you have had the virus and wish to forgo the the vaccine you should be asked to test for you immune response…”

          Fuck off and die, you authoritarian piece of shit.

      2. ” She explained how not everyone got an immune response from the disease”

        No way. An actual medical doctor said that? Because that is absurd. How else would the body rid itself of a replicating virus? Because that is what a symptomatic infection signifies – the virus is running rampant.

        And there is no mechanism within the virus to stop that process, so unless the host immune system mounts a response the host will die.

        1. The propaganda surrounding these vaccines is greater than anything I have ever seen in my lifetime. It is unreal.

          1. Worse than bad orange man propoganda, or same scriptwriters, ya think?

            1. I think it’s even worse than orange man bad propaganda, but it is close for sure. Definitely same scriptwriters

        2. No way. An actual medical doctor said that?

          I’d take it with a grain of salt when someone says that they heard on from something that confirms their bias to distrust that expert. Even professional journalists can miscommunicate what scientists and other experts say when they write an article. I wouldn’t trust some random person on the internet to be accurately expressing what some unnamed doctor on NPR had to say.

    3. masks are an iq test. anyone wearing one has failed the test. they’re not certified morons.

      1. damn keyboard. ” they’re now certified morons”

      2. Actually, I like the masks for anonymity. Fuck facial recognition software.

        1. It was fun going into a bank wearing a bandana.

        2. I too like the anonymity. And it was nice for once not having some mouth breather fogging up the back of my neck while standing in line at the cash register.

          Seems to me, those that lean more conservative, never think tactically. Wear the mask, not for the virus sake, do so for privacy. Embrace wind and solar, not for the environment, but to ensure future technology that may help keep the U.S energy independent.

          And for shits sake, conservatives spent an entire year demanding that government schools be opened, so that they could send their kids to government schools…you know, the left leaning, Marxist indoctrinating, progressives schools that teach CRT…perfect opportunity to pull the kids out of school(reducing funding per pupil) and either home school or take advantage of the private sector.

  8. people have the right to make their own risk assessments

    Yeah, well, parents can’t make a risk assessment to keep their under-12 kids out of the government schools. The truant officers will come and force the unvaccinated kids into the school.

    1. According to the US Census Bureau, homeschooling doubled between fall of 2019 and 2020. There are options.

      1. First the articles became less libertarian, now less than half the commentariat is.

        1. Huh? I would think complaining that the government is forcing children to attend government schools would qualify as a libertarian complaint.

          Homeschooling isn’t an option for everyone. If parents didn’t have to spend thousands on public school taxes, they could probably send their kids to a low-cost private school that matches their wishes regarding masking or whatever. But they don’t have that option.

          1. Well my apologies. I took your comment to be complaining about unvaccinated children.

          2. It would help but public schools are largely funded by property tax and general income tax so mostly by people who do not have school age children. It is one of the libertarian objections.

            A good start would be to eliminate the DOE and return control to local communities as advocated by the LP.

            1. It would help but public schools are largely funded by property tax and general income tax so mostly by people who do not have school age children. It is one of the libertarian objections.

              Publicly funded education exists because it is a public good for all children to have access to education. Parents that want to opt out of that system and homeschool their children or send them to private school with their own funds are still free to do so.

              A good start would be to eliminate the DOE and return control to local communities as advocated by the LP.

              Federal spending on K-12 education is ~10% of the total and most of that goes toward low-income schools, free and reduced meal programs, and so on. The ‘control’ that the federal government has over K-12 education is vastly overstated by libertarians outside of civil rights and other equal access laws.

              1. Stop molesting children

          3. Dunno about your neck of the woods but here the average cost per public school student is about $18k/yr. If the household is paying less than the education costs of their kid(s) in taxes then they are benefitting from someone else picking up the tab.
            A coworker who homeschools his kids says they spend between $500 and $1000 per year on materials per kid. There is also a public charter school here that does everything online so a public-homeschool hybrid. In each case, no vaccination needed.

            1. Number of reported cases in Florida is at an all time high but number of hospitalizations is much lower than the January peak. This is likely because the majority of older people have been vaccinated or recovered.

              We don’t have any mandates where I live at this point but many more people are wearing masks indoors than there were a month ago.

              1. Looks like that was in reply to another comment.

            2. Dunno about your neck of the woods but here the average cost per public school student is about $18k/yr. If the household is paying less than the education costs of their kid(s) in taxes then they are benefitting from someone else picking up the tab.

              That per student spending is well above the national average and about double that in my state (Florida). Florida is a low-tax state, as well. The average state and local tax burden per adult in Florida is about $4k/year. (Data from Tax Foundation and elsewhere) That is for all government services. I’m not sure about local budgets, but K-12 education spending is about 25% of the state government’s budget. Assuming a similar share of local government spending, ballpark estimate, the average adult in Florida pays about $1k/year in taxes toward K-12 education. That leads to an estimate that the cost of public education for each student is spread out between around nine adults.

              Only wealthy parents would pay in taxes anything close to the costs of educating their children in the public schools. And that would also depend on how many children they have.

  9. “When, exactly, do we get to return to normal life?”

    The day you move to a free state like Florida or Texas.

    1. Yeah, but you might want to wait until they work their way through their current surges.

      1. Why? There is statistically no danger to anyone there. Their death rate is basically the same as the rest of the country on average- 26th-ish in the nation, right at the median. But you are also free.

        1. Florida is fifth in 14 day increase in hospitalizations however. 126%. The highest is Alabama at 178%. All of the leading states are in the south.

          Death is not the only risk to think about. This is a horrible disease if you get a mild to severe case often with long term consequences.

          https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/public-health/states-ranked-by-covid-19-hospitalization-rates-august-2.html

          1. Tell us more about how it’s impossible covid19 could’ve originated in a lab, and how everyone who thinks it’s a possibility are crazy conspiracy theorists.
            Wouldn’t want to change your tune after spending a year doing just that…
            Then you can recite some more leftist talking points and pretending doing healthcare data entry makes you totes more knowledgeable than others, and not at all a midwitted, unjustly pretentious sheep.

          2. Cherry pick data much?

            The 3 states with the highest per capita death rate are New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts.

            Of course, that is why suddenly we are only interested in hospitalization rates. Because to look at deaths would mean uncomfortable facts about how little draconian lockdowns actually changed anything.

            1. And are the hospitalization rates being reported due to covid or someone in the hospital for unrelated reasons that also happens to test positive for covid?

              1. If you go to the hospital with a broken leg from a motorcycle accident and test positive for covid, they have to put you in the covid ward. So, you’re still taking up a ‘covid bed’, even if you’re completely asymptomatic.

                1. But it would be misleading to report that as a covid related hospitalization. When I worked at a State CDC something similar was done with H1N1. The director liked the time in front of the news cameras and it was apparently good for funding. It was also unethical.

              2. It shouldn’t matter because it represents a ratio. If the number who would have been admitted for other reasons anyway is relatively constant then more of them either have Covid or were admitted for Covid.

                The problem with just looking at death rates is not just because of confounding factors. It ignores the importance of morbidity as if it did not exist. It assumes that the human cost of the disease is binary. You live or you die.

            2. Correct. I think a good comparison would be FL and CA. One with onerous covid protocols and the other much more lenient.

        2. I’m in Florida, and have been this whole time.
          Everyone’s just walking around like there aren’t bodies in the streets everywhere and we haven’t all died dozens of times! The hospitals and nursing homes aren’t even freaking out! Don’t they know there’s a pAnDeMiC and everyone’s dead???

            1. I was in Florida 2 weeks ago, apparently during the midst of the deadly surge. The only death I saw was from the Red Tide wiping out fishing and fucking up some beach time.

              1. Yes, and because you didn’t see it, it doesn’t exist.

          1. South Dakota here…

            I’ve already died twice, though only one of those times was I personally murdered by Kristi Noem.

          2. Lol, in Orlando there’s some more cases in the hospitals but far from overrun. 80+% are unvaccinated. Of those intubated, 10% were vaccinated, but nearly all of those have comorbidities (obesity, HTN, DM etc). Mayor Jerry Demmings is freaking out (yeah that’s Val’s husband) but it’s his job to because… Never let a crisis go to waste. Am I vaccinated? Yes. It has way more upside than down.

      2. Maybe Cuomo can help with that.

      3. Or you could just move there because you’re not that worried about it.

      4. “Yeah, but you might want to wait until they work their way through their current surges.”

        Given that you’re a lefty who celebrates any government intrusion into persona; matters, any comment from you can safely be considered bullshit.

      5. Why, are their current surges more I tense or more deadly? Or could this just be more freeform pandemic porn from leftist totalitarians?

    2. Land and houses should be cheap there now, with everyone dead.

  10. COVID-19 has been an unpleasant ordeal for the entire planet, but perhaps not so awful as the policies inflicted on us in the name of public health.

    There’s no “perhaps” about it when you consider the most awful policy inflicted on us is “Obey”, and that that policy was not inflicted on us solely by government, it was inflicted on us by half of our fellow citizens. It’s a never-ending surprise to me to find out how many people are sheep and how happy they are to be sheep.

    1. COVID-19 has been an unpleasant ordeal for the entire planet, but perhaps not so awful as the policies inflicted on us in the name of public health.

      JFC, “an unpleasant ordeal” that is “not so awful” as the public health policies? The economic damage of people staying at home was severe, but was that really worse than the alternative? If we lost half a million people prior to vaccines being widely available and most economic restrictions being lifted, how many more would have died without such restrictions? Not to mention that it wasn’t all government mandates that led to things closing down, either. The theme parks here in Florida closed down weeks before Gov. DeSantis gave any orders for businesses to be be restricted, as did movie theaters and similar venues, iirc. Most people recognized that we needed to do that.

      It was the lack of full commitment to doing what was necessary, and the rush to ‘get back to normal’ before things were fully under control that led to the surges in the late summer and fall and then again in the winter. That is one of the main reasons why the outcomes in the U.S. were far worse than most other wealthy nations. Turning the response to COVID into a badge of tribal politics killed tens of thousands, if not a couple hundred thousands, of people that didn’t need to die. And it compounded the economic damage by extending the case numbers and deaths beyond what they could have been, keeping more people afraid and at home for longer.

      People will be analyzing what government interventions worked and what didn’t for years, but politicians and polemicists won’t wait for the data or patiently analyze available data objectively. Most reached their conclusions based on their political preferences long before any such data was available, and they will seek to justify those conclusions with whatever cherry picking and twisted rationalizations they can manage now.

  11. Well Said, “Worse, we sacrificed liberty, prosperity, and our children’s sanity for little in the way of good reason.”

    Sell your souls to the [WE] foundation; because you don’t own you, [WE] own you!

    As history has shown time and time again; Individual Liberty and Justice is the only fight worth fighting for.

  12. If you actually listen to what the Karen Battalions and their puppet masters say, you’ll realize they don’t want to return to a normal life. They see this “crisis” as a golden opportunity to “reset” society and create their Glorious Socialist Worker’s Utopia.

    1. No, we just want our hospitals to function without being overwhelmed.

      1. Well then, victory!

      2. I’ve heard that shit for over a year and a half. Create a new narrative, that one is expired and irrelevant.

      3. Which hospital is overwhelmed, Strazele?

        I have seen reports on one hospital in Jacksonville that reached its normal capacity, then requested emergency capacity and got it. They are not turning away patients. And COVID cases represent less than 25% of their cases. This hospital is doing nothing different than what they did in 2018 when they had a particularly busy flu season.

        But I’ll wait- where is a hospital being OVERWHELMED?

        1. Duh, in the NARRATIVE!

        2. “But I’ll wait- where is a hospital being OVERWHELMED?”

          Sullum is never going to answer that.

          But I’ll accept an even lower bar – show me a hospital that went into diversion (sending patients to another hospital) due to covid and not due to staffing cuts.

          1. They’re pushing 2/3 capacity in MO. It’s hard to find data, but the last CDC data I could find for pre-rona showed average hospital occupancy at around 2/3.

            1. We don’t typically build hospitals that are 2x – 3x – 4x larger than what you need. It’s cost prohibitive.

              2/3 capacity sounds about right to a little bit low.

              We do the same for hotels, btw – if they are operating below 75% occupancy for an extended period, the management starts to get worried.

              1. That is true and hospitals going on bypass or transferring patients is nothing new.

                I don’t expect a big hospital crisis at this point. In large part because good number of at risk people are vaccinated and unlikely to develop severe disease.

                1. Yes, nothing protects people like obeying their democrat masters. Look how well that sort of compliance worked out for nursing home patients in New York.

            2. 2/3 is VERY LOW. Normally you want to run AT LEAST 80% full.

          2. Here’s one: Clinch Hospital in Homerville, GA

            Clinch Memorial Hospital, in Homerville, is seeing a similar increase of COVID patients, including children.

            “We are already experiencing difficulty getting patients out of our facility that need a higher level of care,’’ said hospital CEO Angela Ammons. The hospital’s chief nursing officer “called over 20 hospitals to get a critical care patient out Wednesday and was unsuccessful,’’ Ammons said.

            1. “I found one rural treatment center that isn’t even really a full hospital in one place that got a bit busy because they barely have in-patient facilities. But it fits my narrative.”

              -JFree – noted moron

              “Clinch Memorial Hospital is a 25-bed critical access hospital serving Homerville, Clinch County, and surrounding counties.”

              https://clinchmh.org/about/

            2. P. fucking S. –

              Do you know what a ‘critical access hospital’ IS?

              1. Just another one of 1343 that will no longer be able to deal with the health needs of that community. And a LONG way away from any other.

        3. Didn’t you see? There were a bunch of tweets about it. And the problem is so clear and so bad that all of these tweets used the exact same language.

          That’s how we know it’s true. Corroboration.

      4. Just to flatten the curve, right retard?

      5. Even supposing that was a major problem, which it really hasn’t been outside of a few particularly hard hit areas, why is that justification for imposing on everyone’s life? Seems like a big leap to me. No one has presented an argument for why our rights are subservient to the state of hospitals.

      6. “No, we just want our hospitals to function without being overwhelmed.”

        CA has >73,000 staffed hospital beds. Last count showed ~5,000 occupied “with” covid.
        Like turd; if pod posts it, it’s either an outright lie, or close enough.

      7. Bullshit!! We heard countless stories of overrun hospitals in NYC at the height of the pandemic while simultaneously there was a medical ship there to alleviate that taking in ZERO patients. That was intentional to heighten the fear and anxiety, nothing has changed.

        1. And the democrats kicked Franklin Graham’s free mobile hospital out of NYC because he wouldn’t make a public statement endorsing homosexuality.

          Democrats can fuck off. They don’t give a shit about saving lives. This is 100% about consolidating their power.

      8. Strazele admits to being one of the Karens.

      9. If they made it through last December, the worst is behind them.

      10. Here we see LoS self-identifying as a Karen.

    2. Ironically, they’ve always had the freedom to *create* their Glorious Socialist Worker’s Utopia on a Free-Market contract/union.

      That’s not really what they are after; They want the *POWER* of Gov-Gun-Forces to *steal* freedom away from individual people to enhance their own means.

  13. https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1423594470428323845?s=19

    NEW – #COVID19 vaccination will be required to travel “forevermore” and young people will “not be able to leave the country” without it, the UK transport secretary Grant Shapps told the BBC.

    1. So just like the other half a dozen vaccines you were required to take. This isn’t even new. You guys are delusional if you don’t already know that.

      1. When ever did the UK say kids couldn’t travel if they didn’t get a certain vaccine. I’ll wait.

        1. Animals have to quarantine for one month and either have proof of or receive a rabies vaccine

          1. WTF does that have to do with anything? You h really have no concept of individual rights, do you progtard?

      2. Hmm, can you see a difference between vaccines required by foreign governments to enter certain countries and vaccines required by your own government to leave your house?

      3. i’ve been to uk many, many times and never had to show vaccination records. you’re delusional.

    2. sadly i expect these travel restriction will happen everywhere. i’ll never be able to travel internationally. the tyrants are taking over.

  14. https://twitter.com/TheRealTachyon/status/1423501913996279809?s=19

    Stories like this?

    Their proper name is propaganda [pic of fear mongering bots]

    1. I’ve seen several other similar screenshots of multiple accounts saying the exact same thing.

    2. Dots I should have connected AGES ago:

      The Biden admin missed its vaccination goal by huge amounts. The vaccine has been widely available to all adults who want it since April, and vax numbers aren’t budging.

      Then, “delta variant” is discovered, and now it’s primarily responsible for killing the unvaxxed (allegedly).

      Now there’s a new rash of twitter bots posting shit like this, and nurses and doctors crying on Tik Tok about all the young, deathly ill rona patients they’re seeing. Despite ALL the evidence to the contrary.

      Delta variant is nothing but a propaganda piece to try and push up vax rates, and claim victory.

      And it’s not working. Vax rates still aren’t where the regime needs them to be to claim victory. People have made up their minds about it, and they’re not budging on it, no matter how many crying nurses you put on the interwebs.

      Vax passports are next. If they can’t guilt you into it, and they can’t scare you into it, they’ll hold you hostage in your house until you finally buckle.

      1. I believe the delta variant most likely exists. But you’re probably not far off from most of it. Biden seems to quite upset not everyone is respecting his authoratiii

      2. The Biden admin missed its vaccination goal by huge amounts.

        And the audience at CPAC cheered this.

        Even after the anti-vax bullshit about MMR vaccines and autism, I still never would have thought that this kind of reality denial could take hold on this scale over something so clearly dangerous. At least the Jenny McCarthy’s in the U.S. weren’t taken seriously by a large enough segment of the population to create more than pockets here and there where MMR vaccination rates were below what they needed to be to protect the whole community. We got some unnecessary measles outbreaks that sickened people that didn’t need to get sick, and it showed an ongoing problem, but it wasn’t looking to become a larger disaster. This has been.

        If ever we’ve seen a real-world example that fits the “cutting off your nose to spite your face” saying, this is it. This anti-vax reaction has been about a toxic combination of ideology (gov’ment can’t tell me what to do!) and tribal politics. How many really think that there would been anything like this level of vaccine resistance had it been a Trump administration goal to reach 70% getting their first shot by July 4th? Do people really not remember Trump wanting the vaccines to be pushed out before the election so that he could use that on the campaign trail? Yet now his people are calling them risky and yelling about them not having full FDA approval?

  15. You guys surrendered a long time ago or you’d probably be dead already. Your parent were forced to vaccinate you. Forced to do a thousand other things like getting you medical treatment and feeding you. “Big govt” is the reason you’re even alive.

    1. The government forced my parents to feed me?

      1. Have you seen the crazy out there? Yes, the law requires your parents to feed you and care for you. There’s a whole written code of rights and obligations for parents and children. It had to be written down because people are wildcards. You never what you’re gonna get. They’re probably eating children in Alabama in some other dimension.

        1. “Have you seen the crazy out there?”

          “They’re probably eating children in Alabama in some other dimension.”

          Plenty of crazy in here.

        2. I recall reading about cabalism of kids in North Korea when that country had implemented socialist top-down agriculture policies and the country was starving. I believe that also happened in the socialist Soviet Union during one of their worse 5-year plans. It was cited as a contributing factor to what made Chikatilo into a monster (this apparently happened to his sister). No reports from Roll Tide country but will keep my eyes open.

          1. *cannibalism

        3. This here is the thing that depresses me. People who have so little faith in humanity that they believe thta the laws making people feed their children is what makes people feed kids. This mentality is what is fucking the world up. Every fantasy hobgoblin that the these neurotic freaks can come up with must be regulated against, ignoring the fact that most people, while not geniuses, are basically decent.

          1. This here is the thing that depresses me. People who have so little faith in humanity that they believe thta[sic] the laws making people feed their children is what makes people feed kids.

            I don’t think that laws that require parents to care for their children is what makes parents take care of their children. But it does allow government to step in when there are parents that aren’t caring for their children. It also allows the government to check on suspected cases of neglect or abuse. And when parents are simply overwhelmed and not able to care for their children, it provides for social workers that can identify these cases and help these parents get the support they need or see to it that the children are placed somewhere they won’t be neglected if supporting the parents won’t be enough or if those parents are unwilling to get support.

            These agencies can be highly imperfect, but I don’t think anyone would suggest that they aren’t needed.

            And these laws can and do punish parents that don’t seek medical care for their children. There are always the cases where parents claim the religious freedom to pray that their child will get better rather than take them to a doctor or hospital, but I don’t agree that religious freedom or parental rights extend that far. This is a case where parents actually do believe that they are caring for the children, but they are obviously deluded about how to best care for them. There has to be a point where objective reality trumps religious belief when it comes to the welfare of children.

        4. So you have no faith in humanity, yet somehow the human leaders lording over us are good? You’re such an illogical faggot.

          1. So you have no faith in humanity…

            Faith is belief and trust in something in the absence of evidence either for or against that proposition. (Maintaining belief and trust in the face of strong evidence against a proposition is delusion, not faith.) Personally, I try not to act on ‘faith’ when evidence-based reasoning is an available option. When it comes to parents caring for their children, the evidence is that the vast majority of parents at least try and care for their children adequately. But, the evidence is also clear that some parents are unable or not competent to do so, and a few are willfully abusive or neglectful. That is why we have laws requiring parents to care for their children. That is not human leaders “lording” over us.

        5. Yes, the law requires your parents to feed you and care for you.

          I am very hopeful that Biden will sign the “Reminding All Americans To Breathe Act” soon. I’m starting to feel a little light-headed…

          1. He will sign the bill live on tv, using his nose to breathe, with some long-haired girl in front of his face.

        6. I’m looking at crazy right here. Fuck your nanny state.

    2. “Big govt” is the reason you’re even alive.
      Holy crap.
      Beyond hope.

    3. Lard of Strudel surrendered long ago to his cheese danish fetish.

    4. Yeah, why would parents do those things if there wasn’t a law?

      1. Leftist are retarded.

        They are selfish and psychotic, and they project that onto everyone else. They don’t understand that most people are NOT psychotic, that most people actually love their children, and that most people don’t need anyone to tell them to feed their children.

        They also don’t believe in biology, so they don’t understand the biologically ingrained drive to ensure the health and survival of your offspring.

        1. The retarded are generally decent enough so don’t malign them like that.

          Leftists are straight up evil. Point out or even prove their fallacies or bad assumptions and they either pivot to a new talking point or factory reset like nothing was ever pointed out to them. In people pushing a totalitarian agenda I don’t know how to describe such a disregard for reality but evil.

    5. “Big govt” is the reason you’re even alive.

      And it’s the reason that a lot of people are dead. Get up off of your damn knees.

      And fuck you.

    6. I can’t imagine a reason that one as stupid and pathetic as Strazhole has managed to stay alive.

    7. The sense of mercy ‘my guys’ have is the sole reason you’re still breathing.

      Pray that mercy never runs out.

  16. https://twitter.com/MichaelPSenger/status/1423392812452618241?s=19

    Gates: “The source isn’t gonna change the need for masks and vaccines…so all countries can…be more like Australia.” (6th lockdown) “Flu and common cold…get rid of those as well.”

    “Do you want to know how this started?”

    “”

    A lot wrong here…
    [Video]

  17. I got the Pfizer-jab, just out of pressure to do so from my folks, & now I have recurring-headache from the damn poison.

    1. Correlation, or causation? I got the Moderna. First dose – my shoulder (injection site) was sore for a little less than 24 hours. Second dose – soreness was worse, and I had a headache the next day that was moderate, and perhaps a little queasiness. That lasted just for that day also. Given the timing and expectation of having some side effects, it is reasonable to assume causation between the shots and my symptoms. We’d need more to judge your experiences.

  18. January 6th didn’t go far enough.

  19. I agree with moving on.

    But I disagree that the unvaccinated are making a choice that impacts only themselves. That’s just not accurate. As a vaccinated person, I am significantly less likely to be infected by them, but that doesn’t mean it can’t happen, and I don’t see why I should have to tolerate being around unvaccinated people – without my knowledge or consent – who are so careless about their health that they could be super-spreading without realizing it.

    Put it another way. Say you’re vaccinated, your kid is not, and you want to invite a friend over to watch the game – indoors, for several hours. Your friend is not vaccinated. Cool cool, we’re not being pointless control freaks. But then, day of, your friend has some mild COVID-like symptoms and doesn’t bother to tell you. He comes over anyway, and spends the afternoon in your house, yukking it up, playing with your kid, etc.

    Are you cool with that?

    1. What does your made up story have to do with me?

      1. I’m trying to assist the empathy-deficient aspie-tarians that populate the boards here (and write posts like the OP) understand why someone might be in favor of a vaccine mandate applicable to fellow patrons of restaurants, gyms, and workplaces.

        1. What about flu vaccine proof too since that’s going to be worse for your kid, chicken pox etc? do you show those now before play dates or is it just this one thing Simon? I don’t see that being consistent if you don’t and if you are expecting it you should already being doing that “courtesy” for others.

          1. You say this like it’s not already standard to require kids to get vaccinated to go to school. I’m also sure lots of playgroups are implicitly formed on the understanding that all the participating kids have gotten their vaccinations, with drama ensuing if one of the participating parents came out as anti-vaxx

            I think that, once we’re past this point where COVID surges are overwhelming health systems (in the US and across the world), and we’re into a rhythm with COVID like we are with the flu, it’ll make sense to relax a bit and approach the disease like we currently approach the flu – i.e., with vaccines generally recommended, but not required to participate in society.

            I’m not actually that enthused about the vaccine mandates, myself – I agree with most people here about the actual risks of COVID, etc. – but, for me and where I live, the choice isn’t really between vaccine mandates and normal life. It’s between vaccine mandates and mask mandates. I’d rather have to prove my vaxx status once, in order to use the gym, than be required to wear a mask every time I go. Similarly, I’d rather show my vaxx status at the door of a restaurant, than perform this weird choreography where we all pretend I’m potentially infectious only when I stand up.

            1. So it’s really all about you after all.

              1. Like the protestations about freedom from vaccines isn’t similarly selfish?

            2. The flu vaccine is required for schools?

              1. Schools? Not that I’m aware of. You have to get vaccinated against a number of other disease, though. Flu and COVID vaccine mandates for schools may come soon, given our recent experience.

                Healthcare providers often require flu vaccinations for their employees, though.

            3. Except that flu vaccines aren’t required for school. So you avoid the question because the answer makes you what? Uncomfortable? Hypocritcal?

    2. Yep, but I also let my kids ride dirt bikes, rock climb, handle guns, hunt, fish, hike…you know, live; and not simply exist.

      Kids catch colds. That what Covid is to kids, a fucking cold.

      1. I assume, then, that you take a similar approach to other communicable, usually non-fatal diseases that your child might be exposed to, such as chickenpox, measles, flu, etc., despite the existence of vaccines for those diseases?

        And, for yourself – if you get COVID (admittedly a low chance with the vaccination), you’re cool with potentially losing your sense of smell/taste for an indeterminate period of time? Or coming down with a nasty flu for a couple of weeks? Or being winded for months?

        I’m not scared of getting infected, as I go about living my own life. But a symptomatic case of COVID is nasty enough that I’m going to be quite a bit miffed that I got it just because someone (and I’ll never know whom, or be able to avoid these people) preferred to take their chances.

        1. Oh wouldn’t want you to be “miffed” better throw away respect for civil liberties.

        2. You should be scared that you neurotic collectivists seem hell bent on forcing people to reach the point of necessary self defense

        3. Nobody is happy to get sick. The question is whose responsibility it is to protect me from natural pathogens doing what natural pathogens do. We are all responsible for ourselves.

          To think otherwise is to hand over our rights to the government. They can lock us down. Force us to stick needles in our arms to vaccinate. Force us NOT to stick needles in our arms for drugs. Give preferential treatment to doctors, politicians and police who “protect us”. Limit the cars we can drive. Bestow tax credits on others doing important work to “protect us”.

          No. Thank. You. I would much rather have my freedom than entrust my civil liberties with a federal government that actually gives no shits about me as an individual unless I dare fail to respect its authority.

          1. The question is whose responsibility it is to protect me from natural pathogens doing what natural pathogens do. We are all responsible for ourselves.

            We are responsible for ourselves. That includes making decisions about the company we keep, and setting conditions for (say) having a friend over to watch the game. You might not decide that you need to require vaccinations to enter your house. But if someone comes over, infected with something contagious, and doesn’t bother to tell you, have they violated your trust? Do you think they’ve breached some implicit understanding you might have had, between you?

            Doesn’t have to be COVID. Could be something like the flu. How often do we complain about coworkers who come in to the office sick? The “office bug” wastes productivity and can leave waves of people miserable.

            You might say, “Well, it’s my responsibility to protect myself from the office bug, no one else’s.” But the point is to observe that we pretty clearly do have some implicit social understandings about our responsibilities to others, when it comes to contagious diseases. You’re abstracting away from the question to avoid acknowledging that. (Or embracing the absurdity of your position, perhaps.)

            1. If someone comes over to my house, infected with some contagious disease (of which they are aware), without telling me, then yes, they have violated my trust. They did breach a social compact which says that is wrong. Normally friends don’t do that to friends. The libertarian, non-slaver way that normal people resolve this is, they don’t ever invite that person over ever again. Your response of, use government force to ~make~ them take an experimental vaccine is, to put it mildly, somewhat disturbing. We do have responsibilities to protect ourselves. That responsibility to to protect ~ourselves~. Not to force others to protect us. How do you not see what you are advocating could easily be turned to horrible evil. Name a behavior that couldn’t be forced all in the name of protecting someone else.

              1. Simon knows it’s evil.
                Simon is evil.

          2. My reasoning is that with liberty comes a great deal of personal responsibility. People may have different judgements about this particular issue however what happens in general is that if we don’t act responsibly government will step in.

            The whole reason we are stuck with big government is most people do not want to take responsibility for their own actions which includes how my choices may endanger other people.

            1. “The whole reason we are stuck with big government is most people do not want to take responsibility for their own actions which includes how my choices may endanger other people.”

              No this is wrong. The reason we are stuck with big government is that people like you have decided that just because something is a “good thing”, it must be “required”.

              It may be a good thing if I fence my property to prevent wolves from crossing it to get to your livestock. It may be a good thing if I hold the door open for a person coming behind me with their arms full. It may be a good thing if I install cameras on my house to get pictures of the guy who keeps stealing packages off your front doorstep. It may be a good thing if I vaccinate myself to create barriers to a virus that is coursing through the public. But we do not have a *responsibility* to do things just because they are good.

              And beyond that fundamental objection, I also have a practical one: that too often we cause *way* more harm turning “good” things into “required” things. It is a good thing to abstain from drugs. But the War on Drugs was a colossal fuckup of epic proportions that destroyed the liberties of millions. Providing for the needy is a good thing, but the War on Poverty was a colossal fuckup of epic proportions that turned the needy into a permanent underclass dependent on the government.

              1. No I am against all of those things.

                I am a small government libertarian.

                This says the point I am trying to make better than I can. From libertarian.org

                It is a central tenet of libertarianism that the values of personal freedom and responsibility are indivisible. A corollary to that proposition is the view that respect for one of those values implies and requires a respect for the other. The notion of limited government defended by Madison and Jefferson arguably takes for granted the indivisibility of freedom and responsibility. Friedrich Hayek, a Nobel laureate in economics, explained in his 1960 work, The Constitution of Liberty, “a free society will not function or maintain itself unless its members regard it as right that each individual occupy the position that results from his action and accept it as due to his own action.”

                1. “No I am against all of those things.”

                  So you prefer large scale self righteous scolding over government mandates? I guess that’s something.

                  Have fun with that, dude.

              2. You are confusing responsibility with acts of kindness.

                If someone chooses not to get a vaccine that is their right. The individual however needs to take ownership of that decision as it may affect not just themselves but other people.

      2. simon’s kids live bubble wrapped in plastic so they’re safe. not allowed outside because it’s too dangerous. he wants a risk free world with no danger. he’s a leftist idiot.

    3. “As a vaccinated person, I am significantly less likely to be infected by them, but that doesn’t mean it can’t happen, and I don’t see why I should have to tolerate being around unvaccinated people – without my knowledge or consent – who are so careless about their health that they could be super-spreading without realizing it.”

      You have no right to force someone to do something for your protection- especially protection from nature. The sun’s rays will damage you and kill you. You have no right to force me to build a barrier to protect you. Wolves can go onto your property and kill your livestock. You have no right to force your neighbors to fence their property in order to protect you. And yes, viruses can travel through deer, cats, dogs and other humans on their mission to do what they have naturally evolved to do for millions of years- infect you. That does not give you the right to mandate that I stick a needle in my arm for your benefit.

      “He comes over anyway, and spends the afternoon in your house, yukking it up, playing with your kid, etc.

      Are you cool with that?”

      First: the risk to your or my kid is so small as to be noise. So yeah I am cool with that. Second, the risk to your kid over flu is actually higher. The risk that your friend hit your kid in the street is higher. Why suddenly are you carrying water for totalitarians to mitigate this tiny risk when you would never have cared if someone accidentally transmitted the flu to you or did something really risky like driving around on ROADS for years before COVID?

      1. You have no right to force someone to do something for your protection…

        This is a self-serving way of framing the question.

        We ordinarily abide by one rule, when it comes to potentially harming others – we have a duty to exercise reasonable care in order to avoid harming others. So, I can’t drive recklessly. I can’t shoot a gun carelessly in populated areas. I can’t do a lot of things that would otherwise be perfectly acceptable, if doing so could reasonably be expected to result in harm to others. And the law backs up that restriction.

        So, the question isn’t whether I am “forcing” you to protect me, but whether getting vaccinated from a highly contagious disease falls within the realm of our duty of reasonable care to avoid harming others. I am open to arguments either way, on that question; one way of getting to the question is to consider hypotheticals like the one I’ve posed. But it is that question you need to focus on, not the high-fallutin’ polemic about your “freedoms” you’d prefer.

        The risk that your friend hit your kid in the street is higher.

        It’s an interesting comparison, and I would agree that it’s accurate. I would be inclined to say that I would be mighty pissed if my friend, on his way over, was driving quickly down the street in my neighborhood, where my kid regularly plays, while texting. I would not accept that as something a responsible adult would do. Strange that your intuitions would seem to run in the opposite direction.

        In any event, I don’t mean to inflate the risks to your kid. The question is whether you are fine with your friend being the one whose actions determine whether your kid is exposed to those risks, such as they are, without your even knowing about it. Again, I’m surprised that anyone with such an elevated sense of their own autonomy would be “fine” with abandoning that autonomy at the whims of their friends.

        1. “Everyone who doesn’t do what I want because I want them to do it is selfish”

        2. “This is a self-serving way of framing the question.”

          Wait…Wait…For millions of years, infectious diseases have been accepted as a fact of life. But suddenly YOU have discovered that people going about their normal life (with a potential to catch a disease) somehow have a responsibility to vaccinate on YOUR behalf. And *I* am being self-serving? Really?

          “So, I can’t drive recklessly. I can’t shoot a gun carelessly in populated areas.”

          We created a word for people acting in a reckless manner likely to cause harm- that is called “Negligence”. The reason we created that word is that we needed to distinguish between “performing an act that knowingly puts others in likely danger” and “living our normal lives, despite the fact that some risk is inherent.” For some reason you would like Negligence to lose all significance by taking on all meaning.

          There is risk inherent with driving- risk that we all assume when driving. And people die every year in motor accidents. Not every one of those deaths was due to negligence- because sometimes those inherent risks catch up to us. That is why the law pains itself to distinguish between negligent driving (which often carries criminal penalties) from cases where someone may have made a mistake short of actual negligence.

          Likewise, “walking around living my life” is not negligence, because it doesn’t have a higher likelihood of harm above the inherent risks we have assumed while walking around all our lives. Maybe a case could be made that if you have the sniffles, and you go to a crowded place, you are making a mistake. Certainly if you KNOW that you have the disease, or are likely to have COVID, then you could make negligent choices at that point.

          “So, the question isn’t whether I am “forcing” you to protect me, but whether getting vaccinated from a highly contagious disease falls within the realm of our duty of reasonable care to avoid harming others.”

          There is no question. You are literally FORCING me to put a needle in my arm. You may justify it, but chill with the scare quotes.

          At the end of the day, this virus is doing what viruses have done for millions of years. It is a natural pathogen. The fact that COVID uses bats, cats, deer AND humans to spread is not my fault. I have not aggressed you by happening to be a vector that this pathogen has evolved to utilize. If COVID could only spread through birds and a bird landed on my lawn, would I be obligated to shoot that bird to protect you? After all, by your logic, owning land that COVID-Crows could land on is somehow aggressing against you…? If not, what is the difference?

          1. Wait…Wait…For millions of years, infectious diseases have been accepted as a fact of life.

            Yes, as has been things like quarantines and colonies to isolate the infectious, all backed by force. And, once the germ theory came together, we shortly thereafter developed vaccines, and with them, vaccine mandates.

            The idea that we would have a brand new infectious disease like COVID and choose, for some reason, to just take our chances with it, rather than take a readily-available, effective vaccine to eliminate it as much as possible, is a thoroughly contemporary one. It ought to be incomprehensible, but idiocy reigns these days.

            Likewise, “walking around living my life” is not negligence, because it doesn’t have a higher likelihood of harm above the inherent risks we have assumed while walking around all our lives. Maybe a case could be made that if you have the sniffles, and you go to a crowded place, you are making a mistake. Certainly if you KNOW that you have the disease, or are likely to have COVID, then you could make negligent choices at that point.

            I agree, but this is the very core of the question. With COVID, what constitutes “negligence”? I’ll admit that I don’t really know the answer to that question. But the fact that vaccines are very easy to get, are generally safer than getting COVID itself, and given that COVID is pretty infectious and potentially getting moreso, the more it circulates, counsels in favor (to my mind) that it’s reasonable to get vaccinated. I like to work out in gyms, and I’m looking forward to getting back in to the office. Would it be “negligent” for me to continue those activities, without getting vaccinated?

            I appreciate that you’re trying to make the question more concrete by talking about COVID-crows, etc., but I think the real-life example, on HIV, that I offered in my other comment, helps guide the intuitions here. There, “negligence” would seem to be, having HIV or being intentionally ignorant of your status, not getting the preventative drugs, and having sex with people without telling them your status, regardless of whether they use physical barriers or are on PREP. If that’s so, what’s the COVID correlate?

            1. SimonP is a virus.

            2. The animal analogy could be stated as what is your responsibility if you have a pig farm infected with the swine flu? You have to destroy the pigs. We have rules and responsibilities with infected crops for the same reason so the blight does not spread to others.

              In this case vaccination is a reasonable measure. It is still an individual choice.

              1. The animal analogy could be stated as what is your responsibility if you have a pig farm infected with the swine flu? You have to destroy the pigs.

                That’s the North Korean solution.

            3. Fuck off and die, slaver.

            4. “Yes, as has been things like quarantines and colonies to isolate the infectious,”

              These are not germane examples. First, they are very recent in humanity’s history. And second, they were not used to isolate “the infectious”, they were used to isolate the INFECTED. Prior to 2020, it was almost unheard of to suggest that random people be isolated. Quarantine was reserved for people known to be infected.

              And third, when this was COERCED quarantine, it was never just blindly accepted. Mandatory leper colonies were extremely controversial and the nation had a huge argument as recently as the 2015 Ebola outbreak as to whether society had the right to quarantine those doctors who WEREN’T infected, but just working with the infected.

              So the precedent still remains that no one has ever thought that just walking around living your daily life suddenly constitutes “aggression” merely because you are a POTENTIAL vector for disease. You are suggesting something entirely new, much more in line with the types of infringements of the Drug War.

              “The idea that we would have a brand new infectious disease like COVID and choose, for some reason, to just take our chances with it, rather than take a readily-available, effective vaccine to eliminate it as much as possible, is a thoroughly contemporary one. It ought to be incomprehensible, but idiocy reigns these days.”

              First of all, please put away the straw man. People ought to get vaccinated. I am arguing with your belief that it is moral to compel people to get vaccinated. Absolutely there are a lot of idiots out there- people who abuse drugs, and have unprotected sex, and go out to crowded places while sick. And the only thing worse than those idiots is giving some other idiots the power to force medical decisions on the entire population.

              Second, there is NOTHING novel about the COVID situation. We have had brand new infectious diseases for millennia. When the Hong Kong Flu was sweeping through the nation with similar death rates, people weren’t cowering in their homes- they went to Woodstock.

              “Would it be “negligent” for me to continue those activities, without getting vaccinated?”

              No, because living your life as normal is not negligence. While you may be vaccinated against COVID, are you vaccinated against the Lambda variant? How about Ebola? The simple fact is that there are inherent risks in walking around. You may be struck by lightning. You may get hit on the head by a meteor. You may catch a cold. And while it is nice that people do their best to reduce these risks, IT SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED. Demanding that someone who is infected refrain from infecting you is one thing. But demanding that someone reduce their chances of infection to reduce YOUR chances of protection is totalitarian.

          2. No it has not been accepted as a fact of life. Since germ theory and the discovery of vaccines by Edward Jenner people have been fighting to find preventative measures to combat infectious diseases.

            I am not in favor of government mandates for anything. People do need to accept the consequences or potential consequences of their actions. That is the foundation for a libertarian society.

            1. Echospinner is a virus.

            2. And you, I, and everyone else should not have to pay f for the hospital stays of the uninsured who decided that not getting vaccinated was a good idea. Really shouldn’t have to pay for anyone’s hospital stay but that’s a story for another day.
              If the insurance companies were smart, they would try to avoid paying for covid hospitalizations of their insureds who declined vaccination. Not saying it would work, but as a private venture it might not amount to a breach depending on the wording of the policy.

              1. Yea, separate the population into two separate classes to be judged and treated differently, because your bitch ass is scared of a moderately threatening (to some people, not most) virus and others aren’t as obedient as you.
                Totes great idea

        3. go lick boot you insufferable twat

        4. This guy is absurdly low-T

          1. Strange. My dick is huge, I have hair everywhere, my appetite for sex is insatiable, and I have a raging erection right now just thinking about jizzing all over your hairy little man-titties.

            1. Ah a degenerate schizo with the free time to compose essays during the work day.

              Committing your kind to asylums is a far more urgent public health priority than COVID ever will be.

              1. Lol, “degenerate.”

                But you make a good point. I should get back to work. After I rub (another) one out.

                1. Yeah, fucking degenerate, probably so much fat tissue that he is literally merged with an office chair and keeps rubbing his miniature penis because despite his ‘insatiable apetite’ (lmao) the name of his partner is ‘crickets’. 😀

                2. Should have skipped the on and made your handle ‘SimP’ lol

    4. You can avoid all unvaccinated people by staying at home. I see that as win win

      1. I can also avoid them by patronizing establishments that require vaccine proof to enter. Win-win!

        1. I avoid establishments that discriminate though I respect the right of a baker to not cater same-sex weddings with a custom cake.

    5. If you want to require a vaccine passport for your house, go ahead and leave everyone else alone.

    6. OK, if any degree of elevated risks to my life and lifestyle, real or imagined, posed by others provides justification to control people, then I want to eliminate young black males and socialists.

      1. I’d like to mandate birth control for women so I don’t have to worry about my potential fetuses being aborted.

    7. Short answer, yes. Because my kid is unlikely to get it, or if she does get it, she’s unlikely to be seriously ill. The most she’ll have is a couple of days of very mild illness.

      Also, I don’t know what kind of dickheads you hang out with, but among my responsible group of non-vaxxed friends and family, it’s understood that if you’re sick, you don’t go to other people’s houses because that’s rude, whether it’s the wu flu, the regular flu, or a cold.

      1. Key word being, I suppose, “responsible.” Which was the point I was making.

        Unfortunately, I can’t choose the “dickheads” who enter public spaces at the same time I do.

        1. Unfortunately, dickheads have as much right to occupy public spaces as you do, and you can’t exclude them for being dickheads.

          If you’re worried about too many dickheads in public spaces, posing a risk to you (even though that worry is unfounded), then it’s your own responsibility to make your own risk decisions. You have no right to impose your low risk tolerance on people who may be dickheads and also have a higher risk tolerance than you.

          That’s rub in living in a free society. Dickheads have the same rights as you.

          1. Who says I’m worried? I’m not “worried.”

            Like I’ve said in another comment, for me the choice my local politics seems to have is between vaccine mandates and mask mandates. It’s not vaccine mandates and nothing, or mask mandates or nothing. There’s just too much political pressure to “do something” about a recent surge that is mostly hitting the under-vaccinated parts of the city, especially since the CDC “updated” its mask guidance.

            I don’t mind, and in fact rather welcome, that a vaccine mandate means that the chances I’ll get sick with COVID from going out to eat, or to the gym, etc., should go way down from where they are already. But the lack of the mandate wouldn’t change my behavior, in that respect.

            1. So, just to clarify, while you are not in full-throated approval of instrusove government overreach, you are not opposed to either, because it will not personally inconvenience you in any way.

              Good to know.

              1. You must be one of the rare libertarians that cares about abortion and voting rights.

                1. You lost me. Most libertarians are in favor of right to choose, gun rights, and voting rights so long as it can be verified who is actually voting.

    8. “…But I disagree that the unvaccinated are making a choice that impacts only themselves…”

      Fuck off and die, slaver.

    9. I’m sure you felt the same about every other disease we have vaccines for.

    10. I don’t see why I should have to tolerate being around unvaccinated people

      You don’t have to. You can lock yourself away.

    11. Can you catch the bug from a vaccinated person? Yes? Then what’s the point?

    12. Fuck your fearful Karen nanny state.

    13. If you’re that worried, stay at home.

  20. From the beginning of government intrusion, my first thought was “how do we call an end to it?”. From a political perspective, there is almost a conflict of interest as politicians, particularly Democrats, will feel they must portray compassion and caring even when it causes absurd results. The mindset has been that we must protect everyone, even when they don’t want it. We have truly reached a fork in the road where the unvaccinated have made their decision to go on with life as it was pre-pandemic. I have made that decision too and expect no less freedom. Time to move on. I’m not wasting more of my time.

    1. Holy Shit. Good to see you again John.

      Yes, 2020 has exposed a truly scary feedback loop in the United States especially, but also the rest of the world. Politicians are afraid of looking indifferent and so they “Do Something!” And the media can’t report “everything is normal” (or getting better) because that doesn’t bring in the clicks. So they are perpetually creating shit that politicians need to “Do Something” about.

    2. John if you’re John lovely to see you.

    3. Yay! John’s back!

  21. You have no right to force someone to do something for your protection…

    This is a self-serving way of framing the question.

    We ordinarily abide by one rule, when it comes to potentially harming others – we have a duty to exercise reasonable care in order to avoid harming others. So, I can’t drive recklessly. I can’t shoot a gun carelessly in populated areas. I can’t do a lot of things that would otherwise be perfectly acceptable, if doing so could reasonably be expected to result in harm to others. And the law backs up that restriction.

    So, the question isn’t whether I am “forcing” you to protect me, but whether getting vaccinated from a highly contagious disease falls within the realm of our duty of reasonable care to avoid harming others. I am open to arguments either way, on that question; one way of getting to the question is to consider hypotheticals like the one I’ve posed. But it is that question you need to focus on, not the high-fallutin’ polemic about your “freedoms” you’d prefer.

    The risk that your friend hit your kid in the street is higher.

    It’s an interesting comparison, and I would agree that it’s accurate. I would be inclined to say that I would be mighty pissed if my friend, on his way over, was driving quickly down the street in my neighborhood, where my kid regularly plays, while texting. I would not accept that as something a responsible adult would do. Strange that your intuitions would seem to run in the opposite direction.

    In any event, I don’t mean to inflate the risks to your kid. The question is whether you are fine with your friend being the one whose actions determine whether your kid is exposed to those risks, such as they are, without your even knowing about it. Again, I’m surprised that anyone with such an elevated sense of their own autonomy would be “fine” with abandoning that autonomy at the whims of their friends.

    1. Simon so let me pose this from your question/statement: We ordinarily abide by one rule, when it comes to potentially harming others – we have a duty to exercise reasonable care in order to avoid harming others.

      So what about those with low immune systems should they stay home they have a much larger chance of catching and spreading something than people with healthy immune systems. We could even nuance that and go back to the 80’s and aids do those with the potential stay away? You mention driving recklessly why stop there, why not no driving, just walking bikes, or even better internet to communicate work and order talk out the chance of walking into someone? Yes it’s extreme and we might agree on it but that might not be extreme to someone else so when is the line drawn? I’m curious on your thoughts there as I don’t think we disagree on other topics you posit on but we do diverge here.

      1. So what about those with low immune systems should they stay home they have a much larger chance of catching and spreading something than people with healthy immune systems.

        I’m not sure this is true, but let’s stipulate something concrete: imagine someone who has a genetic trait that means that they essentially always have COVID, they’re always infectious, and they’re always symptomatic. Call him “COVID Corey.”

        Would we say, “Welp, guess everyone has to live with the risk that there’s a COVID Corey next to them in a restaurant, in a theater, on the bus, in the office. Best we can do is vaccinate against COVID”?

        Or would we say, “Hey, COVID Corey? Maybe don’t spend a lot of time around immunocompromised people, at least not without a mask. Maybe wear a mask if you’ll be in places where you’re indoors and near other people for an extended length of time.” And so on.

        HIV offers an interesting point of comparison. There are now drugs that can reduce an HIV-positive person’s viral load to undetectable levels, effectively rendering them non-infectious; and there are drugs that people can take that helps to prevent themselves from getting infected, if they are exposed (both pre- and post-exposure).

        And so, the norm that has emerged is something like this: people with HIV will, if at all possible, get on the drugs that reduce their viral loads to undetectable levels (since that will also help prevent the emergence of full-blown AIDS). People who have HIV-positive partners or who are sexually active and wanting to avoid HIV take the pre-exposure drugs, to help prevent getting infected. And people who, despite all their precautions, get exposed anyway, can rush to get the post-exposure drugs.

        So there’s a fair amount of personal responsibility there. But that doesn’t mean that the norms tolerate not disclosing your HIV status to a potential partner. Having your viral load at undetectable levels doesn’t mean you can present yourself to sexual partners as essentially HIV-negative. You disclose. You give your partner the ability to decide what to do with that information. You work together to prevent transmission.

        That’s all that vaccine mandates are intended to do. I don’t want to get sick. You don’t want to get sick. If we both get vaccinated, we’re protecting ourselves and each other. If I get vaccinated and you don’t, I’m protecting myself and you, but you’re putting me and yourself at risk. And if you don’t even bother to tell me that you’re not vaccinated, I don’t have the ability to decide whether I want to take on that risk, personally. I’m exposed, whether I like it or not.

        It’s like having sex with a person who’s HIV positive at detectable levels (i.e., potentially infectious) who doesn’t disclose, while I’m on PREP. Yes, I’m protected. But now you’ve forced me to rely on the odds, without my knowledge or consent.

        1. A mask would not protect anyone from Covid Corey.

        2. Once more, fuck off and die slaver.

    2. If someone is sick they have an obligation to quarantine until no longer contagious. I think that is a better comparison.

      Do you ever exceed the speed limit when driving?

      If your kid was playing in your backyard is there a risk if your friend is texting and driving fast down the street?

      And if your friend is not texting and not speeding is there a risk to your kid playing in the street when your friend drives down the street?

      1. If someone is sick they have an obligation to quarantine until no longer contagious. I think that is a better comparison.

        I don’t think the “libertarians” here would agree to a state-sanctioned quarantine regime, either, but okay.

        Do you ever exceed the speed limit when driving?

        I rarely drive, but when I do, I tend to drive too slow naturally, when there’s not any traffic around me. This is due to the fact that I bike, primarily, so automotive speeds feel incredibly dangerous. I also live in NYC, which has an across-the-board speed limit of 25 mph on most streets, which further shapes my perception of speed. (The fact that most other cities allow 35 mph in residential areas, and even 40-45 on arterials through dense areas, is… kind of hard for me to comprehend.)

        But anyway, there’s speeding, and there’s keeping up with traffic. It’s not safer to drive the speed limit when traffic is flowing faster than that. I drive at the predominant speed, when there’s traffic to consider.

        If your kid was playing in your backyard is there a risk if your friend is texting and driving fast down the street?

        No, probably not, but it wouldn’t follow, would it, that drivers should be free to speed and text down your neighborhood streets, and that if you don’t like it, just keep your kids inside or the backyard?

        And if your friend is not texting and not speeding is there a risk to your kid playing in the street when your friend drives down the street?

        The point is to say that drivers need to conduct themselves with reasonable care. That’s all we can require of them.

        1. I wasn’t advocating for mandated quarantines but I think you knew that.

          So you have exceeded the limit. But it was “safe” to do so because the herd was also speeding…safely.

          My house is 200 yards from the street so kids wouldn’t be playing in the street but that is not typical. If you wanted to prevent your kid from being hit by a vehicle you could have traffic cops posted 24/7 on your street or have your kid not play in the street. I get it isn’t either/or but to eliminate the risk your kid would have to never be in the street. I think we can agree that isn’t realistic in most cases.

          And with reasonable care taken by drivers kids can be and are still struck by vehicles.

          1. I don’t disagree. I am saying, “reasonable care” is all that we can, and do, expect. Don’t drive recklessly. Steer your kid away from patent dangers. Don’t maintain “attractive nuisances” on your property. And so on.

            Question is, how does that principle apply to COVID and vaccinations?

            The “libertarians” here are fond of saying, “You can’t force me to protect you.” My response is to say, actually, I can – I can “force” you to take reasonable precautions to avoid harming me – to “protect” me. Once this is acknowledged, we can ask whether getting a readily-available, effective, and safe vaccine constitutes a reasonable precaution against infecting me with a likely-survivable but still rather unpleasant disease (regardless of whether I have also taken self-protective measures – your duty to drive safely, for instance, is not lessened by the fact that other drivers wear seatbelts or driver cars with airbags).

            1. Simon P: “I want top control your life because I’m scared”.
              Sevo: “No”.
              End of conversation.
              I do not negotiate with lefty shits who wish to control my life.

              1. That’s the problem we’ve had. Bipartisan solutions are entirely in the direction of feeding ground to the democrats.

                That needs to end. As does the democrat party.

            2. And my response before was reasonable care is if you are sick, stay at home. Regardless of whether folks in public are vaccinated.

              If you need a vaccination, it is available to you.

              If that is not enough protection then my advice would be for you to stay at home.

            3. “Question is, how does that principle apply to COVID and vaccinations?”

              Holy shit. I explained that principle to you over and over. You just don’t want to accept it.

              An unvaccinated person is no harm to you. They potentially harm you if they are infected. But wait, you are vaccinated. So even if they are not vaccinated and even if they are infected, they still POSE ALMOST NO HARM TO YOU because you are voluntarily vaccinated.

              But because there is maybe, possibly, some very tiny risk that you will catch a breakthrough case from someone, you want to invade their medical privacy. Sure, you “can” force that on someone. But it isn’t right.

              Your analogies about driving are not accurate. Declining to vaccinate is more like declining to wear a seat belt. Negligence requires (by definition) actively taking an action that you know will put others in danger. Declining to vaccinate is not an ACTION. It is the absence of an action. Going to the store as everyone else in the world does is not taking an action that you know will put others in danger. These are not negligent actions, because there is zero evidence that you will be putting anyone in any sort of danger.

              Now if you have reason to believe you are infected, then there is a case to be made that going to the store is negligent. Because you are taking an action that you know could put other people at risk.

              (But even then, just because something is wrong, doesn’t mean that we should mobilize the government with extreme, privacy and liberty-eroding powers to prevent that wrong. Terrorists flying airplanes into buildings on 9/11 was wrong. That doesn’t mean that the surveillance state erected to prevent it was justified.)

              1. Holy shit. I explained that principle to you over and over. You just don’t want to accept it.

                You might think you have, but you haven’t.

                The fact that I might take precautions to protect myself against your negligence doesn’t mean that you are not negligent when you act negligently. It just means that your negligence is less likely to cause actual harm. So abstract the fact that I might be vaccinated against COVID out. The question is: What duty of reasonable care does any person have, to other people, in the midst of this pandemic?

                You seem to want to conclude that there is no such duty of reasonable care, when it comes to this infectious disease. Why not? Is it because it is not “that bad”? Is it because it is not “that communicable”? Is it because it is more reasonable not to get vaccinated with these widely-available vaccines? That is the question you refuse to answer; instead you slip into this polemic about “medical privacy.” No, sorry, that doesn’t work.

                You seem to allow that people have some duty to self-quarantine, if they know that they’re infected. We would agree on that. But why does that stop there? We know that COVID spreads in asymptomatic cases, and we know that a person is infectious before they get symptoms (as is the case with many infectious respiratory diseases). Knowing that, why does our duty to take reasonable care not extend to circumstances in which we do not know our current infection status?

                Negligence requires (by definition) actively taking an action that you know will put others in danger.

                No, this is not how it is defined. What you’ve described is called recklessness. Negligence is a failure to take reasonable care.

                Your analogies about driving are not accurate. Declining to vaccinate is more like declining to wear a seat belt.

                How is it not accurate? We have a duty to take reasonable care not to get into accidents while driving, and that’s true regardless of how other people may choose to protect themselves. It’s your analogy that’s inaccurate. Or, to make it more accurate – when you drive or ride in a car without a seat belt, you also endanger other people in the car with you. If you’re in an accident, your body could be tossed around the car, injuring others. Don’t you owe your fellow passengers a reasonable precaution – the seatbelt – to avoid that result?

                1. SimonP
                  […]Don’t you owe your fellow passengers a reasonable precaution – the seatbelt – to avoid that result?

                  Simon: “I’m scared and want to control your life”.
                  Sevo: “No and fuck off”.

                  1. But Sevo, Simon says!

                2. No analogy is ever perfect but the seatbelt analogy is pretty darn close to perfect. If I chose not to wear a seatbelt I’m exposing myself to more risk of death and probably exposing other people in my car to more risk as well. The risk to those outside of my immediate circle is very small. Pretty much the same for the vaccine.

                3. “You might think you have, but you haven’t…”

                  He has and you are either too stupid to understand or willfully doing so.
                  The answer to your desire to control other people is this:
                  N-O.
                  Do you understand that?

              2. The seatbelt analogy is b.s. I can remove the seatbelt when I arrive home and exit my vehicle. I can’t remove the vaccine when I leave a public space and arrive at my private residence.

                1. Exactly. The left sees no problem invading your medical privacy and compelling you to carry the consequences of the vaccine for the rest of your life but don’t try to mention saving lives by restricting abortions.

                  1. They have no principles, everything is just convenient lies to gain whatever they want at that moment.

            4. My response is to say, actually, I can – I can “force” you to take reasonable precautions to avoid harming me

              Just because you think you can doesn’t mean you have the right to not does it mean that you should.

            5. REASONABLE?

              Around 1500 vaccinated people in the US have died from COVID.

              https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html

              How many of those do you think had both doses of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine?

              Maybe 500 tops?

              It’s laughable to suggest that any measure to protect vaccinated people from COVID is reasonable.

            6. Simon, and I realize this would be an imposition, but to help protect me, would you mind being irradiated by about 300 milli-rems of radiation before exiting your house? It’s not a lot of radiation, but there is a preliminary study out showing that the Covid 19 virus is very susceptible to radiation. If you say no to that, please substitute in experimental vaccine.

        2. Man, this lefty pile of shit is ‘REALLY interested in running everyone’s life, isn’t he?
          I really don’t care about your supposed ‘justifications’, the answer is “no”.
          Fuck off and die slaver.

          1. **this** lefty pile of shit is ‘REALLY interested in running everyone’s life, isn’t he?

            Not just this one. Most of them.

            1. *almost all

        3. I rarely drive, but when I do, I tend to drive too slow naturally, when there’s not any traffic around me. This is due to the fact that I bike, primarily, so automotive speeds feel incredibly dangerous. I also live in NYC, which has an across-the-board speed limit of 25 mph on most streets, which further shapes my perception of speed. (The fact that most other cities allow 35 mph in residential areas, and even 40-45 on arterials through dense areas, is… kind of hard for me to comprehend.)

          This statement tells everyone all they need to know about, well, probably everything. Understanding you to be one of those Mission Zero, moar bike lanez!!!! people explains so, so very much.

        4. Going too slow is about as dangerous as going too fast. Stay off the damn road if youre incompetent.

          That’s ‘reasonable care’ from your perspective.

    3. But it is that question you need to focus on, not the high-fallutin’ polemic about your “freedoms” you’d prefer.

      You’ll make a good slave.

      1. Why? Because I prefer precise reasoning to ideological bromides?

        Muddy thinking is what acclimates one to slavery. I’d think the people who keep sending money to Trump’s PACs amply demonstrate that.

        1. Did you vote for Cuomo?

          1. No, and I would absolutely vote for a Republican (or libertarian) governor (or mayor) if the local party could manage to put a non-crazy and competent one up.

            1. So you don’t vote?

        2. No. Because you view freedom as a disposable anachronism.

          1. I don’t.

            But I’ll admit I care about freedom as it is lived, not as how it is conceived in the abstract. The freedom not to get vaccinated doesn’t mean much to me, when reason and prudence counsel in favor of getting vaccinated, and employers and businesses are free to mandate vaccinations in order to work for/patronize them. I also care more about the lived freedom of returning to my old patterns of life, travel, going out, working out, etc., than I do about the “freedom” to remain unvaccinated and live with continued surges and shutdowns (because businesses regularly shut down in response to outbreaks regardless of what the government makes them do).

            That’s the crossroads where we are at, now. If everyone got vaccinated earlier this year, at the earliest opportunity, there’s a good chance we’d still be having our “vaxxed and waxxed” summer. But because you lot decided you cared more about being contrary than being right, we find ourselves still mired in waves of infections and all of the disruption that brings.

            1. My summer has been the same as last year and as the year before. Ymmv.

            2. Government rules and regulations are what’s stopping people from having freedom, not the unvaccinated.

              Do you think states like CA and HI which had the most restrictions in place throughout the pandemic now have the most freedoms because they got everybody through COVID safely?

              The restrictions will never end as long as people put up with them. After COVID dies down (actually I mean after people understand that COVID has died down already) then they will come up with another excuse to restrict our freedoms.

              Climate change, racial equity, drought, influenza, etc. etc.

              1. The restrictions will remain in place so when the next pandemic occurs we will be able to enjoy our freedoms.

                1. Once you redefine freedom, there’s no problem at all!

  22. I have to admit, I’m liking this sudden new change in tone and attitude around here.

    But it needs be said, and I know nobody likes people who say “I told you so”, but…. we told you so! Many of us have been trying to warn you guys for years now that this kind of shit was coming, and for the most part you guys chose to not believe it, handwave our warnings away and dismiss them all. How did THAT work out for you??

    So the only thing that that would make these pieces absolutely perfect would be if at least one of you guys had the decency to admit that we were right and you were wrong. And if you just can’t bring yourselves to go quite that far, then maybe at least have enough self-awareness going forward to realize that you don’t know everything as much as you think you do.

    1. The left’s totalitarianism was so obvious, in my view from 2015 or 2016 is was blatantly clear where we were headed. It will not get better unless we disobey and elect strong leaders that have provably taken a stand against everything the left is doing.

  23. Pandemic management tips from the culture war casualties at America’s disaffected, inconsequential, anti-social, half-educated, right-wing fringe are always a treat.

    1. Comments from half wit bigots like Artie are delicious.

    2. What kind of autistic defective posts the same exact comment hundreds of times accross dozens of articles?

    3. Gecko! I haven’t seen you around in a while. Subroutine update?

  24. The left is proving itself a threat to your life and your family’s livelihood. Leftists reject the concept of individual rights, demand absolute obedience, and cannot be reasoned with. They control all institutions with power, and have dedicated their lives to controlling yours.
    They will not stop of their own accord. You will have to stop them or be completely subjugated.

    How much longer can you afford to remain peaceful in the face of psychotic totalitarian tyranny attacking you?

    1. Nardz I know you’ll not full agree with this reply and I understand your viewpoint but I don’t like the idea of hurting people and not sure how to push back but I did mention to the significant other the other day that the far left has no problem yelling screaming shouting causing violence and we others try to stay quiet and comply with little annoyances as we hope the crying baby will be satiated. I’m not so sure that was ever a good move. Ugh.

      1. I’m don’t want to have to hurt other people either, but what happens when those other people won’t allow you to live-and-let-live?
        There is no option for peaceful coexistence, and that is entirely the left’s fault.
        The future has 2 paths, and only 2 paths: violence fighting back against the left, so both sides engaged, or the left inflicting violence upon you as you submit to it, one sided.
        I wish it were otherwise, but it’s clear they won’t tolerate your independence

        1. nardz is EXACTLY right. the country is forever divided with one side destroying the country before our eyes. a recent poll showed that 50% of republicans believe that violence will be required — that is 25% of the population. the leftists will not back down unless forced to do so.

        2. If the “right” gets violent now, it’s over, as in the left will take complete control. We must engage in civil disobedience, non-conformity, and coalesce with candidates/parties that are provably against Marxism. I think DeSantis is the guy.

          2022 is around the corner and there is no way dems hold the house absent fraud.

          1. you don’t actually believe that the republicans will do the right thing? 17 of them just voted for the “infrastructure bill”. most republicans are really democrats in hiding. how many times have the republicans held both houses and the executive and did exactly nothing? they couldn’t even abolish obamacare. placing your hope in 2022 is very naïve.

            1. I agree with you about republicans. There are a few I would support, though. DeSantis, Rand Paul. I think DeSantis has more electability and he won’t hesitate to smack down leftist BS. I just hope Trump gets out of his way. GOP has no shot unless it’s someone like him or even like Trump without all the side show antics.

          2. I agree. Follow the lead of Ghandi, MLK, etc.

            Peaceful civil disobedience does work.

            1. MLK was a socialist who called for affirmative action.

        3. A handful of seceding states to rally around would go a long way. Secession must be the first step, not open conflict. Only when there can be a safe haven and a substantial military presence to resist federal encroachment by a state(s) declaring sovereignty can there be any hope for a bloodless separation or, if a conflict must arise, a short one with minimal casualties.

          1. I don’t think even secession is needed. I really don’t. Red states need to coalesce though and assert their 10th amendment rights. GOP governors have a lot of power right now.

            We don’t need violence or secession to beat them, we need to be smart and keep cool.

            1. So what’s the line that can’t be crossed?

              To me, it’s already been crossed and then some, but I’m interested in other perspectives.

              1. That is hard to say, I think we will know it when we see it. (As much as I hate marxists and would be happy if they all got free helicopter rides over the pacific).

                I think if enough people would simply protest these measures that would present a big obstacle, and that should be the starting point along with mocking leftists and being vocal about all of this, but we won’t even do that.

                I have little faith in the GOP, but remember the tea party did cause a lot of trouble for Obama’s agenda and it put significant pressure on the GOP. I think we’re coming up on a situation like that in 2022 and then in 2024 we elect someone with the mandate to utterly destroy these leftist goons.

                Between red state governors, who to me are actually putting up a fight, house candidates in 2022 and 2024 we will be able to push back and ultimately defeat the Marxists, peacefully.

                I believe most moderate dems are also against much of what is happening. I recall polling from last summer where an overwhelming majority of voters, something like 70 percent, was ok bringing in the national guard to quell the riots. Dems got their asses handed to them down ballot in 2020 because of their reaction to those riots.

                The media brainwashes the left, but it also brainwashes the right into thinking that all of the dems think like Marxists and that isn’t the case.

                Long winded, but suffice to say, unfortunately folks on the right of leftists haven’t even begun to put up a fight.

                Also, if Obama brought Trump, what will Biden bring…it won’t be anything close to the lame ass GOP candidate of old.

                1. Folks on the right of Marxists should be screaming about, let’s see:
                  1. Open borders into a welfare state
                  2. Abolishing voter ID laws
                  3. Eviction bans
                  4. Climate mandates and bans
                  5. Covid mandates and ban
                  6. The trillions of dollars of taxing and spending on the infrastructure (failed collapsed public transportation systems in blue cities and states)
                  7. The trillions on the reconciliation bill for the Communists in the House of Representatives- the final nail in the Republic btw.
                  I could go on and on, trannies, guns. I see only 2 Democrats with power blocking some of this stuff. So, NO, there aren’t any Democrats right of Marx.

            2. Red states need to coalesce though and assert their 10th amendment rights.

              Sure.

              But what happens when the federal government promptly responds with: “Fuck the Tenth Amendment,” and then sends in the troops?

              The Constitution means nothing to these people. Less than nothing. The only way to deal with people that do not see themselves as bound by any law or principle of restraint is with force.

              1. Do you think the public would support the Federal Govt. sending in the troops–literally invading red states? I have a very hard time believing they would or could do that. It would be futile and turn the public against them in a second.

                As furious as I am about everything that has happened especially in the last 18 months, we can still beat them with ordinary politics.

                1. I think roughly half the people would support it, and roughly half would oppose it. But none of that matters because the entire point of totalitarianism is that it does not matter what the public wants, thinks, or believes.

              2. “Fuck the Tenth Amendment,” and then sends in the troops?”

                Iraq and Afghanistan show how hard it is to pacify a sustained insurgency. And that is with a robust, well maintained, and well protected supply chain.

                When the places you are trying to occupy are your supply chain the pointy end of the spear won’t be able to stay in action for very long.

                1. Furthermore, the left knows that. They absolutely know it and they are banking on the right complying with all of this though, which is why non-compliance, civil disobedience, non-conformity, peaceful protests and outright mocking the left will work. Everything falls apart for their little revolution when the right gets involved politically.

                2. Stated another way, the entire reason for an armed populace is not that we could beat the military, but that we could make their efforts costly enough as to not be worth the fight.

                  1. Not many of those leftish shits would be willing to engage in hand to hand combat.

                  2. Nobody should kid themselves. If push does come to shove there will be few if any stand up fights.

                    It will mostly be assassination and targeted property destruction. Largely aimed at media and government officials.

                    Think Bleeding Kansas or the TN/NC border during the Civil War.

                3. Iraq and Afghanistan show how hard it is to pacify a sustained insurgency.

                  I agree … and that is precisely why I believe secession and a safe haven consisting of coordinating red states will lead to a peaceful separation or a micro-conflict with limited casualties. That, or we end up with something along the lines of the Irish separatist movement; bombings, some skirmishes here and there, and an uneasy détente over time.

                  1. I wonder the opposite. If secession would ignite a civil war. Similar to the first time.

                    Secession gives the left an excuse to aggress.

                    Hopefully it never comes to that but you never know with Marxists, there are already over 100 million murdered in their wake.

      2. This attitude perfectly exemplifies why I reject libertarianism. You know how history goes down, you know what the left does to its enemies. And yet you do nothing to preserve your life or your genetic lineage out of some misbegotten adherence to the “harm principle.”

        Embrace fascism or die in a gulag. The choice is yours.

        1. I agree with you, although technically libertarians should be able to defend themselves when being assaulted. In any case, I agree with you. For whatever reason libertarians, many of them would rather be exploited and raped.

        2. Genetic lineage?

          Oh now I see where you are coming from.

          Well one way is to marry your sister.

          You are rejecting something you do not understand. Libertarians are strongly in favor of gun rights and a strong defensive military. There is nothing in the NAP that prohibits self defense from a threat.

          1. He tried “precious bodily fluids”, but it just didn’t scan.

    2. Don’t you cousin-fucking morons are embracing full-on violent fascism a bit too soon to be effective?

      1. https://twitter.com/titaniamcgrath/status/1420495836681752579?s=21

        If all opinions that I disagree with were made illegal, fascism would be over.

        1. These people are literally calling for the extermination of the leftists dude.

          1. Some people hate fascism more than others.

  25. Thank you, J.D. Tuccille, for this article. I hope those control freaks who want to control the media don’t start harassing you for spreading “misinformation.”

  26. Good article and what we proposed doing back in spring 2020. In fact we did and for over a year have not succumbed to the paranoia and pressures in our corner of the world.

    1. Yeah, I take this weathervane of an article to be a signal that the brave truth tellers at Reason do not feel they will be ostracized by their leftist friends by speaking out in a manner that actual libertarians were saying over a year ago.

      1. Well, John Brennan labelled libertarians part of an unholy alliance of domestic terrorists and vile insurrectionists against whom countermeasures must be taken to preserve national security. The writing is on the wall. Bootlicking does not win you friends, just more boots to lick — and then they will turn on you anyway and stomp on your face.

        1. First Toosilly builds a ghost gun, and now this.

          They must be confidant that the left is fully entrenched to be so comfortably larping like libertarians again.

          1. Gotta maintain appearances if you’re going to be useful as controlled opposition

  27. Our country is moving towards a dictatorship of the left.
    The eviction moratorium extension is going through make housing in the entire U S just like California.
    Mask mandates, lockdowns and vaccine passports are all here with more extreme measures planned.
    Biden was voted in, there is going to be a civil war to get us out of Democrat tyranny

    1. And Simon P is the cheerleader.

    2. The eviction moratorium began with an executive order issued by Donald Trump.

      1. Thankfully Biden sunset it after being determined to be unconstitutional.

  28. We have two choices: Mad Max or Contagion. I’ll pick Mad Max, thank you

    1. ~~ mounts .50 cal to F-250 …

  29. The totalitarian control will be hard for the elites to give up. Even when the Covid pandemic has passed, then it will be the existential crisis of climate change and since lockdowns reduce travel, they will be “necessary” to reduce the increase in temperature by 0.01 degrees by 2100.

    With the new control over health, will weight loss mandates, etc. in order to receive care be next? Bloomberg already tried to get rid of Big Gulp sized sugary drinks for control over people’s choices.

    The taste of being a god will be hard for the elites to surrender.

    1. Surrender? Dude, they have been openly strategizing and game-planning exactly how they were going to go about attaining this power at their semi-secret conclaves. Not just for years, but for decades!

      The clear evidence has been well-documented both in paper trail and digital media trail forever, available to pretty much anyone who could be bothered to do the basic research. But I understand that there are some things that the “average” person prefers to not believe, even when the evidence is right there staring them in the face.

      1. The WEF comes right out and says it

      2. For decades…since the dawn of man and the country

    2. *Climate change*
      *Systemic racism*
      *Income inequality*
      *Equity*
      *Transgenderism*

      There’s not going to be any shortages of “health” “emergencies” that will be used to justify future similar measures.

    3. California already wants to limit office work to 60% of staffing levels, to save the environment (and probably to avoid overloading the renewable grid, which isn’t as “golden” as promised.)

  30. >>Hospitalizations and deaths are rising in some areas not because someone didn’t wear a mask at the ballgame. They’re occurring because too many people are not immunized.”

    vague & ambiguous & speculative. be afraid.

    1. Sounds pretty accurate though. The mask mandates were completely ineffective at flattening any curve last year, there’s no reason to think they will work now. The vaccines have proven very effective, for those who got them.

  31. We live in a world where facts do not matter.

    1. Facts don’t care about their feelings, but they are in charge.

      Every Covid policy should be immediately rescinded, and everyone who signed on to the eviction moratorium should be in jail

      1. And anyone ‘giving us helpful advice’ should be told to mind their own business.

    2. The unfactsinated!

    3. Facts always matter. People only pretend they don’t.

  32. If you’re unvaccinated and someone tries to coerce you to get vaccinated, the unapproved status of the vaccines make them experimental drugs and you can file a lawsuit for Nuremberg code violations.

    1. FDA approval doesn’t mean much when people die from not getting medicine they are holding up

    2. They are approved. They are just approved for emergency use which is an FDA procedure and not unique to this. In any case Pfizer expects final approval in the next few months which they surely will.

      1. Approval is aj oke. The company themselves do the testing or pays an “independent” company to run the trials. The FDA only gets the results. I can tell you from experience the independent testing facilities will quickly rule out people from doing studies that comp-lain too much.

      2. No, if you are going to try playing pedant then do it properly.

        They are not currently FDA approved.

        Their use is FDA authorized.

  33. Reason — boldly asking the tough questions of May 2020 in August 2021.

    1. Reason — boldly asking the tough questions of May 2020 in August 2021.

      I recall something about barn doors and horses…

      1. In this case the horses were long gone but we burned the barn down just in case.

  34. If we were ruled by panic and excess caution in all areas of life, no one would be allowed to drive a car or go to a hospital or take a bath, all places where non-zero numbers of people die.

    1. Swimming pools and 5-gallon buckets would be prohibited.

  35. Don’t Surrender to the Pandemic Control Freaks
    They’ll never be satisfied in a world of balanced risks.

    Yet, by implicitly supporting Biden, Reason advocated exactly that: surrendering to the pandemic control freaks.

    1. Pretty sure Tuccille avoided any such odor.

      1. Tuccille’s message is pretty consistently “both sides are equally bad so it doesn’t matter” and “we’d be better off if government just left us alone”.

        Whether Tuccille just doesn’t realize it or whether he is doing it deliberately, its those kinds of meaningless platitudes and lack of analysis that enable progressives and authoritarians.

        The practical effect of Tuccille’s articles is as if he was saying “shut up peasants and just ignore the people in government because you are powerless”.

        Don’t agree? Show me some articles by Tuccille where he has made constructive, meaningful proposals for how to advance liberty.

  36. This Republican writer is literally demonstrating severe psychiatric problems. The most liberal jurisdictions have dramatically relaxed anti-Covid countermeasures as their case numbers have dropped from the worst levels of last year.

    1. The most liberal jurisdictions’ original stated goals for the countermeasures were to “flatten the curve” and avoid hitting ICU capacity limits until vaccines were widely available.

      Now the most liberal jurisdictions have dramatically TIGHTENED those goals. We’re still having countermeasures in place despite the curve being flattened and ICU capacity not even remotely being threatened by COVID for several months.

      The goalposts keep moving….

  37. It is surprising how many people are afraid of getting Covid, but are dumbfounded that people don’t go to doctors or routinely ignore their doctors. I think they are taking Covid as a means to get America healthier.

    But, I was on Next Door and said that being masked up for an extended time has me angry, rude, not caring about people, and feeling like I’m in a never-ending episode of The Twilight Zone.

    Reaction ranged from “you need psychological help” to “stop being an SOB and care about your neighbors” to “I’ll pray that Jesus will help you to understand that we all must support one another.”

    My mother taught me that life is about self-reliance. You are responsible for yourself, and your children until age 18, or through college if they are smart and vote like you do. You aren’t responsible for your neighbor’s health and well being.

    If my mother was alive, she would say that anyone is is worried about inhaling Covid virus should wear a respirator, like what people wear while using a power sander or paint sprayer.

    1. It’s hard to find a more sanctimonious virtue-signalling crowd than on Next Door.

      1. May I suggest select commenters here? They aren’t difficult to spot.

  38. People who are unvaccinated have 1) had the virus and have antibodies that are better than a vaccine or 2) are aware of the VAERS data showing thousands of deaths and hospitalizations. Is there something wrong with people who don’t want to take a “vaccine” that might kill them, especially for a virus that for most people isn’t much more deadly than the seasonal flu? The world (with exceptions such as Sweden) has lost its mind with excessive fear of this virus.

    1. I believe the vaccines are safe. Therefore, I had the vaccine as did my family.

      I believe the vaccines are effective. Therefore, I’m not worried about getting COVID from unvaccinated people as the risk of that seems tiny.

      If you have different beliefs and have made different choices than me I have no problem with that.

      I see no reason to force anyone to do anything at this point.

    2. The vaccination rate in Sweden is similar to ours 63%.

  39. I’m rooting for natural selection. Maybe we can get a handle on stupid after all.

    1. People who think a virus is safer than the vaccine for said virus?

      As these are the same dregs of humanity who have all the other bad ideas, okay, fine, I accept.

      1. People who think a virus is safer than the vaccine for said virus?

        Are we talking about an FDA approved vaccine using tried and true vaccine technologies with a decades long safety record? Those are indeed safer than the virus; that’s part of the approval and monitoring process.

        Or are we talking about an experimental, non-FDA approved vaccine based on novel technologies with less than a year of widespread use in humans? You know, like the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines?

  40. The argument typically made is you cannot “pass” rock climbing or smoking onto others as you can covid.

    1. One also cannot get vaccinated against falling off a rock or smoking caused lung cancer.

  41. But it’s you people who insist on a precise accounting of costs imposed, as is necessary to guide the invisible hand.

    Don’t come along and argue that, completely at your whim, we must accept certain risks for free, just cuz. This is the free market. Nothing is free.

    1. Shitstain: “I want to run your life because I’m scared”.
      Sevo: “No”.

        1. I merely suggest that you pay for the costs you impose on me, as is required by the invisible hand of the glorious free market.

          Real freedom, as you well know, only comes from genociding the undesirables.

          1. If you are suggesting a complete ledger on “societal costs,” I’m absolutely up for that.

            1. The Koch brother very much is not.

              1. “The Koch brother very much is not.”

                Shitstain: “In the interest of promoting the politics of envy, I’ll offer yet more bullshit in the hopes others are as stupid as me, and will be suckered in”>

                1. The politics of envy. Oh dear. Such a clapping little monkey they have made of you, haven’t they?

              2. Hopefully Koch is the next billionaire to make a journey to and back from space.

          2. Shitstain: “I want to run your life because I’m scared and I’m willing to spout as much bullshit as I can in the hopes you’re as stupid as me and will agree!”
            Sevo: “No, and fuck off and die”.

          3. BTW, shitstain assumed HE gets to decide what ‘costs’ others are ‘imposing’ on him.
            Given that he’s a fucking lefty ignoramus, you are well advised to assume it will include the cost of filtering the air anywhere within 10 miles of shitstain’s location.
            Shitstain is nothing if not a *dishonest* fucking lefty ignoramus. Simon P is a model of honesty by comparison,

          4. Oh, and shitstain! It’s the 76tgh anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima, when the Japanese ought to be thanking US taxpayers for saving probably millions of Japanese deaths.
            I’ve since asked of every self-appointed claimant to ‘moral monitor’ what alternative they could offer which would have ended the war with fewer deaths.
            You are the only one to have ever answered, and your answer tells us a lot about the depths of your stupidity: You suggested the US surrender to Japan!
            Folks, if you are ever in doubt as to the stupidity of shitstain, that should tell you all you need to know.

            1. He’s an unhappy rube with nothing in front of him other than envy and selfish consumption.

              1. Envy is what poor people think rich people think poor people feel.

                As someone well acquainted with rich people, let me tell you that they don’t give a fuck what you feel. They’d rather not think of you at all.

                1. Shitstain responds with a pile of bullshit which shitstain hope others as stupid as he is might find to be something other than a pile of lefty bullshit.
                  Don’t see any takers yet, but Simon and trueman have yet to show up with their assholic idiocy.

                  1. Yes, the politics of envy. The first and last refuge of assholes such as shitstain.
                    WHINE: Someone has more money than me!!!!!!!!!!!!!
                    We got it, shitstain. Believe me, the valet parking cars at an SF reastaurant has more money than the editor of the Dog Walkers Weekly in a gated community in Snake’s Navel nowhere.
                    Because he or she offers more value to humanity than you ever will, steaming pile of ignorant lefty shit.

                    1. This was in response to shitstain’s whining such:
                      Tony
                      August.6.2021 at 11:21 pm
                      Flag Comment Mute User
                      “The politics of envy. Oh dear. Such a clapping little monkey they have made of you, haven’t they?”
                      (threaded comments don’t make it easy to respond to asshiolic lefty shits, do they?)

                2. Wonderful projection. Thanks.

                  1. Shitstain:
                    “As someone well acquainted with rich people, let me tell you that they don’t give a fuck what you feel. They’d rather not think of you at all.”
                    Shitstain is probably “acquainted” with rich people, since some of us post here. As editor of ‘Dog Walkers Weekly’ in Snake’s Navel, Nowhere, his acquaintance with wealthy people amounts to reading about them on some web site.
                    Guess what, shitstain, you are now ‘acquainted’ with some which pathetic pieces of shit like you calls “rich”.

                3. Tony the richest people I have known have been the nicest most unassuming people I have met. You run into the occasional schmuck every now and then but that has little to do with wealth.

                  1. But let’s talk about envy. All humans feel envy. It is a core human motivation. But there’s probably more envy within a class than between them. People envy those they could plausibly replace.

                    The democratic and socialist revolutions are products of the Enlightenment. It’s decidedly not based on envy but on a rational assessment of what is just, or as well as those people could do (and they didn’t actualize the projects with perfection, as we have seen).

                    Envy better describes what the right feels for academics and Jews and such. “If I can’t have their smarts and money, neither can they!” Progressives want to simply make a more orderly, fair, and reasonable world.

                    But they too can have envy, because they are human. They are often destroyed by interpersonal nonsense that often comes in the form of envy. But trust me, not a single one of us envies a single Trump supporter. That’s the equally natural reaction we call disgust.

                4. I’m an Oklahoma guy, an Oklahoma boy!
                  Oklahoma is my pride and joy!
                  Oklahoma’s good enough for me!
                  Guh guh guh guh guh guh guh
                  Guh guh guh guh guh guh guh
                  Oklahoma’s good enough for me!

    2. But it’s you people who insist on a precise accounting of costs imposed, as is necessary to guide the invisible hand.

      The invisible hand is invisible precisely because there is no “accounting of costs imposed”. That is, beneficial economic behavior arises out of the individual choices of large numbers of market participants.

      Don’t come along and argue that, completely at your whim, we must accept certain risks for free, just cuz. This is the free market. Nothing is free.

      Nobody is forcing you to accept any risk. You can get vaccinated. Or you can choose to live the rest of your life in your mother’s basement. Your individual choice.

  42. Good commentary as far as it goes. NOTHING however, in referrence to the risks of the VAX, up to and including deaths (VAERS says roughly 12,000 dead from the vax, and it is estimated that this number may be 1 to 10% of the actual.)

    And again, NOTHING on building immunity with vitamins, supplements including HCQ and ivermection. (Dr. Pierre Kory: “IF YOU TAKE IT [ivermectin] YOU WILL NOT GET SICK!!

    AND NOTHING on the official protocol, should you get C19: Go home and when you are about to die, we will make an heroic-and very expensive-effort to save your life. That is quite frankly, bullshit policy, all to make people get shot. WHY?????

    1. It has been pointed out many times that VAERS is unreliable, unverified data.

      1. It has been pointed out many times that you are full of shit. Tell us again about fire extinguishers, steaming pile of lefty shit.

      2. Did White Knight point that out?

      3. It has been pointed out many times that VAERS is unreliable, unverified data.

        So what are you alleging? That hospitals forged 11990 of those 12000 reports for COVID vaccines while forging none for other vaccines? What would their motivation be? Saying that the data “is unreliable and unverified” isn’t enough. You need to explain the discrepancies between the statistics for COVID and non-COVID vaccines if you want to counter the obvious inference that COVID vaccines have a substantially higher risk of adverse effects than other vaccines.

        1. Actually the CDC website says so.

          “Vaccine providers are encouraged to report any clinically significant health problem following vaccination to VAERS, whether or not they believe the vaccine was the cause.
          Reports may include incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental and unverified information.
          The number of reports alone cannot be interpreted or used to reach conclusions about the existence, severity, frequency, or rates of problems associated with vaccines.
          VAERS data is limited to vaccine adverse event reports received between 1990 and the most recent date for which data are available.
          VAERS data do not represent all known safety information for a vaccine and should be interpreted in the context of other scientific information.“

          The purpose of the database to collect a large volume of information about anything that happens after vaccination. It is then investigated to see if there is any link. It is expected that in the vast majority of cases no such link will be found.

          This is pizzagate level stuff.

          As is the silliness that HCQ and Ivermectin prevent Covid. While Ivermectin may reduce severity of the disease there is no data to support it as a preventative for any disease including it’s approved uses. Anyone telling you otherwise is a quack selling snake oil. Same goes for HCQ. Nobody even uses that for known cases anymore following large scale studies.

          1. Large scale studies that were designed to fail by treating people already in the advanced stages and not following the protocols that actually worked for practicing clinicians.

            1. HCQ has been studied in non hospitalized patients as well.

              https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/full/10.7326/M20-4207

            2. The placebo effect is very strong and clinicians often try things when there are no better options as happened early on in the pandemic. Since the drug has little down side there was no reason to not use it on an empirical basis.

              1. The placebo effect is very strong

                If a placebo effect prevents hospitalizations and deaths, it works for practical purposes.

                1. The art and science.

                  One I like from Osler.

                  “Medicine is learned by the bedside and not in the classroom. Let not your conceptions of disease come from the words heard in the lecture room or read from the book. See and then reason and compare and control. But see first.”

            3. Also Vernon nobody designs studies to fail. The bias tends to go the other way which is why double blinded studies are the gold standard.

              1. nobody designs studies to fail.

                When the pharmaceutical corporations stand to make hundreds of billions by convincing the public that their “vaccines” are their only option, that’s a naïve statement.

                1. Go to Google scholar and look for yourself. The peer reviewed article I linked to from a major journal for example was from researchers at the University of Minnesota not a pharm company and not sponsored by one.

                  Hey it would be great if that stuff worked but it doesn’t.

                  1. The University of Minnesota is free from corporate and government influences? You seriously believe that?

                    1. So you are saying that these academic physicians and researchers at the hospital system were somehow coerced into a published result, peer reviewed study in one of the top medical journals in internal medicine by some sort of bribe or pressure from Pfizer or the government? Have you even looked at it? And all of the others done around the world as well right?

                      This is a multisite, international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with a parallel design. The methodology is clearly spelled out in the article. It involved multiple sites in the US as well as Canada in conjunction with McGill university medical center. So Canada is in on it too.

                      And it correlates with other studies done elsewhere. But it’s all a big plot right? C’mon.

                    2. The study you cite shows a positive effect of hydroxychloroquine, it simply doesn’t reach statistical significance. The fact that the authors concluded from an absence of statistical significance that there was an absence of an effect just marks them out as utterly incompetent. And that’s only one of several serious problems with that “study”.

                      It is frightening that such incompetent people work in our medical system and publish in scientific journals. It is also well known that that is the sorry state of biomedical research these days.

                    3. It seems you do not understand the concept of statistical significance.

                    4. It seems you do not understand the concept of statistical significance.

                      Actually, it is crystal clear that (1) you don’t understand the concept of statistical significance, and (2) you understand so little about statistics that you don’t even know how wrong you are.

                    5. Let me restate it again for your benefit:

                      Yes, you cited that study to support your claim that HCQ was ineffective. Yet, in that very study, there were 5 deaths with HCQ and 11 deaths in the control group. To conclude from that HCQ is ineffective is absurd.

                      In fact, that study wouldn’t have reached statistical significance even if HCQ were 100% effective and consistently prevented all deaths.

                2. There is more scientific literature from independent sources from all over the world on this than you or I could possibly have time to read. It has been reviewed by governmental and non governmental agencies extensively.

                  Believe what you want. It is impossible to have a conspiracy of this magnitude.

                  1. There is virtually no such thing as “scientific literature from independent sources”. Funding and publication of scientific studies requires being let through by well-connected gatekeepers with their own interests.

                3. Look you could say that about anything pharm companies do. They can’t fake results any more than a car company telling me my Dodge can fly.

                  1. I didn’t say they faked results. I said they designed the studies to produce the desired results. But, yes, results of “scientific” studies most certainly CAN be and ARE faked.

                    1. They may have designed the clinical trials but those are easy to design and reviewed. They had nothing to do with follow up studies done by the outside medical and scientific studies and unless you can find it nothing to do with studies done on Ivermectin or Hydroxy. They have nothing to do with those potential treatments.

                      Certainly errors and bias do occur in medical science which is why you want to see more than one and carefully review the methodology. But there is nothing to be gained by trying to benefit the pharm companies making vaccines. I would expect the opposite. Hey we found a drug that will help or prevent this bad disease. You would be the super star of the decade.

                      Everyone is looking for that. It is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

                    2. I think you are under the impression that these studies somehow compare vaccines to agents like Hydroxy. That is not at all the motive or the case. They are simply looking at a potential therapeutic agent and looking at the results which is routine and happens all the time.

                    3. Certainly errors and bias do occur in medical science which is why you want to see more than one and carefully review the methodology.

                      The paper contains elementary errors in its statistical analysis.

                      But there is nothing to be gained by trying to benefit the pharm companies making vaccines. I would expect the opposite.

                      Well, that’s because you are evidently naive about how science works. Most researchers depend on government grants and government approval. The (politically motivated) messaging from the NIH, NIAID, and other agencies was that hydroxychloroquine was ineffective. The net effect is that studies that show that HCQ works would be put in a drawer, while shoddy studies like this that purport that it doesn’t work will get quick review and publication.

                      We’ve had several scandals related to these kinds of phenomena before. We also know that much of the biomedical literature is irreproducible, erroneous, and/or fraudulent.

                    4. Show me convincing evidence that it does. It was tried. It really was. Find me something that works.

                    5. Show me convincing evidence that it does. It was tried. It really was. Find me something that works.

                      I’m not claiming that it works. I have no idea whether it works. You claim that it doesn’t work and cited a paper as evidence.

                      I corrected your misunderstanding of the statistical results in the paper you cited, and I pointed out that you are obviously naive about the widespread effects of biases and funding sources in biomedical research.

                    6. You are right one study is not proof

                      It just happens to be the one I cited.

                      I have been to journal club before. At least there was pizza.

                    7. You have dismissed the concept of statistical significance.

                      You have thrown out the entire published scientific community as biased due to funding issues which can be said about anything.

                      I suspect this is different for you than the latest in sub atomic physics, cancer research, or the biology of plant genomics in North America.

                      Sure if you wish to go in depth and revisit this that would be a noble effort. In the real world even without all of this academic stuff that effort for this agent has mostly been abandoned. Not because of the confidence intervals or Bayesian statistics but because on the ground it just did not help.

                      So we are without a specific drug but better supportive therapy for this disease. Perhaps one will be found.

                    8. You have dismissed the concept of statistical significance.

                      Not at all. Your problem is that you simply don’t understand it. “Lack of statistically significant difference” is not evidence of the absence of an effect.

                      You have thrown out the entire published scientific community as biased due to funding issues which can be said about anything.

                      That is correct: “it can be said about anything”. All scientists are biased. All human beings are biased. The way science deals with this is through decades of repeated, independent experimentation conducted by many people in many situations with many different biases. Sometimes it takes a century or more of research to correct errors in the scientific literature. You cannot draw valid scientific conclusions based on a handful of studies.

                      Sure if you wish to go in depth and revisit this that would be a noble effort. In the real world even without all of this academic stuff that effort for this agent has mostly been abandoned. Not because of the confidence intervals or Bayesian statistics but because on the ground it just did not help.

                      I have no opinion on whether HCQ works, I simply don’t know. My point is about scientific truth, evidence, and gullibility: you don’t know what you are talking about and ignorance like yours kills.

                    9. You are right one study is not proof It just happens to be the one I cited.

                      Yes, you cited that study to support your claim that HCQ was ineffective. Yet, in that very study, there were 5 deaths with HCQ and 11 deaths in the control group. To conclude from that HCQ is ineffective is absurd.

                      In fact, that study wouldn’t have reached statistical significance even if HCQ were 100% effective and consistently prevented all deaths.

                      I have been to journal club before. At least there was pizza.

                      Evidently, it didn’t help your understanding of science or statistics.

          2. Nobody says ivermectin or HCQ prevents infection, you lying passive-aggressive totalitarian leftist sack of shit, they say it’s an effective treatment as has been thoroughly demonstrated.
            And notice echospinner’s use of the stock leftist smear “pizzagate” as an attempt to discredit any and all doubt of “authorities” who have spent the last 18 months alternately lying or being completely wrong. We won’t even get into the fact that echospinner is happy to see children sexually abused, so long as nobody talks about it and he can distort their observations into a caricature used as a dismissive handwave.
            Echospinner has been fear mongering, lying, and wrong for 18 straight months but lacks any integrity thus he continues with the distortion and manipulation.
            Echospinner is a virus.

          3. The number of reports alone cannot be interpreted or used to reach conclusions about the existence, severity, frequency, or rates of problems associated with vaccines.

            That is correct: the absolute number of reports alone is meaningless. We don’t know what fraction of reports are spurious, how many reports are missing, etc.

            But we aren’t talking about the “number of reports alone”. What we are talking about is the ratio of COVID-related reports to non-COVID related reports. When half of the reports in the database are COVID-related, that is something that requires explanation.

            This is pizzagate level stuff.

            I didn’t allege anything, I asked a question: how do you explain the fact that almost half of the reports of deaths and hospitalizations in the entire VAERS system are COVID-related?

            You’re so scientifically illiterate that you don’t even understand the question, instead pointing to an obvious point about absolute numbers.

            1. C’mon. You understand the difference between a public reported database and useful information.

              I cited specifically what the database is asking for. Do you need a link? A repeat?

              Let me quothe it again.

              “Vaccine providers are encouraged to report any clinically significant health problem following vaccination to VAERS, whether or not they believe the vaccine was the cause.
              Reports may include incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental and unverified information.”

              Moreover they do not include follow through on a clinical level to the public. Those are blocked. Only raw reported data.

              Do you need more or is that enough .

              Did you not find the website?

              Exactly what ratio are you talking about. It is a vaccine specific reporting system, not a clinical study. So they had a lot of Covid related reports which means nothing in a clinical sense. There were a lot of Covid vaccines this year if you did not notice. Number of reports by themselves also mean nothing.

              1. Exactly what ratio are you talking about. There were a lot of Covid vaccines this year if you did not notice.

                Yes, and there are also a large number of other vaccinations in the database: all flu vaccinations, all childhood vaccinations, all HPV vaccinations, all tetanus vaccinations, etc. The fact that a single vaccine over six months manages to come almost equal to the entirety over those other vaccinations is a staggering difference.

                C’mon. You understand the difference between a public reported database and useful information.

                The information in VAERS is useful; it is a statistical sample of possible (but unconfirmed) vaccine related side effects. We can draw valid conclusions from such raw data without verifying the reports.

                There may be more benign explanations for the statistics of VAERS reports; you’re welcome to attempt such explanations. But the fact that “reports may include incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental and unverified information” is not such an explanation. In fact, statistically, the higher the frequency of erroneous/irrelevant reports in the database, the larger the risk associated with the COVID vaccine has to be to account for the observed statistics of the reports.

                1. I do not agree.

                  You cannot draw any conclusions from such a raw database.

                  The vast majority of reports are simply coincidental. It is designed to be this way so that possible correlation which might otherwise be missed may be sifted through the sand.

                  Before even doing that you need to account for incorrect or unverified data by investigation. That is done and not available to the public. Did you go to the actual website?

                  Number of reports. I dunno maybe because of 351 million doses in in a new vaccine given high attention in less than a year.

                  The whole point is to dump a giant pile of sand on the beach. Now with effort it can be sifted through to find any pearls that may be in there.

                  Several very rare ones have been found and reported. A clotting syndrome and myocarditis in young people.

                2. “We can draw valid conclusions from such raw data without verifying the reports.”

                  No you cannot.

                3. Number of reports. I dunno maybe because of 351 million doses in in a new vaccine given high attention in less than a year.

                  Ah, so you agree then after all that we can reason about the VAERS numbers and what they mean.

                  I suggest you work through the numbers and share your results when you have done so. Until then, you’re just waving your hands and engaging in motivated reasoning.

                  1. You are obviously an expert in statistics.

                    The points I was making were to refute some common myths and disinformation concerning the vaccines. Not a discussion of one article and statistical theory. This is a clinical problem happening in real time around the world.

                    People are sick or even dying because of these false ideas. I may have only enough working knowledge to read a medical article and have to rely on the expertise of many other people. It is not helpful to just score clever points on the internet. It was obviously a mistake for me to go down that path with you. This issue is very important to me.

                    Bottom line is people need to get vaccinated. I do not need mathematics to tell me that. I do not need mathematics to tell me that the results of multiple clinical studies and experience with the use of Hydroxy demonstrated to significant benefit and were not somehow rigged by a sinister pharm or government conspiracy. I do not need mathematics to tell me that 16,000 people died as a result of complications of the vaccine when only six have been reported, consistent with results elsewhere in the world which implies a massive global coverup. That is a preposterous idea even in the conspiracy world.

                    1. Bottom line is people need to get vaccinated.

                      Really? Why do people “need” to get vaccinated? I’m far more likely to die of a motorcycle accident than from COVID; are you going to tell me that I can’t ride my motorcycle? What business of yours is it what risks I take with my life?

                      People are sick or even dying because of these false ideas.

                      That’s what happens in a free society: people make choices and live with the consequences, even deadly consequences. And in a free society, people have access to all information and make their own choices, instead of having curated information fed to them by government.

                      Furthermore, all vaccines have risk/benefit tradeoffs. Serious, immediate side effects are only one of many possible negative consequences of vaccinations, many of them currently unknowable. For example, I received a vaccine as a kid that interfere with common diagnostic tests and now forces me to undergo X-ray exams when there is anything wrong with my lungs. Vaccination with a modified mRNA vaccine might make it impossible for some percentage of recipients to receive mRNA therapies in the future. We simply don’t know given that these technologies are so new.

                      The way it looks right now is that for people over 50 or people with preexisting conditions, the vaccine makes sense. For everybody else, the risk/benefit argument is weak.

                    2. Your risk-benefit evaluation is flawed. There may be a nonzero risk of taking the vaccine. There is also a risk of dying of covid and a very good risk of spreading it to people who will die. It’s a simple this-or-that choice, and you’re rationalizing the stupid choice because some orange asshole didn’t like being held responsible for his incompetence, and you’ve decided to enable his mental illness for some reason.

                    3. Shitstain: ‘I want to control your life because I’m scared’.
                      Sevo: “No.”

                    4. Die from whatever you wish. Ride your motorcycle responsibly when you are around other people.

                      So take ownership of the risk you may transmit even unwittingly to others.

                      Our tools are imperfect. They do not provide a 100% shield and some variant may overwhelm them. As I posted this just happened in my own close family. We are dealing with it. This is biology and human behavior not mathematics. There is no equation or theorem for this. There is no way to predict the future.

                      As I have posted above with freedom comes responsibility. The two are inseparable. So you have liberty to judge for yourself. That is moral not biological. I cannot change the choices made under individual autonomy. That is a straight line for me.

                      You are not just making choices with your own life in this infectious disease. You are also making choices for others. Take responsibility for that decision.

                      You draw the line at some age. Stand there and we will see what nature does. It has not been kind at this point.

                    5. Oh, and:
                      “…As I have posted above with freedom comes responsibility. The two are inseparable…”

                      Yep, this is the same bullshit used to justify the draft by assholes every bit as ignorant as ES.
                      Hint; For very good reasons, rights are unalienable; they are not negotiable.
                      I am not negotiating my right to choose not to have someone stick a needle in my arm, regardless of how scared you are.
                      Do you understand “unalienable”; it seems to be a bit of a mystery to you.

                    6. Echspinner is a virus.
                      Every breath it takes is an assault upon those around it.

                    7. You are not just making choices with your own life in this infectious disease. You are also making choices for others. Take responsibility for that decision.

                      Whether I choose to get vaccinated doesn’t affect you or anybody else.

                    8. There is also a risk of dying of covid and a very good risk of spreading it to people who will die.

                      That’s b.s. If the vaccine is effective, my choice of whether to get vaccinated or not doesn’t affect other people, since they can make their own choice to get vaccinated. If the vaccine is not effective, then my choice of whether to get vaccinated or not does not affect other people either.

                      If you are immunocompromised and can’t get vaccinated, the world doesn’t owe you a virus-free existence, and COVID is the least of your worries anyway.

                  2. “So take ownership of the risk you may transmit even unwittingly to others.”

                    Stuff it up your ass, sideways.
                    I do not owe you or any other cowardly piece of shit a rick-free existance.
                    Worried? Crawl under your favorite rock and stay there until you feel safe or die; I don’t care.

  43. Good commentary as far as it goes. NOTHING however, in referrence to the risks of the VAX, up to and including deaths (VAERS says roughly 12,000 dead from the vax, and it is estimated that reporting of adverse reactions may be 1 to 10% of the actual.)

    And again, NOTHING on building immunity with vitamins, supplements including HCQ and ivermection. (Dr. Pierre Kory: “IF YOU TAKE IT [ivermectin] YOU WILL NOT GET SICK!!”

    AND NOTHING on the official protocol, should you get C19: Go home and when you are about to die, we will make an heroic-and very expensive-effort to save your life. That is quite frankly, bullshit policy, all to make people get shot. WHY?????

    1. Irrelevant.
      What you do to your body is your business, not mine; IDC.
      Ditto regarding my body and health.

  44. I am old enough to remember when we used to make fun of Howard Hughes in the latter years. Now the control freaks want to emulate him.

  45. Reason, you’ve lost all credibility on this topic. You spent years telling us Trump was an existential threat to freedom, and the past year doubling down on that despite the difference in red vs. blue states responses to this Wuhan coronavirus. And now you want me to be worried about the road we’re on when you’ve been happily driving us toward it for years?

    For all the faults of the Republican party, do you seriously think any of them, Trump included, would push vaccine passports, repeated lockdowns, masking kids again, or even breath word of driving door to door to compel vaccination? Seriously, you should all look at yourselves honestly and realize who you’ve jumped in bed with.

    1. Worse lockdowns and mask mandates happened when Trump was president as did payouts, eviction bans, travel bans, and increased unemployment benefits. There was no point in talking about vaccine passports as there were few people vaccinated. The only reason we are talking about them now is because things opened back up again and we stopped wearing masks.

      I don’t see any of this as a Trump no Trump Red Blue thing. The course of reactions has been pretty much the same everywhere. Not everything is some sort of political scheme.

      1. It is a political scheme, but it’s at a higher level than the US Federal Government.

          1. There are ranks in between President of the United States and God.

            1. Actually most presidents would suggest the reverse order.

  46. this is good article and thanks for sharing nice article govschemes

  47. thank you for sharing this great post.

  48. “the unvaccinated have chosen that status. They’ve made their own decisions and assumed the resulting dangers, just like people who smoke, eat too much, ride motorcycles, or go rock-climbing. ”
    Here’s the problem with this statement – these people are NOT choosing that status for themselves alone – they are choosing to act as a potential reservoir for the virus to continue to mutate into even stronger forms. Forms that WILL figure out how to defeat the vaccines that have been given, thus endangering EVERYONE, regardless of vaccine status. COVID has already shown a fantastic ability to mutate into more contagious variants; we don’t want it to keep mutating. And the only way to stop that is herd immunity – either thru vaccinations or thru natural immunity, i.e. infections (and obviously I don’t wish that on anyone).
    I am in no way suggesting that physically forcing people to be vaccinated is the way to go – that is a VERY slippery slope that I don’t even want to peer over the edge of. But we have got to find a way to show people real science and how their actions affect us all in this case. A democratic society is wonderful in almost every way but it is a nightmare from an epidemiological standpoint – getting a fervent democracy to agree on the greater good appears to be a near impossibility. I can only pray that our independence doesn’t doom us all.

    1. It is worse in Russia with only 25% vaccinated. For pretty much the same reasons as those here. They associate the vaccine with the government and don’t trust either.

      We are not doing badly by global standards. I think this variant is pushing people to get jabs.

    2. Your own understanding of “the science” is obviously poor.

      Give me liberty or give me doom.

    3. Hyperdog: “I want to control your life because I’m scared”.
      Sevo: “No”.
      End of conversation.

    4. Ok, Wokedog, you love SCIENCE, and SCIENCE is consensus. SCIENCE is ‘experts’. SCIENCE is THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED! SCIENCE means shut up and obey!

      The enlightenment is over. We’re now back to where we started and are going going to put anyone who wants a debate in prison. If they don’t starve to death first.

      Don Lemon: Don’t get a vaccine? Can’t go to the grocery store. Wokedog agrees.

  49. Will Democrats ever be satisfied? Historically, no tyrant ever tires of heaping abuses on the people.

  50. This is very good article, i am enjoying very much Life Shayari in English

  51. No. No, they will not.

    And what will the Reason staff do about it? Keep voting for Democrats, that’s what.

  52. Don’t get a vaccine? Can’t go to the grocery store: Don Lemon.

    Don’t get a vaccine? Can’t go to cocktail parties: Reason Staff.

    1. BTW, if you check that link, you’ll find there is zero mention of the number of pediatric ICU beds available in Houston, just that the tried to transfer the kid to five other local hospitals and none had pediatric bed spaces.
      Not a word about how many were ever available or occupied; typical “news” fun-with-numbers bullshit.
      JFree is a propagandist; nothing JFree posts should be believed.

  53. Another story about Houston hospitals

    One ER has 90 people waiting for 20 ER beds. 95% of covid are unvax in Houston. Ambulances are already being diverted.

    1. Another story about Houston

      Houston area officials say the latest wave of COVID-19 cases is pushing the local health care system to nearly “a breaking point,” resulting in some patients having to be transferred out of the city to get medical care, including one who had to be taken to North Dakota.

      Dr. David Persse, who is health authority for the Houston Health Department and EMS medical director, said some ambulances were waiting hours to offload patients at Houston area hospitals because no beds were available. Persse said he feared this would lead to prolonged respond times to 911 medical calls.

      1. JFree: “I want to control your life because I’m a cowardly piece of shit”.
        Sevo: “No”.

  54. “They’ve made their own decisions and assumed the resulting dangers,”

    Not completely. Virtually every hospitalization for covid generates thousands of dollars in costs, most of which are covered by the risk pool in which an insured patient participates. Insurers raise the rates for smokers, knowing that smoking is, medically, costly, but people not vaccinated against covid are still replying on the rest of us to assume the resulting danger — in this case, the cost.

    1. David Taylor: “I want to control your life because I’m sacred”.
      Sevo: “No”.

      1. On the contrary — I want you to control your own life and your own finances. To the extent that, should you need hospitalization for covid and you have not been vaccinated, you pay for it.

        1. David Taylor: “I want to control your life because I’m scared and I’ll make up bullshit in the hopes you’re stupid enough to accept it”.
          Sevo: “No”.

          1. Sevo: posts bogus quotes from other people, completely missing the point.

            1. David Taylor: ‘Still trying to control your life with yet more bullshit’
              Sevo: “No”.
              Better?

  55. https://twitter.com/Siggmak/status/1423881723536838658?s=19

    A friend of mine got a medical mask exemption for her son and this is what happened to him… [link]

    1. But keep in mind: this child abuse is necessary and good because echospinner, jfree, et al say so

  56. https://twitter.com/MythinformedMKE/status/1424051647668445184?s=19

    Ayanna Pressley: The “Anti-Racism” in Public Health Act, will require the federal government to begin developing race-conscious public health approaches through two programs within the CDC.

    Your tax dollars will fund this. To quote @JackPosobiec , “are you paying attention yet”? [Link]

  57. https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1423995699163717633?s=19

    Tense scenes in Paris as thousands gather to protest the expanded covid passport that comes into effect on Monday. The health pass requires vaccination status or negative tests to use flights, trains or to enter recreational venues, malls & health clinics. [Video]

  58. https://twitter.com/EmeraldRobinson/status/1424056034084130824?s=19

    You comply because you want it to stop but because you comply they have no reason to stop.

  59. I live in NJ. Land of the maskup and lockdown. If California wasn’t on the West Coast I would think it was here on the East Coast.

    Our Governor has started his mask mandate with school children and I expect it will be in a store near me by month’s end. Then, once he wins re-election – his aide has stated that they don’t need the votes of those protesting the mask mandates to win – the lockdowns will begin. We don’t have recalls.

    So, what are we to do? There’s only spontaneous protests as Facebook et. al. have made sure there’s no communication that contradicts the government positions.

    Libertarians talk a lot. Republicans just sit on their hands (except for Rand Paul) and Democrats would rather seek forgiveness than ask permission.

    How about organizations like Reason starts doing more than blogging and also begins organizing?

    1. If only there were a politically active libertarian organization which has been around since 1971 and has put candidates on the ballot in all 50 states. If only.

  60. Are there any places where people could organize against this blatant government intrusion into our lives?

    1. These folks are doing their level best:
      https://pacificlegal.org/

  61. The rolling seven day average of confirmed Covid deaths in all of New York State is currently 9. Keep in mind this is the latest seven day rolling average, coming at the end of what is supposedly a major surge in the pandemic. And that’s the entire state not just New York City.

    According to the US Census Bureau, 452 people die every day in the state of New York, 194 of whom die in New York City.

    If you accept the prevailing narrative that 99% of all Covid deaths are amongst the unvaccinated right now, that would suggest that every one of those nine people was unvaccinated. Let’s stipulate this is true for a second. That means two handfuls of New York State residents took a risk and ended up dying. It would seem to me that we have already reached the endemic stage. Very few people are dying and those that are took a risk. It’s not like they hadn’t heard that the vaccine does apparently does do one thing very effectively, which is prevent the more serious outcomes of Covid. The hospitals are not exceeding capacity. All of the remaining pain associated with the pandemic has been imposed by the government.

    As a point of comparison, about 10 people in New York State die of an opioid overdose every day. Maybe everybody in the city of New York should be required to take a daily dose of methadone to prevent this possible causes of death.

    1. In the SF bay area last week, the Chron publishes a graph showing why we must again wear masks indoors. Two weeks ago, the number of those diagnosed was 15/100,000 people. The most recent has 11.8/100,000.
      Now these are not symptomatic, nor under treatment, nor hospitalized, but diagnosed.
      See David Taylor above for some thin gruel; gonna bankrupt the entire state!

    2. As long as you don’t die Covid pneumonia is no big deal then.

      1. Echospinner is a disgraceful liar, threatening your life and liberty.

      2. That’s an amazingly stupid comment, but considering the source….

    3. All of these deaths can be laid at the feet of the kleptocratic delusions of the Republican party. Isn’t the drug industry the best positioned to regulate drugs? Aren’t radio shock jocks the best authorities on pandemics?

      1. All of shitstain’s comments can be laid at the feet of the partisan lies of a lefty ignoramus.

  62. If you truly believe you are “Your Brother’s Keeper”, donate time and money to a religious charity. Hopefully one that also doesn’t believe in “Strike the necks of the unbelievers”. Otherwise, realize this: That was a slap on the ass, not a guarantee the doctor gave us when we were born. Oh, and remember this like your life depended on it: “My freedom does not end where your fear begins”. -Candace Owens. (For, “Fair Warning”, it just may.)

  63. https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1424111796860956672?s=19

    JUST IN – Israel, where ~90% of the adult population is fully vaccinated, reports 3,849 new #COVID19 cases, severe cases spike to 324 (of which 209 are fully vaccinated) – Ministry of Health

  64. https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1424132669743435783?s=19

    NEW – More and more companies in the U.S. are requiring employees to be vaccinated. On behalf of Zeit magazine, a lawyer clarifies whether this is also possible in Germany: “No, here it is not even allowed to ask whether a staff member has been vaccinated.” [Link]

  65. https://twitter.com/MichaelPSenger/status/1424068827273326592?s=19

    Fully-vaccinated protesters in Italy are burning their vaccine passes in a powerful display of solidarity against the tying of civil liberties to vaccination status.
    [Link]

  66. Hmm

    https://twitter.com/NewGranada1979/status/1424135057699004416?s=19

    REPORT: 233 New Cases. – They all seem to be publishing from the same script. Why the number 233? [Link]

  67. https://twitter.com/Lauren_Southern/status/1424171579664125957?s=19

    Just found out my Canadian and American friends don’t have to download QR tracking apps and check in at every shop you enter or be rejected by COVID marshalls overseeing the entrances. Do y’all know what’s going on in Australia?

    1. Do you ever try to find information in places other than Twitter?

      Sorry for hurting your pussy little traitor feelings last week.

      Try not being such an un-American traitor.

      1. Asshole gets flagged.

        1. Sevo, the mall cop of Reason.

          1. Shitstain, the defender of asshole.

    2. I’d bet real money you supported some version of the gulag for AIDS patients.

  68. Thanks for this update. Well written and unique.

    https://vevomusicvideo.com/

  69. Looks like things are changing around here. A month ago 90% of people were not wearing masks in the store. Now it is the opposite. No mandates and I don’t expect any in our state.

    And we just found out today that close member of our immediate family has it despite vaccine. So they will be in quarantine for a few weeks. My wife is actually at the store now picking up some things for them.

    So much for normal.

  70. Folks, we are wasting time here.
    ES, Tony, JFree, David Taylor and the lot of scared people are making the case that because XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX we should all get vaxxed.
    It DOESN’T MATTER

    1. (thanks to Reason’s squirrels, we’ll finish this here):
      Folks, we are wasting time here.
      ES, Tony, JFree, David Taylor and the lot of scared people are making the case that because XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, we should all get vaxxed.
      It DOESN’T MATTER what the supposed justification is, nor the number of beds, nor any of that bullshit (although it is pleasing to see how lame the claims are): human rights are unalienable.
      I do not yield, nor negotiate, my right to avoid being stabbed in the arm for any reason you can possibly invent. If you are realy worried about your health, take whatever precautions you deem appropriate.
      Sevo: “No”.
      Is that clear?

  71. Hello, I’ve been lurking here for years and enjoying the (usually) high caliber discourse here. When the caliber of discussion hasn’t been so high, it’s at least been entertaining. In any case, at long last, I’ve decided to make an account so I can inflict my takes upon the relatively innocent Reason.com readers.

    The implication made by some here, is that people who’ve decided not to get the vax right now should be doubted as to whether they’ve done a risk assessment that’s up to the standard of some commentators here, is ridiculous.

    Unless you expect everyone to abdicate their personal healthcare decisions to some nebulous group of “experts” (which doesn’t seem very libertarian), then you have to allow for individual autonomy in medical decisions.

    I can no more expect people who decide not to get the vax, to prove they’ve done a “proper” risk analysis, than I can expect vaxxers to prove they’ve done more than just nod and obey.

    For the record, I’m a newly minted M.D. who is also about to complete his MPH. This doesn’t mean I’m right, but I flatter myself to that degrees in biology, physiology, medicine, and public health; qualify me to perform a proper harm/benefit analysis (not that I think you need those credentials to make your own analysis).

    It’s perfectly reasonable to look at your low risk from covid-19, and decide that you don’t need the vaccine. I’ve gotten many vaccines the general public never receive, but only because I was, or was about to be, at higher risk. Since I stopped traveling as much I no longer need to get shots for yellow fever, rabies, meds for malaria etc. I’m not foolhardy for not getting vaccines I don’t need.

    The narrative that you either get the vax or you’re uneducated, reckless, or contrarian; is complete crap. Don’t let these public health cultists gaslight you into giving up your patient autonomy and right to INFORMED consent. If you’re fixated on credentials, someone with a stack of relevant degrees says you aren’t necessarily ignorant or stupid if you don’t want to get the vaccine right now. That is all

    1. Not needing vaccines for yellow fever because you won’t be traveling to places where yellow fever is endemic sounds correct. COVID is a current pandemic in the U.S. and is likely to become endemic here as Tuccille notes. Are you arguing that there are people that won’t need to be vaccinated against COVID or just that the risk assessment is up to them as principle of liberty?

      And how does the nature of infectious diseases that can be prevented by vaccines alter this calculus? If people decide that they don’t need to vaccinate themselves or their children against measles, mumps, and rubella, or polio, or other things that 90%+ of children are currently vaccinated against, typically being required to show proof of that before registering for schools or proof that they have a medical reason not to be vaccinated or a statement of religious belief about it, what does that do to the herd immunity of a community and the risks of those diseases to people that can’t be vaccinated? Will a parent of a child that can’t get the MMR vaccine, or for whom the vaccine would be ineffective, have to forego enrolling their child in a school because only 80% of the students are vaccinated? That would be below the threshold for herd immunity for measles, right? How does this affect that parent’s risk assessment and that child’s right to an education?

      I won’t say that people are stupid just for choosing against getting a vaccine, because I don’t know what went into their decision. But as a medical professional, all of those questions I just asked are things that you have certainly thought about and would have discussed in depth during your education, correct? I would have thought you’d share what you learned on those questions as well as what thoughts you did share.

      1. “…And how does the nature of infectious diseases that can be prevented by vaccines alter this calculus?…”

        Not one bit.
        JasonT20: ‘I want to run your life because I’m educated and scared’.
        Sevo: “No”.

      2. “Are you arguing that there are people that won’t need to be vaccinated against COVID or just that the risk assessment is up to them as principle of liberty?”

        I would argue both, as both are undeniably true.

        Children are just not at risk for covid-19. Period. Not saying they CAN’T get ill or die, but that their relative (and absolute) risk means you have to be irrational to be wringing your hands over their risk from covid. We have the data, and if you aren’t arguing for even more restrictions (than we have now for covid) for flu season EVERY year, then you’re being wildly inconsistent.

        Finally, you identify yourself as a medical professional so you should know that being against pt autonomy, as you appear to be, is highly unethical. I know the folks in my MPH program seemed pretty ambivalent about that principle, but in med school they hammered that home as foundational. So it’s a really bad look to be in support of removing pt autonomy and consent from the medical process. Just because so many in our profession seemed to have done so, doesn’t make it right.

        1. You misread that question I asked, “But as a medical professional, all of those questions I just asked are things that you have certainly thought about and would have discussed in depth during your education, correct?” Perhaps I could have phrased it better. I am not a medical professional. I am a high school science teacher. (Chemistry and Physics) I was asking for what you had learned and discussed during your medical education about the public health aspects of what is happening and the ethics involved.

          Autonomy as a patient and informed consent are of course essential in medical ethics. I certainly agree with that, as a patient. But I also expect my doctors to provide me with accurate information and their professional opinion based on what their training and experience and the best available data all indicate.

          I had a younger doctor for a while, before he moved to a different state, that was fairly blunt about my health status. He gave me the facts and risks regarding my numbers at the time. I had Type II diabetes that was poorly controlled, was about 60 lbs overweight, total cholesterol well over 200 with HDL cholesterol well below 50, along with other issues. He said that he wasn’t going to badger me about my diet and lack of exercise and inconsistent use of medications. He said that I could continue the lifestyle that I had if that is what I wanted to do, but I should know what I was headed toward. Heart disease, possible stroke, etc., all at a much younger age than I might be willing to accept. I was 45 at the time, and this was 4 years ago. I also suffer from depression and just had not been able to find the motivation to really do what I need to do. It was almost a Catch-22. I wanted to take better care of myself so that I could feel better, but I the way I felt was making it hard to take care of myself.

          The consequence of that, going back years, was that I did have a heart attack this last year. Two procedures to place stents in blocked coronary arteries later, and a few thousand dollars of out of pocket costs, I’m recovering and managing my diet and exercise better, but I probably could have avoided that outcome had I managed to do better sooner. The choices were entirely my own, but my doctors did not sugar coat anything about was happening with me and they were all very clear about the consequences of continuing on the same path.

          I just expect that you would do the same. It is fine to be clear to people that aren’t medical professionals, like me, that don’t have your training and knowledge, that they have choices. But I also think you should be equally clear to them what the evidence has to say about the consequences of their choices, which includes the risks that their choices would pose to other people. My choices about diet, exercise, and medications only affected me. That is not so when it comes to infectious diseases, obviously.

          Children are just not at risk for covid-19. Period.

          Not saying they CAN’T get ill or die, but that their relative (and absolute) risk means you have to be irrational to be wringing your hands over their risk from covid.

          These two statements are simply not compatible. It is contradictory to say “X is equal to exactly zero.” And then say right after, “Well, X is really small, so you shouldn’t worry about it.” If the second is your point, then stick with that and don’t say the first thing at all.

          Overall, the data does seem to favor that the COVID risk to children, particular children under the age of 10-14, is very small. (A thorough study currently in preprint found 25 deaths attributable to COVID among those under the age of 18 in the UK.) But this isn’t just about kids. That tells us what makes sense for schools (though the rates of transmission to adults from children would factor into that as well as the risk to the children themselves).

          But the risks to children is hardly the only thing going on. Whether or not adults get vaccinated, and whether businesses or other public facilities can require “vaccine passports” from their customers, employees, or others before they can enter those facilities really has little to do with the risks to children. That’s only relevant to whether to add COVID vaccines, when available to children under 12, to the list typically required of children before enrolling in schools (with exceptions for medical or religious reasons only). (Note that Florida’s vaccination requirements for children attending schools or day care apply to private schools as well as public schools.)

          If vaccinations can be required for children before they attend public or private schools or day care with other children, and have been for decades, then why is it such a violation of personal autonomy to make the same kinds of judgements for adults?

          1. “These two statements are simply not compatible. It is contradictory to say “X is equal to exactly zero.” And then say right after, “Well, X is really small, so you shouldn’t worry about it.” If the second is your point, then stick with that and don’t say the first thing at all.”

            Firstly, I’ll express myself however I wish, thank you very much. Secondly, if you parse my language uncharitably, then you might come away with the wrong impression; but a good faith reading would get my point.

            “I was asking for what you had learned and discussed during your medical education about the public health aspects of what is happening and the ethics involved”

            We have indeed discussed matters relating to covid-19 ad nauseam, but you’re going to have to be a LOT more specific.

            “But I also expect my doctors to provide me with accurate information and their professional opinion based on what their training and experience and the best available data all indicate.”

            Of course I do this. I find it odd that you phrased it like that, and that’s light years away from mandates, which is the issue I’m concerned about.

            “consequences of their choices, which includes the risks that their choices would pose to other people. My choices about diet, exercise, and medications only affected me. That is not so when it comes to infectious diseases, obviously.”

            On the contrary, the burden on our healthcare system from people who make unhealthy lifestyle choices, like yourself (no offense), does affect the rest of us. In one way by driving up insurance costs for everyone else, making it too expensive for people who’s finances are already stretched thin.

            I could use your reasoning to mandate diets and exercise for obese people. I could also delve into “incentives” to make people lose weight, like not allowing fat people into certain venues until they lose weight. I could extend similar mandates and “incentives” to people who smoke, drink, have unprotected sex etc. Hell, prohibition was the result of that kind of top down thinking; it didn’t work, and the collateral damage from that isn’t widely known enough (more than just solidifying and expanding organized crime’s foothold in our cities). I think history shows that to be a bad path to go down and thats without talking about cognitive/psychological reactance.

            “But the risks to children is hardly the only thing going on.”

            Children are not only vanishingly unlikely to get seriously ill or die, evidence suggests they are less likely to contract covid, and less likely to spread it if they do.

            Additionally, vaccinated adults have little to fear from even the most SARS-CoV-2 riddled kids as breakthrough infections are rare and those resulting in severe illness or death are even more so. Based on the above, there is little logic behind the rush to vaccinate small children.

            Finally, your reference to other mandated vaccines is not an argument for adding another.

            The proper mindset isn’t, “why NOT mandate another vaccine?”, but “Why should we add another one?”. Because that’s how medicine works (or how it was meant to work). We start out with our null hypothesis that you don’t need any intervention, and then interview, examine, and test you to disprove the null. If we disprove the null then we add therapies or meds that are indicated. We do not generally (or at least, should not) start out with the intention to medicate you, and you have to talk us out of it. Conversely I shouldn’t have the burden of proof to show that kids don’t need it, the burden is on those to demonstrate that children actually need it. That burden has not been met, and certainly not to the extent that mandates are appropriate.

            Closing remark: Congrats on recovering from your heart attack! I’m also glad that you seem to be taking an active interest in reducing your modifiable risk factors (eg. Lifestyle choices). Keep it up!

            1. Thank you for the well wishes. It has been challenging.

              I just have a few minutes, so this will be quick.

              I haven’t disputed that children are at low risk for COVID. Again, I bring up the existing vaccine mandates for children as an example of how we have decided, as a society, that some diseases are a serious enough risk to justify such mandates. And again, the issue isn’t just children, the risks to adults of all ages. Case fatality rates for people 65-74 was something like 5% the last time I looked it up. That is hardly insignificant, and we aren’t talking about people on their deathbed in that age group. And since vaccines aren’t 100% effective for anyone, and some people have conditions that mean that vaccines are unlikely to be effective (transplant recipients, for instance) or that they can’t be vaccinated at all, they need a high % of the people around them to be vaccinated in order to be able to live a normal life. Otherwise, they will be living in justified fear.

  72. Just a reminder, anybody who supported ANY lockdowns, mask mandates, eviction/foreclosure moratoriums, stimulus, government deciding which businesses are essential and aren’t, etc… this is your fault. What we should be asking with any policy proposal more than even it’s constitutionality, efficacy, tradeoff, unintended consequences, etc… is what kind of precedents are we setting and what kind of slippery slope is this setting up.
    I don’t know the details, but the precedents set in the last 18 months with the overall tolerance to tyranny will gives us a god awful dystopian future that will make an Ayn Rand or George Orwell novel look like a picnic.

  73. Tuccille and others keep referring to that one paper about shelter-in-place orders. He quotes,

    We find that shelter-in-place orders had no detectable health benefits, only modest effects on behavior, and small but adverse effects on the economy.

    But, as always, he leaves out the very next sentence:

    To be clear, our study should not be interpreted as evidence that social distancing behaviors are not effective. Many people had already changed their behaviors before the introduction of shelter-in-place orders, and shelter-in-place orders appear to have been ineffective precisely because they did not meaningfully alter social distancing behavior.

    The reasonable lesson to take from that study seems like it should be that the governments’ orders were either unneeded because people were already being responsible, or that they were ineffective because they didn’t have the teeth to get irresponsible people to do the right thing. Which of those supports typical libertarian beliefs and arguments?

    A related, but still different question would be to examine the effect of lifting those orders. What do studies have to say about that? Is there evidence one way or the other about how lifting those orders affected people’s behavior, whether the timing of lifting them was appropriate to the circumstances, and how it affected the progress of the virus through those communities?

  74. Is anyone else tired of being lied to about “masks do not change blood oxygen level”? I saw this with my own eyes at my annual physical, after being in the waiting room for 20 minutes with a mask, my O2 level was about 93 (it’s usually about 98 or 99). Tech looks at me and says, “take the mask off”. A minute later, O2 was up to about 96 and still creeping up. Tech says “Yeah, we see it all the time”.

    93 isn’t going to kill you, but I sure wouldn’t want to be trying exercise, and I had the GD thing on while doing heavy moving of equipment at work one day, and the difference was noticeable.

    “Mask have no effect on blood O2 levels” is not so. Pass the word!

    1. Covid can also affect blood oxygen level.

      1. So can fetal alcohol syndrome and having the umbilical wrapped around your neck. Which was it for you? Both, maybe?

      2. Indeed, to the point of making it go to zero.

        But not in this case; I got vaccinated as soon as I could (March), have never had any symptoms, and don’t really spend much time around others anyway. And, btw, note that the anecdote involved a control also : the mask was removed and the level went up.

  75. The myopic view of the pandemic disregards huge aspects of daily life. The solutions that are presented often create real harm and long term effects that are counterproductive. These myopic hysterics will never be satisfied until the population becomes bored and disregards the hysterical hyperbole.

    Covid -19 is a real virus, but so is the flu and many others are all around us. We are in contact with dirty nasty stuff on a daily basis. Covid-19 will not go away, just like the flu and common cold are still with us. Life does not stop because of a potential danger. Humans rise above the danger and live their lives.

    Listening to the CDC and their schizophrenic messaging makes it very apparent that the CDC follows politics over science. I understand that science evolves and grows, but the CDC has yet to offer any credible research that does not have political spin.

    Publish the data if there are findings, Let the individual decide what actions they as an individual should do to protect themselves and their family.

    Stop attempting to manipulate the population to capitulate to your whims. Stop the nonsense of using government sponsored to forcing individuals to capitulate (this is called violence). Stop pressuring companies to act as government proxies to enforce individuals to capitulate (this is crony capitalism).

  76. Beginning to look like we have to recognize CDS: Covid Derangement Syndrome.
    A disease affecting those who hope the world can be made free of risks, that, because they are terrified of an illness which is extremely rarely fatal, they get to control your life, or are simply lefty shits trying to use one more ‘crisis’ to extend government control of the population.
    Like TDS-addled assholes, they’ll claim it for your own good/the collective outweighs the individual/it’s for the children and EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THE PILES OF SHIT NEEDS TO BE TOLD TO FUCK OFF AND DIE. Slowly and painfully.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.