Scientists have reported the first human-to-pet transmission of monkeypox when the dog of a gay French couple became infected after sharing a bed with its infected owners.
Early this summer, the 4-year-old Italian greyhound tested positive for the disease, not long after its French owners began experiencing symptoms, according to reports.
It is suspected that the gay men, ages 44 and 27, caught the virus as a result of having sexual contact with other men during their non-monogamous relationship.
“One man is Latino, aged 44 years, and lives with HIV with undetectable viral loads on antiretrovirals; the second man is White, aged 27 years, and HIV-negative,” according to a report published last week in the journal The Lancet.
After the owners developed ulcers, they went to the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital in Paris for treatment on June 10th.
The owners attended the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital in Paris on 10 June after developing ulcers. They tested positive for monkeypox.
The gay couple said that they continued to share their bed with their dog. Who said they had been careful to prevent their dog from contact with other pets or humans from the onset of their own symptoms.
It took less than two weeks after they were told they had the viral disease before their dog started showing symptoms of monkeypox, including pustules on its stomach.
A PCR test showed that the dog had monkeypox, and genetic sequencing showed that the strain matched the strain that its owners had, according to The Lancet.
“To the best of our knowledge, the kinetics of symptom onset in both patients and, subsequently, in their dog suggest human-to-dog transmission of monkeypox virus,” they wrote in a study published in the Lancet health journal this month.
“Our findings should prompt debate on the need to isolate pets from monkeypox virus-positive individuals. We call for further investigation on secondary transmissions via pets,” they added.
In light of recent studies suggesting that humans can spread monkeypox to their pets, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has updated its guidance on the issue to include dogs among the animals that are susceptible to infection.
“People can get infected with the virus through direct contact with infected animals, often while hunting, trapping, and processing infected animals or the infected body parts and fluids of animals.,” the CDC stated in its guidance.
“We are still learning which species of animals can get monkeypox. While we do not know if reptiles, amphibians, or birds can get monkeypox, it is unlikely since these animals have not been found to be infected with other orthopoxviruses,” the CDC stated.
“We are still learning about which mammals are susceptible to infection. We should assume any mammal can be infected with Monkeypox virus. The table shows which animals can be infected with Monkeypox virus or other closely related orthopoxviruses.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-08-18 06:14:482022-08-20 06:22:08First Dog Infected With Monkeypox After ‘Sharing Bed’ with Gay Men
LONDON, Aug 14 (Reuters) – Stood on her hind legs to greet any prospective owner who might approach her glass-doored kennel, Harriet is a black English cocker spaniel abandoned as a deepening cost-of-living crisis pushes growing numbers of Britons to part with their pets.
She was found running along a busy road in London after witnesses saw her pushed out of a car and is one of 206 dogs and 164 cats currently being looked after at rehoming centres run by the Battersea animal charity.
It is a similar story at other centres across the country – with some seeing record inquiries for dog and cat returns – as the tightest squeeze on living standards since at least the 1960s forces many owners to decide the additional cost of food plus hundreds of pounds in vet bills is no longer manageable.
“We are concerned that’s going to be an increasing reason for people bringing their dogs in to Battersea,” Steve Craddock, who manages the centre in soutwest London, told Reuters.
NOTE: in the 1970’s Czechoslovakia, pets (in particular, dogs) were declared a luxury and the tax on dogs was raised to be about the same as my family paid in rent for 3 months for what was considered a large, modern apartment (the building had an elevator and everything – and it was assigned to us before my dad became a political dissident, so the bureaucracy found it difficult to kick us out afterwards). It would have been well over a year’s worth of rent that my great-grand-parents were paying annually for their kitchen/sitting room, a bedroom across the common hall (their only access to running water was in that hall and shared with all the tenants on that floor) and a shared toilet…
And the cruelty people were capable of towards their pet dogs when they suddenly became expensive to keep was, for me, unimaginable, incomprehensible…
Taking the dog out to a forest, tying it to a tree (out of sight of anyone who might report it – or save the dog) and leaving it there. Even Hansel and Gretel had a better fighting chance… And this was just an example of ‘passive cruelty’, not the more active types.
This was useful to the regime because it sowed discord and hate into nuclear families: typically, one spouse and/or the kids were pro-pet and willing to do anything for them, and the other spouse resented the cost (and political stigma attached to owning a Western-style luxury pet) and that would be the one ‘getting rid’ of the pet. It broke the trust between spouses, parents/children and so on.
Destruction of the nuclear family at its most fundamental.
The kicker was that because of the housing shortage, even broken families often had to live together for quite some time after the marriage failed, so, no privacy and spite-spying on one’s spouse was easily accomplished.
Bonus: becoming callous to the plight/fate of the beloved family pet dehumanized the ones doing it/witnessing it, making it that much easier to behave inhumanly to others, including, well, everyone… much like taking in an animal, making the kids become attached to it and then sacrificing it to Allah for Eid does. Different ideology, same methodology for dehumanization.
OK, so the ‘tax’ here is based on food/vet bills, but, while the means are a different shade of green, the effect is the same. By giving up their pet, because the cost outweighs their love, people are becoming less humane, more ruthless and feeling more justified in doing whatever it takes to make their life easier, regardless of the cost to anyone else, even their loved ones.
Of course, not all people will fall into this trap. But those who do become useful tools for the tyranny machine.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Vlad Tepes Bloghttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngVlad Tepes Blog2022-08-17 10:25:302022-08-17 10:27:26Cash-Strapped Britons Give Up Pets as Living Costs Soar
Queering the Maid of Orleans shows an impoverished imagination.
A new play about Joan of Arc, I, Joan, opens in London next week. After all the plays, poetry, novels, and biographies published since she was burned at the stake in 1431, it’s difficult to imagine that anything fresh can be said about the Maid of Orleans,
However, the Globe Theatre, a successor to Shakespeare’s theatre, believes that it has a new angle – a non-binary Joan. Instead of celebrating her holiness (she was canonised by the Catholic Church in 1920) or her martial prowess, the Globe is depicting her as “the essence of transgressive androgyny”.
I, Joan was written by Charlie Josephine, who identifies as non-binary. The play uses they/their pronouns instead of she/her, making a perusal of the publicity rather confusing. But the Globe sums up the play as follows: “Rebelling against the world’s expectations, questioning the gender binary, Joan finds their [her] power and their [her] belief spreads like fire.”
The play treats Joan’s life as a neglected chapter in trans history. “Joan is also part of a long and cross-cultural history of people who have experienced their gender nonconformity as spiritually motivated. Throughout their period in the military, and throughout their trial, Joan remained consistently clear that their gender nonconformity was at the command of God.”
Will anyone find this convincing? Perhaps. According to a survey reported in The Times, of London, the British are ignorant of their history: “A tenth thought Henry VIII had eight wives not six and the same ratio believed Joan of Arc was one of them. A third did not realise Henry established the Church of England, and 54 per cent had no idea William Shakespeare was alive in the Tudor period.”
So if ten percent of Brits believe that Joan of Arc was married to Henry VIII, why wouldn’t they believe that she was trans or non-binary or two-spirit or whatever?
The Globe is committed to a ShakesQueer view of drama. What the playwright and the director see in Joan is a person who was true to an inner voice which told her to be gender transgressive. Gender fluidity is the Globe’s religion. The notes for the play explain:
So when we read that Joan said, ‘It was necessary that I changed my clothes’, what if we were to take that at face value? Joan is telling us that for them, gender nonconformity felt necessary: like something they had to do. It seems clear that part of that necessity had to do with their [her] faith: their God had told them [her] to dress this way, and they [she] felt wholeheartedly bound to follow that command… But this is also a feeling that so many of us, whether we have a faith or not, can relate to: a sense that this next step in our lives is the right one, even if we can’t tell exactly why.
This is, according to the Globe, what makes I, Joan “alive, queer and full of hope”.
In fact, what made Joan’s life full of hope was something altogether different. The historical Joan would have been baffled by the idea of gender transgression. She was completely feminine and dressed in male attire only to protect herself amongst the rough soldiers of the French Army. She had made a vow of virginity and was uncompromisingly chaste and modest. Queer sexuality would have been abhorrent to her.
There’s no point in a literary work which is unable to account for the facts of her extraordinary character and instead makes them up. But in a back-handed way I, Joan may be a genuine homage to her simplicity, wisdom, leadership, and courage. Unfortunately, queering her strange life sheds no light upon these qualities at all.
Joan is one of the most astonishing figures in history. An illiterate 17-year-old peasant girl who inspired battle-hardened men, enabled the coronation of her king, and saved her country from English invaders. And as quickly as she appeared, two years later she disappeared — betrayed, tried on trumped-up charged and then burned at the stake.
The only coherent explanation for this is her unbending faith, not a bogus gender-fluidity. She believed that in obeying her conscience – which often went clean against her own feelings – she was obeying God. That is what gave her fortitude in all her tribulations.
And that is what gave her the peace of soul to bear the humiliation, betrayal, loneliness, lies, injustice, and agony of the second half of her career. She found a serenity in her deep Catholic faith that is simply unimaginable for the snowflakes of the LGBTQI+ movement.
The Globe justifies its bizarre production by asserting: “That is the role of theatre: to simply ask the question ‘imagine if?’” But queering Joan of Arc shows an impoverished imagination. The truly transgressive and imaginative question is: what if Joan really was a warrior for God?
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexitieshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexities2022-08-17 10:05:342022-08-17 10:10:06Woke Silliness at its Worst: A Non-Binary Joan of Arc
Deaths are up 40% among working people. ‘Just unheard of’ the company cites “non-pandemic-related morbidity” and “unusual claims adjustments.” In other words, the vaccine.
Lincoln National Life Insurance Company’s Employer-provided Group Life Insurance policies for employees ages 18 through 64 paid out $500 M in death benefits in 2019, the year before the pandemic, and $548 million, a 9% increase in the 1st year of the pandemic, and out $1.4 Billion, in the first full year of the vaccine, in which about 90% of the adult population were vaccinated, and which included mandatory vaccines for employees of many companies). The $1.4 Billion in 2021 was a 163% increase over the amount paid in the 1st year of the pandemic. Lincoln National stated that these increases were due to “non-pandemic related morbidity” and “unusual claims adjustments”
Its CEO of One America Life Insurance company, said that “We are seeing, right now [in 4th quarter 2021] , the highest death rate we have seen in the history of this business — not just at One America. The data is consistent across every player in that business. [The increase in deaths represents ‘huge, huge numbers,’ and it’s not elderly people who are dying, but ‘primarily working age people 18-64’ who are the employees of companies that have group life insurance plans through One America]
And what we saw just in third quarter, [and are seeing in] the fourth quarter, is that death rates are up by 40% over what they were pre-pandemic. Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three sigma or a one in 200-year catastrophe would be 10% increase over pre-pandemic . . . So 40% is just unheard of.”
=Lincoln National is a large life insurance company that’s so old that when it was started, the founders actually asked Abraham Lincoln’s son whether it was okay to use his father’s likeness in their company branding. (source: Epoch Times)
Five months after breaking the story of the CEO of One America insurance company saying deaths among working people ages 18-64 were up 40% in the third quarter of 2021, I can report that a much larger life insurance company, Lincoln National, reported a 163% increase in death benefits paid out under its group life insurance policies in 2021.
This is according to the annual statements filed with state insurance departments — statements that were provided exclusively to Crossroads Report in response to public records requests.
The reports show a more extreme situation than the 40% increase in deaths in the third quarter of 2021 that was cited in late December by One America CEO Scott Davison — an increase that he said was industry-wide and that he described at the time as “unheard of” and “huge, huge numbers” and the highest death rates that have ever been seen in the history of the life insurance business.
The annual statements for Lincoln National Life Insurance Company show that the company paid out in death benefits under group life insurance polices a little over $500 million in 2019, about $548 million in 2020, and a stunning $1.4 billion in 2021.
From 2019, the last normal year before the pandemic, to 2020, the year of the Covid-19 virus, there was an increase in group death benefits paid out of only 9 percent. But group death benefits in 2021, the year the vaccine was introduced, increased almost 164 percent over 2020.
Here are the precise numbers for Group Death Benefits taken from Lincoln National’s annual statements for the three years:
Here are the key numbers for 2021, below, shown on the company’s annual statement that was filed with the Michigan Department of Insurance and Financial Services. These are national numbers, not state-specific:
Lincoln National is the fifth-largest life insurance company in the United States, according to BankRate, after New York Life, Northwestern Mutual, MetLife and Prudential.
The company was founded in Fort Wayne, Indiana in 1905, getting the OK from Abraham Lincoln’s son, Robert Todd Lincoln, to use his father’s name and likeness in its advertising.
It’s now based in Radnor, Pennsylvania.
The annual statements filed with the states do not show the number of claims — only the total dollar amount of claims paid.
Group life insurance policies, in most cases, cover working-age adults ages 18-64 whose employer includes life insurance as an employee benefit.
How many deaths are represented by the 163% increase? It is not possible to determine by the dollar figures on the statements.
But the average death benefit for employer-provided group life insurance, according to the Society for Human Resource Management, is one year’s salary.
If the average annual salary of people covered by group life insurance policies in the United States is $70,000, this may represent 20,647 deaths of working adults, covered by just this one insurance company. This would represent at least 10,000 more deaths than in a normal year for just this one company.
The statements for the three years also show a sizable increase in ordinary death benefits — those not paid out under group policies, but under individual life insurance policies.
In 2019, the baseline year, that number was $3.7 billion. In 2020, the year of the Covid-19 pandemic, it went up to $4 billion, but in 2021, the year in which the vaccine was administered to almost 260 million Americans, it went up to $5.3 billion.
The statements show that the total amount that Lincoln National paid out for all direct claims and benefits in 2021 was more than $28 billion, $6 billion more than in 2020, when it paid out a total of $22 billion, which was less than the $23 billion it paid out in 2019, the baseline year.
A $6 billion increase in expenses is something few companies could absorb, but Lincoln National has been working to do just that — by increasing sales of new insurance polices.
In the press release accompanying its annual report, and in its press release announcing the first quarter 2022 results — in which the company announces a $41 million loss in its Group Protection business — it trumpets an increase in sales. For first quarter 2022 that increase was 42 percent. The company also mentions that premiums have gone up 4 percent.
Interestingly, in the press release accompanying the first-quarter 2022 results, Lincoln National attributes the $41 million operating loss to “non-pandemic-related morbidity” and “unusual claims adjustments.”
“This change was driven by non-pandemic-related morbidity [emphasis added], including unusual claims adjustments [emphasis added], and less favorable returns within the company’s alternative investment portfolio.”
Morbidity, of course, means disease. A lot of people are sick.
This matches what I was told by OneAmerica in January in emails following the publication of my story in The Center Square — that it was not only deaths of working-age people that shot up to unheard-of levels in 2021, but also short- and long-term disability claims.
Annual statements for other insurance companies are still being compiled and reviewed. So far, Lincoln National shows the sharpest increases in death benefits paid out in 2021, though Prudential and Northwestern Mutual also show significant increases — increases much larger in 2021 than in 2020, indicating that the cure was worse than the disease — much worse.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-08-17 07:36:412022-08-17 07:38:03Fifth Largest Life Insurance Company Reports a ‘Catastrophic’ 40% Increase in Deaths in 2021
It’s been a bad stretch for the phony climate change narrative, lately.
A new report shows 96 percent of NOAA’s temperature stations don’t meet the agency’s own placement standards. They are deliberately placed near urban areas in order to overstate average temperatures, leading to the now-routine bogus claims we’re having the ‘hottest year on record’.
Someone pointed out the inconvenient truth that NASA has recognized over the years that the biggest factor affecting temperature and climate is the sun, specifically, variations in the earth’s solar orbit. Fly too close to the sun, and things get a little warmer, whodathunkit.
Those disappearing coral reefs in Australia? Well, guess what – they’ve rebounded to record levels. Environmentalists routinely tell you the sky is falling and the coral reefs are disappearing, but neither is true.
The climatistas prattle on about extreme weather events, but the fact of the matter is that the number of climate-related deaths has dropped by 99 percent since 1920 and is now approaching zero – except for storm chasers, of course. Oh, by the way, the number of tropical cyclones has dropped 13 percent since pre-industrial times, a new study found. Sorry to rain on your anti-growth parade.
The climate change crowd is deceiving you when it claims extreme weather is increasing and climate change is to blame. It turns out that the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – IPCC – recently changed its methods, producing an increase in extreme weather events on paper but not in the real world. “(T)he latest IPCC report has introduced novel ‘attribution’ statistics and now insists that things are getting worse. It’s yet another case of scientists trying to scare the public into compliance,” a recent paper said.
So-called experts say sea levels are rising, but photos show they’re not, and the satellite data underlying the sea level rise claim has not been vetted for satellite altitude which makes all the difference in the method used.
Greenies hyperventilate about the water level at Lake Powell being down 94 feet since 2000 and blame evaporation from hotter temperatures, but it is government policies that produced the drop. The original plan was to hold back water in wet years to make up for dry years, but the government now releases more water than originally planned in wet years, leaving no cushion. You can’t blame that on climate change – or maybe you can, if you’re dishonest.
Similarly, it is government policies that are producing the increasing wildfire problem in the West. Litigation under environmental laws and environmental reviews have delayed thinning and controlled burns. Some controlled burns are being done, stupidly, in windy conditions. So look to forest management, not climate change, if you’re sincerely interested in finding the culprit instead of just demagoguing the issue.
California and Germany are finding out that alternative energy isn’t all sunshine and lollipops. Faced with electricity shortages from pursuing green energy policies, both are moving toward increasing reliance on their fossil fuel and nuclear power plants.
If you’re pinning your hopes the planet won’t burn up on the new climate bill Joe Biden is signing today, you might want to reconsider. If you use U.N. climate models and everything in the bill goes swimmingly, the average temperature of the earth in the year 2100 will be 61.972 degrees instead of 62.0 degrees, best case. I’m so relieved, and I’m so glad we’re spending $739 billion dollars to achieve a drop of 0.028 degrees. Lollipop, anyone?
Related procedures, like double mastectomies, are available at the Hospital to minors as young as 15 without parental consent. Not to be outdone, Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh is putting out videos promoting puberty blockers for kids. Ca-ching, ca-ching.
The institutionalization of transgenderism is occurring, not only in children’s hospitals, but in the federal government and world medical societies. The Biden administration spent one and a half million dollars to develop feel-good programs for transgender inmates. It is also proposing a new rule to force private insurers to pay for children’s sex change drugs and surgery. The World Professional Association for Transgender Health lowered its recommended age for transgender drugs by two years to age 14 and by one year for some surgeries to age 15. Adults making choices in these matters is one thing, but there is a rush on to push life-altering transgenderism on kids who aren’t even legally competent to consent to a car loan.
That way lies trouble. The FDA placed a warning label on certain puberty blockers after reports of tumor-like masses in the brain, high blood pressure, and eye paralysis. Transgender advocates are trying to get to confused kids online, just like child sex predators, and telling kids how to get sex change drugs without their parents’ knowing about it. Stories are piling up about how transgenderism is separating parents from their children. Transgenderism is also ruining lives. More and more stories are piling up about young people who regret going down the road with sex change drugs and surgery, many of whom now want to detransition. [More here and here.]
Meanwhile, the transgender narrative keeps getting crazier and crazier. Germany is weighing a plan to let people change their gender declarations annually for government purposes. Transgender activists are pushing anthropologists not to identify ancient human remains as male or female. A blood donor was turned away because he refused to answer the question whether he had ever been pregnant. This insanity is getting institutionalized. The dictionary definition of ‘female’ is now those who identify as the ‘opposite of male’.
But the institutionalization of transgenderism is not inevitable. It’s possible to fight back and win. Britain will shut down its only gender clinic for minors after an investigation found doctors there were skipping all the normal case assessments and rushing even 10-year-olds into sex change drugs. We need a few investigations here. I suggest we start with Boston Children’s Hospital and Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh. Ca-ching, ca-ching.
Brigham Young University stopped offering voice-coaching services for transgender clients at its speech clinic. But it’s really Florida that’s showing the way. Florida will prohibit Medicaid coverage for sex change surgeries and drugs, starting August 21st. The Florida medical board is moving to prohibit doctors in the state from providing sex change drugs and surgery to minors under 18. Victories like these are possible in your state. If you don’t know how to organize, contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org and I’ll put you in touch with people who do.
The Green Movement is a total assault on capitalism, freedom, and our entire way of life by the Far Left global elites. It’s implementation will cause significant economic decline in countries throughout the world. Furthermore, if this movement is not stopped, you can expect massive instability in your cities and your towns, and your communities in the years ahead.
“An unpleasant surprise to the ingenuity and resilience of the international Far Left in its environmental assault upon capitalism has been the venality, cowardice, and invertebrate tactical stupidity of much of the corporate world.” – @ConradMBlackhttps://t.co/vSryieyV4N
Germany’s economy will lose more than 260 billion euros ($265 billion) in added value by 2030 due to the Ukraine war and high energy prices, spelling negative effects for the labor market, according to a study by the Institute for Employment Research (IAB).
In comparison with expectations for a peaceful Europe, Germany’s price-adjusted gross domestic product (GDP) will be 1.7% lower next year and there will be about 240,000 fewer people in employment, said the study published on Tuesday.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-08-15 06:10:502022-08-15 06:11:08Germany To Lose $265 billion By 2030 Due To Green Energy Hoax
Imagine if this system were to be extrapolated to other fields.
The present system for pharmaceutical drugs requires a doctor’s prescription as a precondition for their sale to members of the public.
At first glance this seems like a reasonable plan. After all, most people simply lack the necessary information to determine whether they need or can benefit from drugs such as Penicillin, Vicodin, Albuterol, Lisinopril, Levothyroxine, Gabapentin, Metformin, Lipitor, Amlodipine, Tamsulosin, Finasteride, Digoxin, Metoprolol, Celecoxib to name but a tiny sample of those drugs covered by this rule. Moreover, even if people had that knowledge, which the average person most certainly does not, they would be totally lost as far as proper dosage is concerned.
However, all is not well under present institutional arrangements. For here we are not talking about advice and counsel from a physician to a patient. That is all well and good. Rather, the problem is that the horse is placed before the cart: the client must seek the permission of a person who is for all intents and purposes an employee of his, not an employer.
That should be the proper relationship between the two, and in the free society that is exactly what would occur. Instead, nowadays, the patient is not seeking, nor obtaining, information, knowledge, advice. Instead, he must appear on bended knee to beg for permission from his physician.
Imagine if this system were to be extrapolated to other fields of endeavor. Then, instead of the motorist telling the mechanic which of his services he requires, matters would be inverted: the former would have to gain the approval of the latter regarding the proper procedures to be followed. Instead of the customer telling the cab driver where to go, the former would have to seek approval from the latter regarding the destination deemed by him to be the most appropriate.
Similarly, the diner would have to ask the permission of the waiter as to what kind of meal to order; if the latter deemed the former’s choice to be in any way problematic, he would simply reject his request. Travelers would propose destinations to air carriers; the latter would say yea or nay. After all, doctors nowadays sometimes refuse to write prescriptions for patients if they deem those prescriptions harmful; they make the final determination to the request, not the order, of the patient.
Yes, yes, there are disanalogies here. Pharmaceuticals have life and death implications, certainly those for good health. Some, but not all of these examples are fully apropos. But this is a dramatic and accurate way of depicting exactly what is going on in the prescription system.
How should matters work, ideally? Architects give advice to builders. Mechanics give advice to automobile owners. That is exactly the relationship that should prevail between a doctor and a patient. The former should advise the latter as to proper medication. But the patient should be free to ignore what the physician says, to seek a second opinion, and to have access to whatever (legal) drug there is out there. (All drugs should be legal, but that is entirely a different matter.)
Lawyers know more than us about law; the same thing follows; they are our employees, not employers. Physicists, chemists, mathematicians, economists, musicians, plumbers, and electricians are also more knowledgeable about their own specialties than we laymen; still, this gives them not a shred of justification to boss us around.
Yes, doctors, too, know more than us, specifically about medicine. But that shouldn’t make them our bosses. Their brief should not be to permit, or to withhold permission. We, their clients, are not children. We should not be treated as such.
Walter Edward Block is an American economist and anarcho-capitalist theorist who holds the Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair in Economics at the J. A. Butt School of Business at Loyola University New Orleans. He is a member of the FEE Faculty Network.
EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2022-08-15 05:48:532022-08-15 05:50:13Why You Shouldn’t Need a Doctor’s Permission to Get Prescription Drugs
Same-sex relationships keep popping up in Disney’s movies.
Although I enjoyed Dr Strange: Into the Multiverse of Madness, I was disconcerted. Some aspects of wokism don’t concern me. However, one of the new Marvel superheroes introduced in this instalment of Dr Strange has two mums. Eternals, released late last year, features the first gay couple in the Marvel Universe.
Then I heard that one of the main characters in Lightyear, featuring Buzz Lightyear from the Disney-Pixar Toy Story franchise, is in a same-sex relationship.
Then I connected the dots. Who owns Marvel and Pixar? Disney.
Same-sex relationships keep popping up in Disney’s movies. They are being marketed as family-friendly films for children and teenagers – but they are now being used to make same-sex relationships more mainstream and acceptable.
We all need friends, especially in our early years. Same-sex friendship is a profound kind of love. No one has ever disputed that. “Nothing in life is more necessary than friendship,” said Aristotle – and he lived 2500 years ago. But deep affection need not be erotic.
Disney is getting its “love language” all muddled up. Children and teenagers need to be inspired by stories about selfless love, about putting others first, about heroic sacrifice. This comes first, before confusing themes about two women who have a committed sexual relationship who are called wives or mums.
In the past Disney and Marvel stories centred on ideals of love, sacrifice, heroism, perseverance, commitment, kindness, and self-control. They appealed to everyone: people of faith, people from diverse cultures, hippies, progressives, gays, conservatives — pretty much all of us.
But rather than bringing people from different backgrounds, cultures and beliefs together, Disney is disenfranchising quite a few groups and in the process making life more confusing for kids.
I have a brother with Down Syndrome. He loves Disney films and watches them with great joy. Some of his favourites are Aladdin, The Lion King, Star Wars: A New Hope, and the Toy Story series. These perennial favourites were not ideologically driven.
But films imbued with sexual complexity are going to perplex him. He knows all about the birds and bees –that a child comes from a mother and a father, or at least should come from a mother and a father.
He can tell me who Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia’s parents are or Simba’s in the Lion King, but if he’s ever introduced to the parents of the superhero America Chavez (Xochiti Gomez), he won’t get it.
In the latest Dr Strange, Chavez tells the story of how her two mums were taken from her and she doesn’t know where they are. Someone will have to explain to my brother that Chavez still has a father somewhere in the multiverse, because in our universe, every human being has a mother and a father.
Disney’s LGBTQI+ campaigns will leave him lost and confused – and not just him.
In a company-wide zoom meeting back in March, the president of Disney’s General Entertainment Content, Karey Burke, said the company “doesn’t have enough LGBTQIA leads in their content and don’t have enough narratives in which gay characters just get to be characters”. She vowed to change this “non-inclusive trend”.
Why can’t Disney stick to producing great content, family films which champion what is good, true, beautiful, and universal? Back in 1938 Walt Disney said: “everybody in the world was once a child. So in planning a new picture, we don’t think of grown-ups, and we don’t think of children, but just of that fine, clean, unspoiled spot down deep in every one of us that maybe the world has made us forget and that maybe our pictures can help recall.”
That’s the formula which transformed a small film studio in Kansas City into the world’s greatest entertainment company. Turning The Walt Disney Company into The Woke Disney Company is a betrayal of everything that its founder stood for.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexitieshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexities2022-08-15 05:31:312022-08-15 05:37:48The Woke Disney Company is turning its back on family values
Please use social media, etc. to pass on this Newsletter to other open-minded citizens…If at any time you’d like to be added to (or taken off) the distribution of our popular, free, worldwide Media Balance Newsletter, simply send me an email saying that.
Note 1: We recommend reading the Newsletter on your computer, not your phone, as some documents (e.g. PDFs) are much easier to read on a large computer screen… We’ve tried to use common fonts, etc. to minimize display issues.
Note 2: For recent past Newsletter issues see 2020 Archives & 2021 Archives & 2022 Archives. To accommodate numerous requests received about prior articles over the twelve plus years of the Newsletter, we’ve put together since the beginning of the Newsletter — where you can search by year. For a detailed background about the Newsletter, please read this.
Note 3: See this extensive list of reasonable books on climate change. As a parallel effort, we have also put together a list of some good books related to industrial wind energy. Both topics are also extensively covered on my website: WiseEnergy.org.
Note 4: I am not an attorney or a physician, so no material appearing in any of the Newsletters (or any of my websites) should be construed as giving legal or medical advice. My recommendation has always been: consult a competent, licensed attorney when you are involved with legal issues, and consult a competent physician regarding medical matters.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00John Droz, Jr.http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJohn Droz, Jr.2022-08-14 10:02:462022-08-15 05:43:00MEDIA BALANCED NEWSLETTER: We cover COVID to Climate, as well as Energy to Elections.
An AP article featured on Yahoo blamed flooding for a cardiac arrest of a teen who helped clean-up after the flooding. He was “officially added to the list of those who died as a result of the flooding.”
This is media misinformation as they fail to report cardiology findings, says Richard Ruhling, a retired MD who had a Fellowship in Cardiology, citing the American Heart Association’s journal:
“We conclude that the mRNA vaccines dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.” Stephen Gundry, MD, Circulation (November 16, 2021 Vol 144, Issue Suppl_1)
Since Biden gave the media $1 Billion to promote the shot, we do not have a free press that gives truth on this topic. A nursing home healthcare worker reported seeing 32 patients die after the shot, but it didn’t make the evening news—it didn’t fit what they wanted to say, but it’s also a silent warning posted by the FDA in 2020.
Death is one of the adverse events. Biden’s mandate of the shot is a mandate for death and poetic justice could see him die before his term is up for the millions of lives he has disrupted in collusion with a lying pharma, CDC and Fauci. Here are examples:
Marcia Angell, MD was an editor of the New England journal of medicine. She authored the book, The Truth About the Drug Companies; How They Deceive Us. The CDC the CDC makes billions from the patents they own on vaccines and their recommendations for little children to get so many shots when there’s little or no risk, but greed is in the details, says Ruhling, citing “Top Scientists Eviscerate Fauci and Daszak for ‘Silencing Debate’.”
Ruhling cites Bill Gates who said a worse pandemic is coming this fall and the gov is pushing shots again. Ruhling claims worse is coming because the mRNA vaccine has ruined the natural immune system for millions who may die this coming winter, and he offers three tips to help immunity.
Citing Colin Campbell, PhD, that whole foods, plant-based diet is best for immunity and could help most people who take prescription drugs to reduce their toxic levels. Those prescriptions are a significant reason why patients with diabetes high blood pressure and cholesterol have a higher mortality rate with covid, reported by the UK with 90% of people dying from covid are fully vaccinated. Similar figures for Israel, but the US is hiding the truth behind Biden’s billion to media.
Not only do drugs and animal products lower immunity, but sugar is why the flu season hits after the holidays. If we get sick, fasting is helpful as it enhances white blood cell hunger for germs.
Alternate hot and cold showers increase the white blood cells in circulation. Ruhling has finished his showers with 5-10 seconds of cold for 65 years since a high school coach recommended it. Extra Vitamin C can help if coming down with flu.
Ruhling says, Why wait for Biden to die—he should be impeached for pushing the shot when he knows so little of the above facts.
Classic Misinformation on from Media.
This short video could also be instructive to churches that are accepting government mandates.
The CDC dropped its recommendations for social distancing and quarantining, citing the fact most Americans have acquired some form of immunity to COVID-19. The CDC might actually have gotten something right for once, but even a stuck clock is right twice a day. Otherwise, it’s been pure quackery and lies from our public health authorities since the pandemic began.
Presidential advisor Dr. Birx admitted in her book to making things up and to lying to President Trump and to the public about COVID recommendations. ‘Two weeks to stop the spread’ was completely made up, not based on science, and she immediately set out to see how lockdowns could be extended. Social distancing was made up, too, as she had originally wanted 10 feet. She also admitted she knew the vaccines would not protect against COVID infection. They overplayed the vaccines, she said. Now they tell us, after 30,000 people may have been killed by the vaccines.
It’s not just Birx. The CDC was caught cooking the books, overstating the COVID mortality rate among children in order to push childhood vaccination. Moreover, when the CDC was asked to substantiate its claim COVID vaccines don’t cause variants to develop, it couldn’t do so. Small wonder. In country after country, new COVID variants appeared after mass vaccination began.
These quacks and liars were wrong about everything, but they possess the soul of a tyrant. Last month, L.A. public health authorities were talking up COVID mandates again acting like it was a crisis, even though doctors there said: “Only 10% of our COVID positive admissions are admitted due to COVID. Virtually none of them go to the ICU, and when they do go to the ICU it is not for pneumonia. They are not intubated… we have not seen one of those since February.” Some crisis.
They were wrong about masks. A recent study found masks are germ factories, some dangerous like staph. It also found the longer masks are worn, the greater the problems with bacteria and fungus become.
They were wrong about natural immunity. Another recent study found immunity from vaccines wears off quickly and natural immunity is better.
They were wrong about vaccine efficacy. Research from Harvard and Yale shows people who were not boosted did better than people who were. In Canada, four out of five people who died from COVID since February were vaccinated. Seventy percent of those were triple-vaccinated.
They were wrong about lockdowns. The lockdowns prevented children from building up immunity to common childhood infections. School closures had devastating impacts on education and did not reduce COVID infection rates. [more here at p. 20]
Our public health authorities are quacks and liars – case closed. And they want our trust? I’ve said many times, you are better off doing your own research and making your own decisions. But here’s what gets me: After all this insanity, there are still people out there who want more government. For the life of me, I can’t understand why.
According to many researchers, the learning styles theory is the biggest myth in education.
Are you a visual, auditory, reading/writing, or kinesthetic learner? For millions of students, this question has become so familiar that they already have an answer ready to go. Some identify as visual learners, which means that, in theory, they learn best by seeing concepts in pictures and diagrams, perhaps on a blackboard or in a video. Others identify as auditory learners, which means they learn best by hearing, or reading/writing learners, which means they learn best by reading books and taking notes. Still others identify as kinesthetic learners, which means they learn best when they can physically engage with things, such as in a chemistry lab.
For most of us, the idea that different people have different learning styles is so obvious that it is simply common knowledge. But there’s a problem here, a big problem. No matter how hard scientists have looked, they haven’t been able to find any good evidence for the learning styles theory. Indeed, many academics who study this for a living consider learning styles to be one of the biggest myths in education.
“There is no credible evidence that learning styles exist,” write psychologists Cedar Riener and Daniel Willingham in a 2010 paper titled The Myth of Learning Styles. “Students may have preferences about how to learn, but no evidence suggests that catering to those preferences will lead to better learning.”
If that sounds far-fetched, well, there’s plenty more where that came from.
In a 2009 review paper entitled Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence, researchers investigated the “meshing hypothesis,” which is the idea that students learn better when instruction is provided in a format that matches their learning style. Their conclusion is a hard pill to swallow. “The contrast between the enormous popularity of the learning-styles approach within education and the lack of credible evidence for its utility is, in our opinion, striking and disturbing,” researchers wrote. “If classfication of students’ learning styles has practical utility, it remains to be demonstrated.”
A 2006 study looking at multimedia instruction came to a similar conclusion. “There was not strong support for the hypothesis that verbal learners and visual learners should be given different kinds of multimedia instruction,” the authors concluded.
But perhaps this is just a few fringe studies? Perhaps there is still some debate on this within academia? Not so, says the American Psychological Association. “Many people, including educators, believe learning styles are set at birth and predict both academic and career success even though there is no scientific evidence to support this common myth,” the APA wrote in a 2019 press release titled “Belief in Learning Styles Myth May Be Detrimental.” The release goes on to say that “numerous studies have debunked the concept of learning styles,” and that there is a “lack of scientific evidence supporting them.”
This lack of evidence stands in stark contrast to popular opinion. Indeed, surveys show that 80-95 percent of people in the US and other industrialized countries believe in learning styles.
Having said all that, it’s important to be clear about what exactly researchers are criticizing when they talk about the myth of learning styles. They aren’t saying there are no differences between students, or that tailored teaching approaches can never be helpful. There are plenty of individual differences between students, such as talent, background knowledge, and interest in the field, and researchers agree that teaching with these differences in mind can have a positive impact.
There is also evidence that using multiple teaching approaches together (such as words and pictures) tends to improve learning across the board, a phenomenon known as the multimedia effect. Again, researchers don’t take issue with this. What they dispute is the idea that each student has a particular learning style, and that teaching to a student’s preferred learning style will improve their educational outcomes.
Questioning the Unquestionable
For many people, the idea that learning styles don’t have scientific support is likely a bit of a shock. How could we be so wrong about something so fundamental? And how could so many people believe this if it wasn’t true? These are good questions, and they’re worth exploring. But a more unsettling question also comes to mind.
If we could be wrong about this, what else might we be getting wrong about education?
What if there are other things we’re doing in the school system that are also seriously flawed, even though we don’t realize it? What if there are other widely-believed assumptions that would also prove untrue upon closer inspection? We fall so easily into habits and routines that we become slaves to the status quo. Is it really a stretch, then, to suggest that we might have missed something else as well? Is it a stretch to wonder whether we’re even getting this whole education thing right?
What if there are better ways to learn than typical schooling, ways we haven’t even thought of? What if we’ve been duped into thinking that what we have now is the best possible approach, but really the only reason we think that is because it’s all most of us have ever known? What if most of the stuff we think is “common knowledge” about education is actually straight-up wrong? These are questions worth seriously considering.
We’re told that sitting in a classroom 6 hours a day is what kids need. But is it really? We’re told that everyone should learn the same thing at the same age, but is that really best? We’re told that everyone needs at least 12 years of formal schooling, and that this schooling should take place between the ages of 6 and 18, but is that really true? Once you start questioning the fundamental tenets of schooling we all take for granted, you realize there’s a lot we might be getting wrong.
Fortunately, we live in the 21st century, with technology and insights that previous generations simply didn’t have. As such, now is a better time than ever to go back to the drawing board and question the fundamental assumptions that form the bedrock of the education system as we know it.
Change is hard, of course. When we start asking questions that no one has asked for decades, it can be uncomfortable. But in the end, not changing is harder. When we allow myths about education to fester, like the myth of learning styles, we only do a disservice to the next generation. So rather than seeking out validation for our pre-existing views, let’s be courageous and have an open mind about these things. Let’s put our theories about education to the test and see whether they stand up to scrutiny.
The education system has been stagnant for far too long, and the persistence of bad ideas like the learning styles theory is a testament to this fact. So rather than sticking with the status quo, perhaps it’s time to put our old education assumptions aside and seek out a better approach.
Researcher Brian Shilhavy compared VARES reports of cancer after COVID vaccine injections over the last 20 months with the same query of all FDA-approved vaccines throughout the last 30 years.
By: Patrick Delaney, Aug 5, 2022:
(LifeSiteNews) – A researcher who queried the Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) discovered a 10,661.4% increase in cancer reports as a result of experimental COVID-19 gene-base vaccines as compared with all FDA-approved vaccines over the last 30 years.
Brian Shilhavy, who is the editor of Health Impact News, traced his steps in the search providing links to documentation of his various findings.
Having first queried the cases of “the most common cancers [that] had been reported following COVID-19 vaccines,” he found “837 cases of cancer, including 88 deaths, 66 permanent disabilities, and 104 life threatening events (Source).”
He emphasized that even these numbers were not exhaustive, and the VAERS database could not handle the larger search of “ALL cancers listed in VAERS” under this category of COVID inoculations.
“Using the exact same search terms for cancer,” he wrote, “I then searched ALL FDA-approved vaccines for the previous 30 years and found only 140 cases of cancer reported (Source).”
“That result is for 360 months (30 years), whereas the 837 cases following the experimental COVID-19 vaccines were reported in just 20 months, since the roll out of the COVID-19 shots beginning in December of 2020,” Shilhavy wrote.
“That is an increase of 10,661.4%!” he concluded.
Shilhavy, whose organization is located in Texas, also made note of the significant number of the cancer cases in the database that were of young people, from age 12 up through many young adults in their 20s.
Last October, a Swedish lab study found that the spike protein associated with the COVID-19 illness, and its experimental vaccines, enters the nucleus of cells and significantly interferes with DNA damage-repair functions, compromising a person’s adaptive immunity and perhaps encouraging the formation of cancer cells.
In March 2021, board-certified pathologist Dr. Ryan Colereported that he was seeing a massive “uptick” in various autoimmune diseases and cancers in patients who have been COVID-vaccinated.
“Since January 1, in the laboratory, I’m seeing a 20 times increase of endometrial cancers over what I see on an annual basis,” he said.
In regard to overall adaptive immunity, Cole describes, “post-vaccine, what we are seeing is a drop in your killer T-cells” that “keep all other viruses in check,” leaving the patient susceptible to a variety of illnesses.
In January, data leaks given by three “decorated high-ranking soldiers who are doctors and public health officials,” in sworn declarations under penalty of perjury, showed enormous spikes in dozens of diseases following COVID vaccine uptake in the U.S. military.
These also include 55,719 permanent disabilities, 50,739 cases of myocarditis/pericarditis, and 14,374 reported cases of shingles.
As such figures are based on voluntary reports, it is important to note that they are very likely just “the tip of the iceberg” in actual figures.
A 2010 Harvard-executed study commissioned by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) revealed that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events” are reported to VAERS, and vaccine manufacturer Connaught Laboratories calculated at least a “fifty-fold underreporting of adverse events” in a confidential study.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-08-12 06:05:202022-09-16 08:38:27Gov’t Database Reveals 10,000% Increase in Cancer Reports Due to COVID Vaccines
Boston Children’s Hospital posted a video promoting hysterectomies as a form of “gender-affirming” medical care, along with several other clips explaining vaginoplasty, facial feminization surgery and other medical treatments they offer.
The term “gender-affirming care” refers to sex change treatments to help people with gender dysphoria to present as the opposite sex, including puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries. The video featured a doctor describing hysterectomies — the surgical removal of the uterus — as a form of “gender-affirming” treatment while smiling as upbeat music played in the background.
“A gender-affirming hysterectomy is very similar to most hysterectomies that occur,” Dr. Frances Grimstad of Boston Children’s Division of Gynecology explained in the video. “A hysterectomy itself is the removal of the uterus, the cervix — which is the opening of the uterus — and the fallopian tubes, which are attached to the sides of the uterus.”