From Russell Brand's Video Description: "As Australian police arrest middle aged women for allegedly nor showing their vaccine passports, its politicians are considering charging the unvaccinated for healthcare. So, are we witnessing the creation of a two-tier society?"
Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg, MD PhD, writing on the website of Dr. Vinay Prasad (who was interviewed by Saagar and Krystal). Hoeg is concerned about one-size-fits-all vaccination and internet censorship of comments (even by doctors) that are off-narrative):
My interpretation of the data is vaccines continue to be the best tool we have to prevent severe disease. When health care workers could get vaccinated, I got mine the first day I could. That being said, I had wished my parents and older patients could have gotten theirs before me. I begged unsuccessfully to extend my time between the first and second dose because of cardiac side effects I had had from the first dose (which came on quite severely while running). I continue to strongly recommend vaccines to my patients (and now boosters for all over 40-50 or with specific risk factors) and help facilitate vaccination appointments for them and talk them through the data. I recommended to my younger healthier adult patients to only get one dose if they had already been infected based on the data we already had late last winter and a need to preserve vaccinations. I have always felt, based on the data that healthy children were at very low risk and vaccinating them before older adults across the world was unethical and irresponsible. You and I wrote about this for the Atlantic with Monica Gandhi. I still stand by what we said.Over the spring and summer, the evidence suggested vaccines were very effectively preventing transmission, which was a major rationale for vaccinating everyone. But I also knew, as did you, in the spring that a serious vaccine adverse effect could quickly tip the individual harms of the vaccine beyond those of the benefits for healthy children. And I actually tweeted about the uncertainty about the risk-benefit ratio of vaccination in healthy boys on June 10th as the myocarditis data were accumulating from Israel and our own CDC.
My tweet was censored by Twitter and that landed me on Tucker Carlson (which I had never watched). I understand the political nature of this pandemic (certainly on social media) but the censorship of an issue as important as vaccine-associated myocarditis in boys and young men really got under my skin. I was receiving texts and messages from physicians I knew seeing post-vaccination myocarditis in young boys and men across the country and I was vexed the CDC did not prioritize getting an accurate, stratified estimate of this occurrence. Certainly, as a mom I wanted to have a reasonable sense of the benefits vs risks in my old children. At that time I was glad to connect with the cardiologist John Mandrola because we are very like-minded, particularly on this issue (we’ll discuss our study below).
I have consistently viewed attempts to estimate the rates and define the severity of a vaccine side effect as highly pro-vaccine. Anything else, especially when it comes to children, will quickly erode public trust and fuel overall vaccine hesitancy. Especially now with the vaccines’ limited and transient impact on transmission, we need to be considering each individual’s risks from COVID-19 and their expected benefits (and risks) from each dose. The most important factors to consider in this analysis include age, sex, risk factors for severe COVID-19 and history of infection.
What still boggles my mind, is when you just do the simple math using the German study of infection-hospitalization rates in healthy children, you get a 1/2400 chance a healthy 12-17 year old will be hospitalized for COVID-19 requiring specific covid treatment (this eliminates incidental hospitalizations) and, now with omicron, that is likely around 1/5000 risk (or lower) and yet the rate of symptomatic post vax myocarditis after dose 2 in this age group is around 1/3000 (see below) and yet so few seem to be questioning dose 2 for them (when mathematically it’s the wrong decision), let alone dose 3, which seems a clear mistake to mandate without evidence of benefit. . .
Caitlin Flanagan has been a cancer survivor for 20 years. She wrote the following in "I’LL TELL YOU THE SECRET OF CANCER: It’s been almost 20 years since my diagnosis, and I’ve learned quite a bit:
When I began to understand that attitude doesn’t have anything to do with survival, I felt myself coming up out of deep water. I didn’t cause my cancer by having a bad attitude, and I wasn’t going to cure it by having a good one. And then Coscarelli told me the whole truth about cancer. If you’re ready, I will tell it to you. Cancer occurs when a group of cells divide in rapid and abnormal ways. Treatments are successful if they interfere with that process. That’s it, that’s the whole equation.
A New Trend in Psychotherapy: Encouraging Learned Helplessness. In this video by FAIR, Christine Sefein, a professor of clinical psychology discusses her resignation from Antioch College. She could no longer thrive in a department that now seeks to validate its patients' claims of learned helplessness and identitarian blaming. The new approach also intentionally overlooks maladaptive behaviors. According to Sefein, this new approach destructively locks people into a belief that they are powerless. This new approach endangers patients who are feeling desperate.
This new affirmation therapy taught by Antioch is a major change from traditional approaches to psychotherapy, which properly emphasized empowering therapy, adaptive coping skills, strong social support system, exercise, meditation and, when needed, medication.
Making this situation all-the-worse is the well documented rise in anxiety depression and self-harm among young adults.
For more on FAIR (Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism) visit FAIR's extensive website and videos.
I used to weigh 30 pounds more than I currently weigh. My secret is that I avoided most refined carbs, ate less overall and exercised more. One of the prime reasons I lost the weight was a concern with diabetes. This study should give hope to many other people concerned with diabetes. It was sent to me by a friend who decided to take control of his weight, losing 50 pounds early in the pandemic. The title: "Nutritional basis of type 2 diabetes remission."
Type 2 diabetes mellitus was once thought to be irreversible and progressive, but a series of clinical studies over the past 12 years have clarified the mechanisms that cause the disease. We now know that the processes that cause type 2 diabetes can be returned to normal functioning by restriction of food energy to achieve weight loss of around 15 kg.1 Around half of people who are within the first 10 years of diagnosis and manage to follow food energy restriction can stop all diabetes medication and return to non-diabetic glucose control.23 Remission is achieved when haemoglobin A1c concentrations of 48 mmol/mol are recorded after weight loss and at least six months later without any anti-diabetic medications (box 1).4 Here we summarise the new understanding of type 2 diabetes and consider how different changes to food intake can achieve the necessary weight loss and maintenance required for remission of diabetes.