Posts Tagged ‘coronavirus’

Sorry Governor Baker but your latest edicts are tyrannical and not based on science

Posted: November 19, 2020 by Jon Fournier in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , ,

On Monday, November 2 Governor Charlie Baker announced extremely draconian restrictions on all residents of the State of Massachusetts  These totalitarian restrictions were announced because Governor stated that the Coronavirus pandemic is becoming dire. A careful examination of the WCVB daily Massachusetts Covid19 tracker will show that is not accurate. 

The number of positive tests per day, which has now risen to 2000 per day, looks alarming compared to June when it was only around 200 a day. In reality that ten fold increase is not alarming because it is the result of a drastically increased number of daily tests, the vast majority who test positive are asymptomatic.   The number of deaths per day has not shown the same 10 fold increase as the number of positive tests, increasing from a low of 13 to 26 or so.   Hospitalizations have only modestly increased from an average low of 400 to a current rate of 600 per day with intensive care numbers increasing from a low of 70 to a current average of 110.

This WCVB Channel 5 article discusses the draconian new mandates in great detail.  This one mandate is as anti liberty as you can get and not based on science in any way.  As far as I know a virus cannot tell time.

Baker announced an overnight stay at home advisory, resembling a curfew, from 10 p.m. through 5 a.m. It will allow activities such as commuting to or from work, running essential errands and talking a walk.

This next mandate boggles the mind and makes no sense.  Now you will have to wear a mask if  you walk down an empty street with no one around you for miles.

Baker’s orders include a change to the statewide mask order. Under the altered order, masks will be required for anyone in any public space, indoor or outdoor, regardless of the ability to maintain social distancing.

Governor Baker will win the Grinch of the year award with this next mandate.  We usually have a few dozen relatives over forThanksgiving and Christmas Eve.  Governor Baker has no right to dictate what people do in their own homes.  That is tyrannical in the extreme.

Gathering limits at private residences across Massachusetts will be reduced, Baker said. Indoor gatherings at private residences will be reduced from 25 to 10, and outdoor events will be reduced from 50 to 25.

Here is Governor Baker’s rational for this tyrannical mandate.

“Young people need to stop having big house parties, and we’re planning to talk to local officials about how we can work with them to prevent these events going forward. Folks need to postpone or rethink any indoor get-togethers, like big birthday parties, baby showers or watching football or some other big sports event with your neighbors. These are places where COVID spreads, unregulated gatherings, even if they’re small, where people let down their guard, ” Baker said.\

This next mandate makes no sense scientifically because for it to have any effect on the transmission  of Coronavirus the virus would need to be able to tell time.

Restaurants will be required to cease in-person dining by 9:30 p.m., although takeout or delivery of food can continue. Liquor stores and other establishments will be required to cease alcohol sales at 9:30 p.m. Several other categories of recreation and entertainment businesses will also be required to close at 9:30 p.m.

This Federalist article proves that mask mandates are not backed up by science in any way at all yet we are all forced to wear them, even alone in a large public park.

Scientists have long tested the value of masks for the general public. The results are not, on the whole, in favor of masks for general use because there are just too many trade-offs and exceptions. Besides, not all masks are created equal. A clean, properly-fitted N-95 respirator and face shield worn, and never touched while worn, by a trained health professional is one thing. A dirty cloth neck gaiter worn begrudgingly at the gym is quite another.

Even Dr. Anthony Fauci used to admit this. “In the United States, people should not be walking around with masks,” Fauci told “60 Minutes Overtime” back in the spring. “There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better, and it might even block a droplet. But it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is.”

The people of Massachusetts have become such a pathetic bunch of sheeple. Only a small minority are voicing any opposition to these tyrannical restrictions.  They won’t end until enough individuals demand they stop.

The science behind Coronavirus lockdowns is far from settled

Posted: October 15, 2020 by Jon Fournier in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , ,

Far too many individuals blindly accept the freedom and economy destroying lockdowns that governors have forced upon us because they believe that the lockdowns are based on science.  That is the narrative that has been crammed down the throats of all of us by the dangerously corrupt liberal news media.  The truth is far different but few are aware it.  That is why I’m writing this article.  On social media I share the truth, however, so many of my liberal friends dismiss the truth because it comes from right wing websites such as Breitbart, American Thinker, and the Federalist.

I was shocked to see actual truth in this New York Times article, which I immediately shared on Facebook and Twitter.  As you can see, Coronavirus is no where as prevalent in the United States as the media trumpets because the most often used test is far too sensitive.

Some of the nation’s leading public health experts are raising a new concern in the endless debate over coronavirus testing in the United States: The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus.

Most of these people are not likely to be contagious, and identifying them may contribute to bottlenecks that prevent those who are contagious from being found in time.

Here is the scientific explanation behind the overly sensitive tests:

The PCR test amplifies genetic matter from the virus in cycles; the fewer cycles required, the greater the amount of virus, or viral load, in the sample. The greater the viral load, the more likely the patient is to be contagious.

This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients, although it could tell them how infectious the patients are.

The PCR tests uses too many amplification cycles.

Most tests set the limit at 40, a few at 37. This means that you are positive for the coronavirus if the test process required up to 40 cycles, or 37, to detect the virus.

Tests with thresholds so high may detect not just live virus but also genetic fragments, leftovers from infection that pose no particular risk — akin to finding a hair in a room long after a person has left, Dr. Mina said.

A more reasonable cutoff would be 30 to 35, she added. Dr. Mina said he would set the figure at 30, or even less. Those changes would mean the amount of genetic material in a patient’s sample would have to be 100-fold to 1,000-fold that of the current standard for the test to return a positive result — at least, one worth acting on.

There has been a mini-serge of Coronavirus cases here in Massachusetts which has resulted in Governor Baker halting his tortuously slow reopening plan.  This serge is based on a big lie.

 In Massachusetts, from 85 to 90 percent of people who tested positive in July with a cycle threshold of 40 would have been deemed negative if the threshold were 30 cycles, Dr. Mina said. “I would say that none of those people should be contact-traced, not one,” he said.

A large number of medical experts have recently condemned the Coronavirus lockdowns. Those who rely on the mainstream media for news are completely unaware of this development.  Here is a description of the group from this Breitbart article

The internationally known experts, who identify themselves as “coming from both the left and right, and around the world,” have produced what they call the “Great Barrington Declaration,” which, to date, has been signed by nearly 4,700 medical and public health scientists, 8,900 medical practitioners, and 123,300 members of the general public.

Here are the opening paragraphs ofThe Great Barrington Declaration

As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. 

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. 

The Great Barrington Declaration recommends a must better approach for dealing with the  Coronavirus Pandemic.

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e.  the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. 

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. 

Instead of placing all of us under house arrest and shuttering all of our businesses we should:

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

The lockdowns are so not backed by science that the World Health Organization has recently reversed course on them,

Governments cannot eliminate risk without eliminating freedom

Posted: October 8, 2020 by Jon Fournier in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , ,

This whole government overreaction to the Coronavirus pandemic has proved that the only way government can minimize risk is by minimizing freedom.   There is no other way for governments to minimize risk.  These lockdowns by states and municipalities, which are meant to minimize the risks associated with a supposedly deadly virus spreading wildly throughout their population, have resulted in the almost total loss of freedom for the majority of individuals living in this country.  This loss of freedom has resulted in tremendous harm to the individuals who have lost freedom and to the country as a whole.

Exercising your freedom naturally results in some form of risk.  It is something we as individuals all understand.  Throughout every day we make decisions based on this fundamental truth. We weigh the risks versus the benefits every time we decide to exercise out freedom.  The only person qualified to weigh the risks of exercising our freedom is each and every individual. 

An honest and thorough investigation of history will confirm that when government, even at the most local, attempts to decide for others which risks are more acceptable than others, government does a terrible job.  California, New York, and Massachusetts, with their disastrous lockdowns, have proved that governors of states do a tremendously poor job making these decisions for us.  It is far worse for every individual in the United States when the Federal Government attempts to minimize risk for us.  We should all be extremely grateful that President Trump followed the Constitution and did not lockdown the entire country.

Freedom used to be a concept that was universally cherished by everyone in this nation.  Sadly that no longer is true thanks to the brainwashing that has been taking place in our colleges and universities for decades.  Far too many individuals meekly accept the freedom destroying restrictions placed on them to minimize the risks associated with Coronavirus.  It turns out that Coronavirus is far less deadly than the media and so called experts make it out to be.  Even if it was far deadlier than it actually is that would not justify any freedom destroying restrictions.   Earlier generations would not have put up with these restrictions.

Thanks to the Coronavirus ‘crisis’ the United States has become a police state and far too many are OK with that

Posted: September 24, 2020 by Jon Fournier in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , ,

I heard a call on my police scanner this past Saturday that perfectly illustrates just how far along the road to becoming a police state large portions of the United States have become.  A concerned citizen called the police because there were a dozen cars parked on her neighbor’s lawn.  The caller was concerned that the neighbor was having a party and the guests were not wearing masks and were not social distancing.  Two cruisers were dispatched to make sure no one at the party was being naughty.  The home owner welcomed the officers and demonstrated that all guests were properly following Governor Baker’s edicts from on high. 

I was shocked that the neighbor was such a meddling busybody who would tattle on her neighbor for daring to do something so shockingly evil as have a party in their own home.  I was not shocked that the police responded to such a frivolous call because I have read all of Governor Baker’s draconian, liberty destroying, edicts.  Here is a description of the rather odious proclamation that supposedly granted local police officers the authority to trample on the rights of property owners across the state of Massachusetts:

Baker also announced the formation of a an enforcement and intervention team, which will be tasked with ramping up enforcement in key communities and evaluating rising trends such as new positive cases and the percentage of positive tests.

Public safety officials, including state and local law enforcement, now have the jurisdiction to enforce safety orders and crack down on events hosted in violation of the orders, according to Baker.

“These teams will coordinate an increased enforcement effort across the state to assure businesses and residents are aware of and are following the COVID-19 orders,” Baker said. “By authorizing state and local police to enforce these orders, we can not only increase the number of people who will be out there to enforce these measures but also ensure that are penalties for those who refuse to make the adjustments that so many people in Massachusetts have made and continue to make.

Those who fail to comply with the orders will be subject to fines or cease and desist orders,

If I was hosting a party at my home and the police showed up to determine if we were wearing masks and practicing social distancing I would not have allowed them entry.  I would have demanded they produce a search warrant and I would have asked them to cite the exact laws we were breaking.  If the police officers cited the governor’s emergency edicts I would have informed them that these edicts are not valid laws, not having passed through the formal legislative process.  That situation could easily happen because my family always hosts large gatherings over the Christmas Holidays and we have no intention of followings emperor Baker’s commandments on our private property.  I know a great many individuals believe the same way.  I could see this type of scenario easily spinning out of control and leading to violence or a standoff.

These regulations have turned Massachusetts into a police state with local law enforcement officers and an army of busybodies acting as Governor Baker’s secret police force.   Because so many states such as New York, California, and Virginia have similar draconian regulations most of the country is now a police state.  It is not just sad, it is disgusting that far too many people blindly follow these obscene and unconstitutional regulations.  These regulations are worthy of mass protests demanding they be removed immediately, where are these protests?

Older Entries
Newer Entries