CDC Considers Putting Us in Camps!

Foreword by Fred Brownbill. I was sent this by a retired Lt. Col friend and patriot. I read it and although not surprised, was still shocked that Americans could still be thinking of this sort of action against fellow Americans. Please as always read and share, hit the like button and feel free to comment. As always the link is at the end of the article. Please share it fast as I am sure social media ‘fact checkers’ will remove or say it is a lie. IT IS NOT. Please take the time to read this blog in its entirety and then look at all the links they used for references.

America. These are so called Americans discussing this, deciding our futures. This is the totalitarian thinking of a communist nation – NOT a free nation.


Operational Considerations for Humanitarian Settings. Updated July 26th 2021.

This document presents considerations from the perspective of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) for implementing the shielding approach in humanitarian settings as outlined in guidance documents focused on camps, displaced populations and low-resource settings.1,2  This approach has never been documented and has raised questions and concerns among humanitarian partners who support response activities in these settings. The purpose of this document is to highlight potential implementation challenges of the shielding approach from CDC’s perspective and guide thinking around implementation in the absence of empirical data. Considerations are based on current evidence known about the transmission and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and may need to be revised as more information becomes available. Please check the CDC website periodically for updates.

What is the Shielding Approach1?

The shielding approach aims to reduce the number of severe COVID-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease (“high-risk”) and the general population (“low-risk”). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or “green zones” established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level depending on the context and setting.1,2 They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.

Current evidence indicates that older adults and people of any age who have serious underlying medical conditions are at higher risk for severe illness from COVID-19.3 In most humanitarian settings, older population groups make up a small percentage of the total population.4,5  For this reason, the shielding approach suggests physically separating high-risk individuals from the general population to prioritize the use of the limited available resources and avoid implementing long-term containment measures among the general population.

In theory, shielding may serve its objective to protect high-risk populations from disease and death. However, implementation of the approach necessitates strict adherence1,6,7, to protocol. Inadvertent introduction of the virus into a green zone may result in rapid transmission among the most vulnerable populations the approach is trying to protect.

A summary of the shielding approach described by Favas is shown in Table 1. See Guidance for the prevention of COVID-19 infections among high-risk individuals in low-resource, displaced and camp and camp-like settings 1,2 for full details.

Table 1: Summary of the Shielding Approach1

Level

Household (HH) Level:

A specific room/area designated for high-risk individuals who are physically isolated from other HH members.

Movement/ Interactions

Low-risk HH members should not enter the green zone. If entry is necessary, it should be done only by healthy individuals after washing hands and using face coverings. Interactions should be at a safe distance (approx. 2 meters). Minimum movement of high-risk individuals outside the green zone. Low-risk HH members continue to follow social distancing and hygiene practices outside the house.

Level

Neighborhood Level:

A designated shelter/group of shelters (max 5-10 households), within a small camp or area where high-risk members are grouped together. Neighbors “swap” households to accommodate high-risk individuals.

Movement/ Interactions

Same as above

Level

Camp/Sector Level:

A group of shelters such as schools, community buildings within a camp/sector (max 50 high-risk individuals per single green zone) where high-risk individuals are physically isolated together.

Movement/ Interactions

One entry point is used for exchange of food, supplies, etc. A meeting area is used for residents and visitors to interact while practicing physical distancing (2 meters). No movement into or outside the green zone.

Operational Considerations

The shielding approach requires several prerequisites for effective implementation. Several are addressed, including access to healthcare and provision of food. However, there are several prerequisites which require additional considerations. Table 2 presents the prerequisites or suggestions as stated in the shielding guidance document (column 1) and CDC presents additional questions and considerations alongside these prerequisites (column 2).

Table 2: Suggested Prerequisites per the shielding documents and CDC’s Operational Considerations for Implementation

Suggested Prerequisites 

*As stated in the shielding document*

  • Each green zone has a dedicated latrine/bathing facility for high-risk individuals

Considerations as suggested by CDC

  • The shielding approach advises against any new facility construction to establish green zones; however, few settings will have existing shelters or communal facilities with designated latrines/bathing facilities to accommodate high-risk individuals. In these settings, most latrines used by HHs are located outside the home and often shared by multiple HHs.
  • If dedicated facilities are available, ensure safety measures such as proper lighting, handwashing/hygiene infrastructure, maintenance and disinfection of latrines.
  • Ensure facilities can accommodate high-risk individuals with disabilities, children and separate genders at the neighborhood/camp-level.

Suggested Prerequisites 

*As stated in the shielding document*

  • To minimize external contact, each green zone should include able-bodied high-risk individuals capable of caring for residents who have disabilities or are less mobile.  Otherwise, designate low-risk individuals for these tasks, preferably who have recovered from confirmed COVID-19 and are assumed to be immune.

Considerations as suggested by CDC

  • This may be difficult to sustain, especially if the caregivers are also high risk. As caregivers may often will be family members, ensure that this strategy is socially or culturally acceptable.
  • Currently, we do not know if prior infection confers immunity.

Suggested Prerequisites 

*As stated in the shielding document*

  • The green zone and living areas for high-risk residents should be aligned with minimum humanitarian (SPHERE) standards.6

Considerations as suggested by CDC

  • The shielding approach requires strict adherence to infection, prevention and control (IPC) measures. They require, uninterrupted availability of soap, water, hygiene/cleaning supplies, masks or cloth face coverings, etc. for all individuals in green zones. Thus, it is necessary to ensure minimum public health standards6 are maintained and possibly supplemented to decrease the risk of other outbreaks outside of COVID-19. Attaining and maintaining minimum SPHERE6 standards is difficult in these settings for the general population.8,9,10 Users should consider that provision of services and supplies to high risk individuals could be at the expense of low-risk residents, putting them at increased risk for other outbreaks.

Suggested Prerequisites 

*As stated in the shielding document*

  • Monitor and evaluate the implementation of the shielding approach.

Considerations as suggested by CDC

  • Monitoring protocols will need to be developed for each type of green zone.
  • Dedicated staff need to be identified to monitor each green zone. Monitoring includes both adherence to protocols and potential adverse effects or outcomes due to isolation and stigma. It may be necessary to assign someone within the green zone, if feasible, to minimize movement in/out of green zones.

Suggested Prerequisites 

*As stated in the shielding document*

  • Men and women, and individuals with tuberculosis (TB), severe immunodeficiencies, or dementia should be isolated separately

Considerations as suggested by CDC

  • Multiple green zones would be needed to achieve this level of separation, each requiring additional inputs/resources. Further considerations include challenges of accommodating different ethnicities, socio-cultural groups, or religions within one setting.

Suggested Prerequisites 

*As stated in the shielding document*

  • Community acceptance and involvement in the design and implementation

Considerations as suggested by CDC

  • Even with community involvement, there may be a risk of stigmatization.11,12 Isolation/separation from family members, loss of freedom and personal interactions may require additional psychosocial support structures/systems. See section on additional considerations below.

Suggested Prerequisites 

*As stated in the shielding document*

  • High-risk minors should be accompanied into isolation by a single caregiver who will also be considered a green zone resident in terms of movements and contacts with those outside the green zone.

Considerations as suggested by CDC

  • Protection measures are critical to implementation. Ensure there is appropriate, adequate, and acceptable care of other minors or individuals with disabilities or mental health conditions who remain in the HH if separated from their primary caregiver.

Suggested Prerequisites 

*As stated in the shielding document*

  • Green zone shelters should always be kept clean. Residents should be provided with the necessary cleaning products and materials to clean their living spaces.

Considerations as suggested by CDC

  • High-risk individuals will be responsible for cleaning and maintaining their own living space and facilities. This may not be feasible for persons with disabilities or decreased mobility.11 Maintaining hygiene conditions in communal facilities is difficult during non-outbreak settings.7,8,9 consequently it may be necessary to provide additional human resource support.

Suggested Prerequisites 

*As stated in the shielding document*

  • Green zones should be more spacious in terms of shelter area per capita than the surrounding camp/sector, even at the cost of greater crowding of low-risk people.

Considerations as suggested by CDC

  • Ensure that targeting high-risk individuals does not negate mitigation measures among low-risk individuals (physical distancing in markets or water points, where feasible, etc.). Differences in space based on risk status may increase the potential risk of exposure among the rest of the low-risk residents and may be unacceptable or impracticable, considering space limitations and overcrowding in many settings.

Additional Considerations

The shielding approach outlines the general “logistics” of implementation –who, what, where, how. However, there may be additional logistical challenges to implementing these strategies as a result of unavailable commodities, transport restrictions, limited staff capacity and availability to meet the increased needs. The approach does not address the potential emotional, social/cultural, psychological impact for separated individuals nor for the households with separated members. Additional considerations to address these challenges are presented below.

Population characteristics and demographics

Consideration: The number of green zones required may be greater than anticipated, as they are based on the total number of high-risk individuals, disease categories, and the socio-demographics of the area and not just the proportion of elderly population.

Explanation: Older adults represent a small percentage of the population in many camps in humanitarian settings (approximately 3-5%4,5), however in some humanitarian settings more than one quarter of the population may fall under high risk categories13,14,15 based on underlying medical conditions which may increase a person’s risk for severe COVID-19 illness which include chronic kidney disease, obesity, serious heart conditions, sickle cell disease, and type 2 diabetes. Additionally, many camps and settlements host multiple nationalities which may require additional separation, for example, Kakuma Refugee Camp in Kenya accommodates refugees from 19 countries.16

Timeline considerations

Consideration: Plan for an extended duration of implementation time, at least 6 months.

Explanation: The shielding approach proposes that green zones be maintained until one of the following circumstances arises: (i) sufficient hospitalization capacity is established; (ii) effective vaccine or therapeutic options become widely available; or (iii) the COVID-19 epidemic affecting the population subsides.

Given the limited resources and healthcare available to populations in humanitarian settings prior to the pandemic, it is unlikely sufficient hospitalization capacity (beds, personal protective equipment, ventilators, and staff) will be achievable during widespread transmission. The national capacity in many of the countries where these settings are located (e.g., Chad, Myanmar, and Syria) is limited. Resources may become quickly overwhelmed during the peak of transmission and may not be accessible to the emergency affected populations.

Vaccine trials are underway, but with no definite timeline. Reaching the suppression phase where the epidemic subsides can take several months and cases may resurge in a second or even third wave. Herd immunity (the depletion of susceptible people) for COVID-19 has not been demonstrated to date. It is also unclear if an infected person develops immunity and the duration of potential immunity is unknown. Thus, contingency plans to account for a possibly extended operational timeline are critical.

Other logistical considerations

Consideration: Plan to identify additional resources and outline supply chain mechanisms to support green zones.

Explanation: The implementation and operation of green zones requires strong coordination among several sectors which may require substantial additional resources:  supplies and staff to maintain these spaces – shelters, IPC, water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH), non-food items (NFIs) (beds, linens, dishes/utensils, water containers), psychosocial support, monitors/supervisors, caretakers/attendants, risk communication and community engagement, security, etc. Considering global reductions in commodity shortages,17 movement restrictions, border closures, and decreased trucking and flights, it is important to outline what additional resources will be needed and how they will be procured.

Protection

Consideration: Ensure safe and protective environments for all individuals, including minors and individuals who require additional care whether they are in the green zone or remain in a household after the primary caregiver or income provider has moved to the green zone.

Explanation: Separating families and disrupting and deconstructing multigenerational households may have long-term negative consequences. Shielding strategies need to consider sociocultural gender norms in order to adequately assess and address risks to individuals, particularly women and girls.18,19,20 Restrictive gender norms may be exacerbated by isolation strategies such as shielding. At the household level, isolating individuals and limiting their interaction, compounded with social and economic disruption has raised concerns of potential increased risk of partner violence. Households participating in house swaps or sector-wide cohorting are at particular risk for gender-based violence, harassment, abuse, and exploitation as remaining household members may not be decision-makers or responsible for households needs.18,19,20

Social/Cultural/Religious Practices

Consideration: Plan for potential disruption of social networks.

Explanation: Community celebrations (religious holidays), bereavement (funerals) and other rites of passage are cornerstones of many societies. Proactive planning ahead of time, including strong community engagement and risk communication is needed to better understand the issues and concerns of restricting individuals from participating in communal practices because they are being shielded. Failure to do so could lead to both interpersonal and communal violence.21,22

Mental Health

Consideration: Ensure mental health and psychosocial support*,23 structures are in place to address increased stress and anxiety.

Explanation: Additional stress and worry are common during any epidemic and may be more pronounced with COVID-19 due to the novelty of the disease and increased fear of infection, increased childcare responsibilities due to school closures, and loss of livelihoods. Thus, in addition to the risk of stigmatization and feeling of isolation, this shielding approach may have an important psychological impact and may lead to significant emotional distress, exacerbate existing mental illness or contribute to anxiety, depression, helplessness, grief, substance abuse, or thoughts of suicide among those who are separated or have been left behind. Shielded individuals with concurrent severe mental health conditions should not be left alone. There must be a caregiver allocated to them to prevent further protection risks such as neglect and abuse.

Summary

The shielding approach is an ambitious undertaking, which may prove effective in preventing COVID-19 infection among high-risk populations if well managed. While the premise is based on mitigation strategies used in the United Kingdom,24,25 there is no empirical evidence whether this approach will increase, decrease or have no effect on morbidity and mortality during the COVID-19 epidemic in various humanitarian settings. This document highlights a) risks and challenges of implementing this approach, b) need for additional resources in areas with limited or reduced capacity, c) indefinite timeline, and d) possible short-term and long-term adverse consequences.

Public health not only focuses on the eradication of disease but addresses the entire spectrum of health and wellbeing. Populations displaced, due to natural disasters or war and, conflict are already fragile and have experienced increased mental, physical and/or emotional trauma. While the shielding approach is not meant to be coercive, it may appear forced or be misunderstood in humanitarian settings. As with many community interventions meant to decrease COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, compliance and behavior change are the primary rate-limiting steps and may be driven by social and emotional factors. These changes are difficult in developed, stable settings; thus, they may be particularly challenging in humanitarian settings which bring their own set of multi-faceted challenges that need to be taken into account.

Household-level shielding seems to be the most feasible and dignified as it allows for the least disruption to family structure and lifestyle, critical components to maintaining compliance. However, it is most susceptible to the introduction of a virus due to necessary movement or interaction outside the green zone, less oversight, and often large household sizes. It may be less feasible in settings where family shelters are small and do not have multiple compartments. In humanitarian settings, small village, sector/block, or camp-level shielding may allow for greater adherence to proposed protocol, but at the expense of longer-term social impacts triggered by separation from friends and family, feelings of isolation, and stigmatization. Most importantly, accidental introduction of the virus into a green zone may result in rapid transmission and increased morbidity and mortality as observed in assisted care facilities in the US.26

The shielding approach is intended to alleviate stress on the healthcare system and circumvent the negative economic consequences of long-term containment measures and lockdowns by protecting the most vulnerable.1,24,25 Implementation of this approach will involve careful planning, additional resources, strict adherence and strong multi-sector coordination, requiring agencies to consider the potential repercussion among populations that have collectively experienced physical and psychological trauma which makes them more vulnerable to adverse psychosocial consequences.  In addition, thoughtful consideration of the potential benefit versus the social and financial cost of implementation will be needed in humanitarian settings.*Specific psychosocial support guidance during COVID-19 as specific subject areas are beyond the scope of this document.

References

  1. Favas, C. Guidance for the prevention of COVID-19 infections among high-risk individuals in camps and camp-like settings pdf icon[465 KB, 15 pages]external icon. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 31 March 2020.
  2. Maysoon, D, Zandvoort K, Flasche S, et al. COVID-19 control in low-income settings and displaced populations: what can realistically be done?external icon. 2020. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Groups at Higher Risk for Severe Illness. Content source: National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD), Division of Viral Diseases. Last content review 14 May 2020.
  4. UNHCR Statistical Yearbook 2016external icon.
  5. UNHCR -Rohingya Refugee Response/Bangladesh-Joint Government of Bangladesh-UNHCR, Population Factsheet. Annex I and II. March 31,2020. Sent by email.
  6. The Sphere Handbook. Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response, 2018 editionexternal icon.
  7. Butler, N., Tulloch. O. Anthrologica, 2020. Social Sciences in Humanitarian Action pdf icon[275 KB, 8 pages]external icon.
  8. Blum, L.S., Yemweni, A., Trinies, V. et al. Programmatic implications for promotion of handwashing behavior in an internally displaced persons camp in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo. Confl Health 13, 54 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13031-019-0225-xexternal icon.
  9. Cronin AA, Shrestha D, Cornier N, Abdalla F, Ezard N, Aramburu C. A review of water and sanitation provision in refugee camps in association with selected health and nutrition indicators–the need for integrated service provisionexternal icon. J Water Health. 2008;6(1):1-13. doi:10.2166/wh.2007.019.
  10. Nyoka R, Foote AM, Woods E, et al. Sanitation practices and perceptions in Kakuma refugee camp, Kenya: Comparing the status quo with a novel service-based approachexternal icon. [published correction appears in PLoS One. 2017 Dec 19;12 (12 ):e0190129]. PLoS One. 2017;12(7):e0180864. Published 2017 Jul 13.
  11. Working with Persons with Disabilities in Forced Displacement pdf icon[343 KB, 28 pages]external icon: Need to Know Guidance 1. 2019.
  12. IFRC, UNICEF and WHO. Social Stigma Associated with COVID-19: A guide to preventing and addressing social stigma associated with COVID-19external icon.
  13. Sethi S, Jonsson R, Skaff R, Tyler F. Community-Based Noncommunicable Disease Care for Syrian Refugees in Lebanonexternal icon. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2017;5(3):495-506. Published 2017 Sep 28. doi:10.9745/GHSP-D-17-00043.
  14. Akik C, Ghattas H, Mesmar S, Rabkin M, El-Sadr WM, Fouad FM. Host country responses to non-communicable diseases amongst Syrian refugees: a reviewexternal icon. Confl Health. 2019;13:8. Published 2019 Mar 22. doi:10.1186/s13031-019-0192-2.
  15. Rehr M, Shoaib M, Ellithy S, et al. Prevalence of non-communicable diseases and access to care among non-camp Syrian refugees in northern Jordan. Confl Healthexternal icon. 2018;12:33. Published 2018 Jul 11. doi:10.1186/s13031-018-0168-7.
  16. UNHCR, Kakuma camp and Kalobeyei Settlement Visitors Guide pdf icon[5.7 MB, 10 pages]external icon.
  17. World Health Organization. COVID-19 Supply Chain System, Requesting and Receiving Suppliesexternal icon.
  18. UNFPA: COVID-19, A Gender Lens: Protecting sexual and reproductive health and rights and promoting gender equality.
  19. IFRC, Prevention and Response to Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in COVID-19, A protection, Gender and Inclusion PGI Technical guidance note pdf icon[560 KB, 12 pages]external icon.
  20. Inter-agency Standing Committee Interim guidance -Technical note. Protection from sexual exploitation and abuse (PSEA) during COVID-19 response. Version 1.
  21. Rashad, M, Farrell, S. April 24, 2020. Reuters, Islam’s holiest sites emptied by coronavirus crisis as Ramadhan beginsexternal icon.
  22. ABP News Bureau, April 24, 2020. Pakistani Imams Overrule Lockdown for Ramadan, 253 Healthcare Workers get Infected with COVID-19external icon.
  23. Operational considerations for multisectoral mental health and psychosocial support programmes during the COVID-19 pandemic, Version 1.1pdf iconexternal icon.
  24. Public Health England: Guidance on Shielding and Protecting People Who are Clinically Extremely Vulnerable from COVID-19external icon.
  25. Van Bunnik, Bram A.D., Morgan, L.K., et a. Segmentation and shielding of the most vulnerable members elements of an exit strategy from COVID-19external icon. University of Edinburg.
  26. Michael TM, Clark S, Pogosjans S, et al. COVID-19 in a Long-Term Care Facility — King County, Washington, February 27–March 9, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020; 69:339-342. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6

©All rights reserved.

These 12 High-Profile Politicians Got Caught Violating Their Own COVID Rules

Amid widespread panic and alarmism over the “Delta variant” of COVID-19, Mayor Muriel Bowser just reinstated an indoor mask-mandate in Washington, DC. She did so despite the capital city seeing just four COVID deaths in July, leading many to dub the renewed restrictions mere security theater. The mayor’s case isn’t helped by the inconsistency of her own behavior.

Bowser officiated a wedding over the weekend with hundreds of unmasked attendees, the Washington Examiner’s Tiana Lowe exclusively reports. The event was held at a 4-star hotel and the mayor did not wear a mask even though her indoor mask mandate had just hours before gone into effect city-wide.

Unfortunately, Mayor Bowser is hardly the first politician whose hypocrisy has been exposed. Here are 12 examples of high-profile politicians caught flouting the pandemic rules their own government imposed, as cataloged by the Heritage Foundation’s COVID hypocrisy tracker.

The New York City mayor reportedly hit the gym and went to a local YMCA in March 2020 at the same time the state government was ordering New Yorkers to avoid “non-essential” business.

The Chicago mayor reportedly got a haircut in April 2020 while her city’s stay-at-home orders made doing so unlawful for most residents.

The Virginia governor reportedly socialized in close quarters without a mask despite urging Virginians to wear masks in similar settings and practice social distancing.

The New York governor reportedly traveled to Georgia in July 2020 for what critics called a PR stunt while discouraging New Yorkers from engaging in “non-essential” travel.

The California congresswoman has been a vocal advocate of mask mandates and social distancing orders. However, she got a haircut in San Francisco at a salon opened specially for her while they were generally closed due to such restrictions. And just this week a video went viral showing Pelosi removing her mask for a photo-op with a fellow member of Congress in violation of her recently reinstated congressional mask mandate.

The California governor dined maskless at a fancy indoor restaurant, the French Laundry, violating his own COVID-19 protocols.

The California senator was pictured maskless in the halls of Congress in conversation with aides, despite having called for nationwide mask mandates and mandatory mask-wearing in public.

The former Rhode Island governor closed bars in her state, but reportedly attended a maskless “wine and paint” night at a bar anyway.

The New Jersey governor reportedly attended President Biden’s January inauguration even though his state government was discouraging non-essential travel and prohibiting large gatherings.

The congressman was captured on video speaking on the floor of Congress without a mask, despite having advocated that members who don’t wear masks be fined.

In May, the Michigan governor hit the bar with friends in violation of her own restrictions. She has also admitted to traveling to Florida to visit her sick father despite the state discouraging Michiganders from similar travel. The governor also banned large gatherings yet decided to attend President Biden’s inauguration.

The aforementioned maskless wedding scandal isn’t the DC mayor’s only brush with pandemic hypocrisy. She also reportedly attended a party maskless just hours before her new mandate went into effect. And Bowser attended an election victory party for President Biden even while her government discouraged Washington residents from “non-essential” travel.

The above 12 examples of politicians caught in COVID hypocrisy are just a select few from dozens and dozens more cataloged by the Heritage Foundation. And there were no doubt many more who engaged in similar acts and weren’t caught.

The glaring “rules for thee, but not for me” approach of our political class during the pandemic to date is yet more confirmation that inequality and selective enforcement are inherent to big government systems. As FEE Managing Editor Jon Miltimore explained, “As government control over the economy expands and free markets recede, privileges increasingly become the province of those in power or those who have proximity to power.”

Having been given the enormous power to dub some businesses “essential” and close others, outlaw some livelihoods and not others, and more, politicians drunk on pandemic power were inevitably going to abuse this wild authority. So, the many examples of COVID hypocrisy from our elected officials have grave ramifications far beyond the individual officeholders and their personal integrity. They deal a serious blow to the arguments of those who think benevolent big government will lift us up instead of grinding us down.

COLUMN BY

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Policy Correspondent at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Like this story? Click here to sign up for the FEE Daily and get free-market news and analysis like this from Policy Correspondent Brad Polumbo in your inbox every weekday.

VIDEO: Fauci-Delta Variant Lies — Better Chance Dying in Your Shower!

The odds of any American dying from the so-called Delta Variant of the Wuhan coronavirus is not being reported to the American people. Instead, Biden, Fauci, and the media are force-feeding the people a stead stream of unwarranted fear. This is only the latest act in a political theater that is designed to make Marxists Democrats more powerful and richer. Graham Ledger speaks with Dr. Ben Marble of MyFreeDoctor.com on the truth about COVID and its Delta, along with the lawless vaccine mandates and the simple ways to combat this virus.

RELATED VIDEOS:

Rand Paul Takes Down Delta Hysteria With Cold Hard Facts

COLLUSION: Here’s Who Funds Facebook Covid Vaccine Fact Checkers

RELATED ARTICLE: These 12 High-Profile Politicians Got Caught Violating Their Own COVID Rules

EDITORS NOTE: This Ledger Report video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Brutal Democrats Target Landlords for Extinction, Would Make Paying Rent Voluntary

“Businessmen are the symbol of a free society—the symbol of America. If and when they perish, civilization will perish. But if you wish to fight for freedom, you must begin by fighting for its unrewarded, unrecognized, unacknowledged, yet best representatives—the American businessmen.”

“Every ugly, brutal aspect of injustice toward racial or religious minorities is being practiced toward businessmen.. . . Every movement that seeks to enslave a country, every dictatorship or potential dictatorship, needs some minority group as a scapegoat which it can blame for the nation’s troubles and use as a justification of its own demands for dictatorial powers. In Soviet Russia, the scapegoat was the bourgeoisie; in Nazi Germany, it was the Jewish people; in America, it is the businessmen.”

“America’s Persecuted Minority: Big Business,”

Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal,

“All the evils, abuses, and iniquities, popularly ascribed to businessmen and to capitalism, were not caused by an unregulated economy or by a free market, but by government intervention into the economy. The giants of American industry—such as James Jerome Hill or Commodore Vanderbilt or Andrew Carnegie or J. P. Morgan—were self-made men who earned their fortunes by personal ability, by free trade on a free market. But there existed another kind of businessmen, the products of a mixed economy, the men with political pull, who made fortunes by means of special privileges granted to them by the government, such men as the Big Four of the Central Pacific Railroad. It was the political power behind their activities—the power of forced, unearned, economically unjustified privileges—that caused dislocations in the country’s economy, hardships, depressions, and mounting public protests. But it was the free market and the free businessmen that took the blame.” Ayn Rand, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

The Rental Evictions Fiasco

Democrats want an emergency measure to last forever.

By The Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal, Aug. 1, 2021:

Perhaps you’ve read that the pandemic recession officially ended in April 2020, that the economy grew 6.5% in the second quarter, that employers are desperate to find workers, and that the housing market is booming. Never mind. Democrats are in a panic because the federal ban on landlords evicting tenants who haven’t paid rent in 16 months expired on Saturday.

The eviction moratorium was perhaps justifiable amid the early lockdowns that threw millions out of work, but it’s now a cautionary tale of how bad policies distort behavior and are difficult to end. The original Cares Act moratorium that only applied to federally subsidized housing expired last July, but the Trump Centers for Disease Control and Prevention imposed its version in September. The moratorium applied to all rental housing and tenants who earned less than $99,000 ($198,000 for couples) who claimed they lost income because of the pandemic. Landlords who evicted non-paying tenants could go to jail.

Congress extended the ban in December for a month, but then the Biden Administration extended it three times through Saturday despite rulings from several judges that the CDC had exceeded its authority. Last month Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the liberals in maintaining a stay on a lower-court injunction reversing the ban.

Justice Kavanaugh wrote that he agreed the CDC acted unlawfully but allowed the moratorium to continue so rental assistance appropriated by Congress could have more time to be distributed. But he said a “clear and specific congressional authorization (via new legislation) would be necessary for the CDC to extend the moratorium past July 31.”

Cue the political panic. On Thursday, two days before July 31, the White House issued a statement essentially blaming the Supreme Court for the moratorium’s end and urged Congress to extend it. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared a five-alarm fire, but her attempt to rush an extension through the House failed. Too many Democrats balked.

President Biden implored Congress to extend the ban because only $3 billion or so of the $46 billion in rental relief that Congress appropriated has been distributed. But who’s fault is that? Not the landlords’.

The state and local governments in charge of distributing the aid have been hobbled by bureaucracy, and some tenants without the immediate threat of eviction haven’t bothered to apply. This is what happens when people become inured to government protection and subsidies. They assume it will never end. Has Congress heard of incentives and human nature?

The economic emergency has long passed and many landlords are struggling to pay their mortgages and utilities. Even Mr. Biden acknowledged recently that the moratorium may discourage some people from seeking work. The moral imperative now is to let landlords collect rent so they can stay in business and avoid bankruptcies that would lead to cascading damage throughout the rental housing market.
Mrs. Pelosi is vowing to bring the evictions ban back to the House floor for another vote, no doubt to portray Republicans as heartless. But this is a mess made in Washington and state capitals. Your government at work.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Highly Vaccinated Iceland & Gibraltar DESTROY COVID-19 Vaccine Passport Narrative — Vaccinated People Are The Biggest Spreaders

This is the proof vaccinated people are the biggest spreaders.

Highly Vaccinated Iceland & Gibraltar DESTROY COVID-19 Vaccine Passport Narrative

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

New FBI Initiative Will Put ‘Hate Crime’ Quotas On Local Law Enforcement

And guess who they’re after. Our intel and LE agencies have been weaponized against the American people.

New FBI Initiative Will Put “Hate Crime” Quotas On Local Law Enforcement

By: Eric Striker, National Justice, Jul 29, 2021:

The Department of Justice and the FBI have a message for local police departments: start charging more white people with hate crimes or invite an investigation.

Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta told an assembly of FBI agents yesterday that they are now tasked with hounding police departments in their district if they do not register any “hate crimes.”

Gupta and FBI Deputy Assistant Director of the Criminal Investigative Division Jay Greenberg have declared “hate crimes” by “racially motivated violent extremists” (a euphemism generally reserved for right-wing white men) to be a national threat priority — a rare designation.

According to Greenberg, the FBI will be increasingly specialized in pursuing “hate crimes” through increased training in the matter, an aggressive media campaign designed to recruit victims in “underrepresented and targeted populations,” and putting federal pressure on local law enforcement to charge and report hate crimes when they otherwise wouldn’t.

Hate crimes laws are political and racially motivated. Blacks and Jews are heavily overrepresented as supposed victims in the FBI’s “hate crime” database, while whites are charged at higher rates than general crime rates. Blacks are rarely charged with hate crimes when they commit bias crimes against whites. For example, last month a black man who shot five white men in a multi-state shooting spree told police his sole motive was that he hated white people, yet neither local prosecutors or the FBI have charged him with a hate crime.

According to the FBI’s 2019 hate crime report, blacks are 49% of victims of racial bias while Jews are 60% of crimes motivated by religious animosity. Most of the blacks in the data were victims of “intimidation,” an often Constitutionally dubious charge. A large number of reported hate crimes targeting both blacks and Jews are hoaxes, as seen in famous cases like the Jussie Smollett incident and the thousands of bomb threats targeting Jewish community centers that were the work of a Jew in Israel.

Just yesterday, a white man was charged with “ethnic intimidation” for putting up stickers that say “I Love Being White.” The FBI wants more police departments to exploit the legal gray area and lack of First Amendment advocacy groups for white dissidents to juke crime statistics and distort the reality of crime. Blacks commit roughly 90% of violent interracial felonies, a statistic the Critical Race Theorists at the FBI find inconvenient.

The mad rush for white racists at the FBI is bound to cause more embarrassments for the increasingly discredited agency. Last year, the theater put on by the FBI over NASCAR driver Bubba Wallace’s “noose,” which turned out to be a hoax, served to reveal the hyper-politicization and lack of seriousness at the Bureau.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

NYC: ‘Palestinian’ jihad supporters scream ‘Globalize the intifada,’ ‘We don’t want two states, we want all of it’

This would require the total destruction of Israel and the genocide of millions of Jews.

Meanwhile, the call to globalize the intifada heralds more violence against Jews worldwide.

Protestors in New York cry ‘Globalize the intifada’ at demonstration

by Jeremy Sharon, Jerusalem Post, August 1, 2021 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

Several hundred protesters took part in a pro-Palestinian rally on Saturday in Brooklyn, using inflammatory rhetoric and messaging against Israel. They lauded “intifada” uprisings and called for taking control of Israeli territory, the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
During the protest, organized by an organization called “Within Our Lifetime – United for Palestine,” demonstrators marched behind three large banners: “Globalize the intifada,” “Zionism is terrorism,” and “We will free Palestine within our lifetime.”

Intifada is an Arabic word meaning uprising or rebellion. During the Second Intifada from 2000-2005, Palestinian terrorist groups, including Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and some affiliated with Fatah, carried out hundreds of terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians and security personnel, killing more than 1,000.

During Saturday’s rally, marchers chanted, “We don’t want no two states, we want all of it,” referring to the two-state solution that has formed the basis of peace proposals.

A Twitter account was deleted on Sunday afternoon after it posted video footage of demonstrators chanting, “We don’t want no two states, we want all of it.”

Among the demonstrators’ other slogans were: “If we don’t get no justice, then they don’t get no peace,” “Intifada, intifada,” “There is only one solution, intifada revolution,” “Mobilize the intifada,” and “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Hamas intensifies efforts to carry out jihad massacres from Judea and Samaria (aka the West Bank)

Blinken vows ‘collective response’ to Iran’s attack on oil tanker

Burkina Faso: Children screaming ‘Allahu akbar’ participated in jihad massacre in which 160 people were killed

Austria: Muslim migrant had machine gun in his luggage, is now on the run

Somalia: Muslims bomb soccer team bus, killing three people and injuring six

UK: Family of jihadi who stabbed two people claims in court that he was wrongfully killed by police

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Silencing Saul and Saving America

“At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. . It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be out lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.”  – Abraham Lincoln


Although Saul Alinsky died in 1972, his legacy lives on.  It manifests itself through leftist ideology, agendas, organizational strategies promoting cultural revolution and the socialistic transformation of our society. Alinsky was a community organizer who created a guide for organizations to gain legal; economic; and political power by any means necessary.  He attempted to incite people in grassroots organizations to take direct action to affect often unidentified change. One of the tools in his arsenal was to unite groups by generating conflict and through this conflict provide the organization with a specific enemy to confront and oppose.

His stated organizational efforts were to elevate minority rights and bring about the betterment of society.

They were introduced under the guise of humanitarian concerns and social justice. But we cannot be misled. His ambitions were not altruistic. He portrayed himself to be a radical. He did not promote reform, but advocated revolution. His intent was not to improve society.   But rather to destroy the very societal structures and institutions that ensure public safety and national security. Divisiveness must prevail over unity. Violence was accepted as necessary if it advanced the goals of the organization.
Although Saul Alinsky died in 1972, his legacy lives on.  It manifests itself through leftist ideology, agendas, organizational strategies promoting cultural revolution and the socialistic transformation of our society. Alinsky was a community organizer who created a guide for organizations to gain legal; economic; and political power by any means necessary.  He attempted to incite people in grassroots organizations to take direct action to affect often unidentified change. One of the tools in his arsenal was to unite groups by generating conflict and through this conflict provide the organization with a specific enemy to confront and oppose.

His stated organizational efforts were to elevate minority rights and bring about the betterment of society.

They were introduced under the guise of humanitarian concerns and social justice. But we cannot be misled. His ambitions were not altruistic. He portrayed himself to be a radical. He did not promote reform but advocated revolution. His intent was not to improve society.   But rather to destroy the very societal structures and institutions that ensure public safety and national security. Divisiveness must prevail over unity. Violence was accepted as necessary if it advanced the goals of the organization.
If there is any doubt as to his malevolent motives, it is removed by the dedication in his book, Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals:

“Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins-or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom—Lucifer”. 

Saul Alinsky’s organizational guide is set forth in his rules. This is a summary of the rules relevant to our discussion:

  1. “Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.”
  2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people.”
  3. “Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy.”
  4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”
  5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. There is no defense and it is impossible to counterattack.”
  6. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
  7. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.”
  8. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”
  9. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

A common thread that permeates Alinsky’s ideological principles is that the established government and our foundational values are so intrinsically evil that they cannot be resurrected, but must be destroyed. Today his theme is amplified by the left/progressives in their preoccupation with cancel culture tactics and the obliteration of our historical heritage.

Alinsky believes that patriotic heroes of the past should be demonized.  History must be rewritten so the revolution can begin with a clean slate. Governmental institutions that safeguard our peace, prosperity, public safety, and national security shouldn’t be strengthened.  They should be defunded or abolished and replaced with “reimagined” undescribed utopian governmental entities.

Antiquated Constitutional principles must be replaced with foundational premises more in keeping with contemporary societal norms. Outdated laws must be rescinded to make way for the implementation of progressive programs. Democratic and capitalistic fundamentals must be sacrificed so that a socialistic society can be realized. Most important of all, governmental leadership at all levels must be maintained by the liberal elite and institutionally preserved for generations to come.
Saul Alinsky is quoted as saying “Never let a crisis go to waste,” That advice is followed religiously by the progressive left. Their simplistic crisis resolution formula, however, always adheres to their partisan political agenda. It rarely leads to successful responsive or preventive solutions to the disaster.

The history of revolutions, warns us that it is ultimately just trading one master for another.  Even the proletariat revolutions of the twentieth century left the majority of the proletariat still grubbing in the dirt and building their masters’ new castles.
Ironically, the two most devastating crises facing our nation today – the southern border chaos and the rampant nationwide surge in violent and drug-related crimes – are not even recognized by the current administration as emergency national priorities. Arguably, this is because these are crises of their own making and they do not want to accept accountability for their consequences. The left has violated the Alinsky rule of never going beyond the expertise of their followers.
Progressive activists have no expertise in securing international borders or running law enforcement agencies. Their refusal to acknowledge or accept responsibility for their organizational efforts to sabotage, defund and abolish the institutions that safeguard our freedoms is unconscionable. Demonizing and de-platforming all conservative leaders and making accusations that all law enforcement officers are guilty of police brutality caused by inherent racism are not conducive to the establishment of a more perfect union.

The fundamental flaw in the adoption of the Saul Alinsky ideological tactics is that they are not based upon the Judeo-Christian values of our founding fathers. The American people are not willing to unravel the moral fabric of our society. There has been no voter mandate to overthrow our government or cause a radical transformation of our way of life. For these reasons, the Alinsky radical movement will ultimately fail.
The abiding principles of American political faith are adeptly described in The American Creed:
“I believe in the United States of America as a government of the people, by the people, for the people, whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed, a democracy in a republic, a sovereign nation of many sovereign states, a perfect union, one and inseparable, established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, humanity, for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes.

I, therefore, believe it is my duty to my country to love it, to support its Constitution, to obey its laws, to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies.”
Victims of the Alinsky rule regime who have been targeted, polarized, and personally vilified as enemies of the people because of their love of country must refuse to be censored and canceled. The true enemies of the republic have to be identified.

Their principles must be understood, and their nation destroying operational strategies opposed.

Silence Saul and Save America by acting for America!

As He Died to Make Men Holy Let Us Die to Make Men Free!

“In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea. With a glory in his bosom that transfigures you and me. As he died to make men holy let us die to make men free. His truth is marching on.”  – The Battle Hymn of the Republic, a Union Marching Song

“We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.” ― Benjamin Franklin

“Give me liberty or give me death.” ― Patrick Henry


Are we headed to a second American Revolution to restore our Constitutional Republic?

In a column titled “Is America Headed Toward a Second Civil War?” I wrote:

There are multiple indicators that America is headed toward a second Civil War.

This new Civil War is not about the Southern states secession from the Republic. Rather this new Civil War is about those who want to fundamentally transform America. It’s between those who embrace liberty against those who are hell bent on imposing a tyrannical government upon American citizens.

It is in essence a battle between patriots and tyrants.

The Battle of Athens

The Battle of Athens was a rebellion led by citizens in Athens, Tennessee against their local government on August 1st, 1946.

The citizens, including some World War II veterans, accused the local officials of predatory policing, police brutality, political corruption, and voter intimidation.

A plaque commemorating the Battle of Athens reads:

The Battle of Athens was an armed revolt that gained national attention. Attempting to end the control of an entrenched political machine, World War II veterans used force to ensure that on the day of local elections in 1946 every vote “was counted as cast.”

After local authorities locked themselves and the ballot boxes in the jail, veterans suspicious of foul play gathered weapons and ammunition and exchanged fire from this hill upon the jail, which once stood across the street.

The besieged authorities surrendered. At a meeting in the courthouse, the interim government was set up, followed by the election of the veterans’ slate.

Are patriots ready for another Battle of Athens?

Republicans are willing to ‘take the law into their own hands’

The Hill reports:

About 47 percent of Republicans believe that a time will come when “patriotic Americans have to take the law into their own hands,” according to a George Washington University poll on Americans’ faith in election systems and democratic values.

The GW Politics Poll, conducted among more than 1,700 registered voters from June 4 to June 23 and released this week, found that support for principles like free and fair elections, free speech and peaceful protest were nearly unanimous among Democratic and Republican voters. Approximately 55 percent of GOP respondents, however, said they support the potential use of force to preserve the “traditional American way of life,” compared to just 15 percent of Democrats.

Only 9 percent of Democrats agreed with the statement that “a time will come when patriotic Americans have to take the law into their own hands.”

The Second American Revolution – Patriots vs. Tyrants

A new ABC News/Ipsos poll found that 55% of respondents say they are pessimistic about the direction of the country for the next 12 months. This is significant because it represents a nearly 20 percentage point drop in the same poll that was taken in May, when 36% of Americans were pessimistic and 64% were optimistic about the nation’s future. Declines in optimism were from Republicans, independents, and Democrats.

Conclusion

It is only a matter of time before there is a second American Revolution.

This new American Revolution will be between patriots and tyrants.

The goal of the tyrants is to destroy America as a Constitutional Republic. The goal of patriots is to protect and defend our Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. We are now seeing that the Democrat Party is a domestic enemy of the people.

The methodology of the tyrant is to rewrite history, e.g. Critical Race Theory, and literally tear down historical memorials to keep the young from understanding America’s true history, especially the American Revolution.

The more government tries to take control the more the people will push back against it.

Violence may be necessary to restore our freedoms. As Thomas Jefferson wrote:

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

The Deadly Politicization of America’s Medical Care

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James – British television writer

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” –  H. L. Mencken

“Today the world is the victim of propaganda because people are not intellectually competent. More than anything the United States needs effective citizens competent to do their own thinking.” – William Mather Lewis – President, George Washington University 1923-1927


The Good News is … God is still on the throne and He still answers prayer.  But we cannot be silent if we want to save our Republic.  God gives us free will, but He tells us to put on the full armor of God, and having done all to Stand!  As Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”

If we want to keep our God-given freedoms recorded in America’s Bill of Rights, we must rise up from the recliners, dump the beer and turn off every sport with the anti-American flag-hating kneelers, including the Olympics.

An evil plan has been hatched by those who hate our Constitutional Republic and her freedoms; that plan is straight from the Marxist pit of hell.

Concentration camps and forced labor Gulags await unless we rise up against despotic godless tyranny. Throughout Europe, people are demonstrating against the totalitarian tactics, the shutdowns, the masks, and now the mandated Covid jabs!  France, England, Italy, Ireland and Greece are seeing massive protests, but as of yet, the American spirit has not awakened to spit in the face of authoritarianism.

Orchestrated Destruction

I am sick of writing about the evils of Covid’s medical nihilism and malfeasance. Every day we learn more despite truth constantly being censored. The comrades’ plans for America began over a century ago…and now we face annihilation.

A friend in Israel sent me a short video she said I must watch.  In six minutes, former Army officer Royston Potter urges us to get our houses in order.  He talks about the supply chains, ships and cargo being slowed down, trains stopped, and grocery shelves being empty. The elitists are turning off the economy, keeping it shut down rather than allowing pre-Covid status to return. The attacks are coming on multiple levels, everything is now a shortage, aluminum, steel, wood, energy, etc.  Assaults are happening on multiple fronts with full spectrum dominance, and it’s only just begun.

Video Here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acL4Y-QYcuw

Covid decimated manufacturing, companies can’t get people to work, restaurants can’t get servers to return, and it’s blamed on government funding to help those destroyed during lockdowns.  Citizens stay home because the government hands out more money per week to them than they can make working.

There’s a class action lawsuit against the State of Tennessee.  Governor Bill Lee ended the federal unemployment programs early and our Senator Marsha Blackburn claims that since those funds came from the feds, they must be given out.   Yet, there are a quarter million jobs in TN that need to be filled.  Up to nine other states have similar lawsuits.

Four years of Trump encouraged America’s comrades to rush their final programs to fruition. The neo-con Trotskyites in the Republican Party are silent.  Like Lenin and Stalin, Trotsky was a Marxist, but he wanted to bring communism in slowly so the people would accept it. That’s the reason we rarely hear more than a handful of republicans speak out.

Leveling America to a third world country is being accomplished; just look at what has been effectuated by the illegitimate president in seven months.

If we don’t wake up, canned beans will be the only food source on grocery shelves as in Cuba and Venezuela, and the stocked-up toilet paper will eventually run out.  Biden tells freedom-seeking Cubans to get lost, while he opens the southern flood gates to gangs, terrorists and law breakers.

Medical Tyranny Continues

CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said the delta variant now represents 83% of sequenced coronavirus cases in the U.S.  She claims a major setback in the progress in the U.S. epidemic that reflects a surging variant and the country’s ongoing struggles to increase vaccination rates.  What Walensky didn’t tell us is that the Covid-inoculated are passing this variant.  Luc Montagnier, a French virologist and recipient of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Medicine tells us the vaccines don’t stop the virus, they do the opposite, they “feed the virus,” and facilitate its development into stronger and more transmittable variants. These new virus variants will be more resistant to vaccination and may cause more health implications than their “original” versions.

Those utterly useless face diapers that kept us apart and kept our faces hidden are back.  The CDC is telling us that even people who’ve had their Covid-19 shots must wear masks in public indoor settings in areas with widespread transmission of the coronavirus.

They also want universal masking in schools.  They want children ages two to 12 to wear masks in public places or when they’re not with their family.  Can you imagine trying to keep a mask on toddlers?  Well, best wear them to bed, to the sauna, while swimming, and even in outer space.  Good grief, the American people who fall prey to this Marxist control are lemmings and lab rats.

All this despite mask ineffectiveness.

Despotic NY Governor Cuomo says he’ll spend $15 million on the door-to-door policy of convincing people to inoculate and they’ll put them in a car and drive them to receive their jab.  Cuomo and other governors are off the hook for the murder of thousands of nursing home elderly when they issued directives to admit Covid patients because of alleged hospital shortage.  The Department of Justice (DOJ) says it will not investigate Covid-19 nursing home deaths in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Michigan.

Of course not!  Murder of “useless eaters” is apparently legal for Democrats.  Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of former Obama Chief of Staff and Chicago Mayor, Rahm Emanuel, is now the number one advisor to Fauci’s buddy, World Health Organization President and China mouthpiece, Dr. Tedros.  Ezekiel has stated that everyone who reaches the age of 75 should die, that life after 75 is not worth living.  Dr. Emanuel is also one of Biden’s Covid-19 advisors.  Has he told Biden to die?

Here’s something even more special that Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel will love…the next target for messenger RNA jabs after Covid-19: the flu vaccine.  “Vaccine” makers want to replicate their so-called “success” with the Covid jab.  All the regular actors are back, Sanofi SA, GlaxoSmithKline PLC and Pfizer Inc. are all working on mRNA shots against seasonal flu, betting the technology will be more effective, and quicker and cheaper to make than traditional shots.

The DOJ has declared that Covid-19 jab mandates are legal.  It is their opinion that federal law doesn’t prohibit public agencies and private businesses from requiring Covid-19 jabs under the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) emergency use authorization (EUA). Since when are they allowed to override federal and Constitutional laws and have their opinions become law?  Yes, I know, they’ve done it for nearly two centuries.

The government via the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Johns Hopkins University decided long ago that children 12 years and older should also receive the jab.  However, there are no cases of children dying from Covid unless they had underlying comorbidities such as leukemia.  The instances of myocarditis in inoculated teens is on the rise.  Just recently a 13-year-old died in his sleep a few days after receiving the second jab.

The CDC is signaling its support for mandatory jab “passports” likely being the way forward for a nation that has all but beaten the plandemic that 99.75% of people recover from, unlike polio, smallpox, etc.

Both the FDA and the CDC have admitted they have worked on vaccines that shed.  I’ve reported this in several of my previous articles as has Dr. Lee Merritt in an interview with Alex Newman.  Dr. Merritt’s recent article in the New American Magazine asks the question, Are “Vaccines” Harming More than the “Vaxxed”?

So, if the un-vaxxed are getting this, where do you think it’s coming from?  Those who took the killer Covid jab are spreading it to the healthy un-jabbed. Again, it has already been acknowledged that those who are inoculated are shedding the spike proteins and infecting non-inoculated.  Even the FDA has written a “guidance document” entitled,  Design and Analysis of Shedding Studies for Virus or Bacteria-Based Gene Therapy and Oncolytic Products.

Dr. Bryan Ardis

Brannon Howse’s video with Dr. Ardis is telling.  Ardis did some deep digging within FDA documents and found a report they did in October 2020, two months before the C-19 vax was released. Their internal division, (CBER) Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, in coordination with the CDC, gave an internal 25-slide presentation to the FDA regarding the possible side effects expected with the Covid jab.

The FDA actually listed everything we’re seeing today that’s been reported on VAERS.  As of July 23rd, the Vaccine Adverse Event Report System released by the CDC, showed 11,000 deaths and 463,457 adverse effects for America.

As of July 17th, the European database, Eudra Vigilance reported 18,928 dead and 1,823,219 adverse effects.

A Harvard study from 2010, found that VAERS receives less than one percent of occurrences. Therefore, every statistical number for the Covid jab needs to have two more zeroes added to it for true figures.

In another video with attorney Reiner Fuellmich PhD, Dr. Ardis exposed the adverse effects during Remdesivir trials, organ failure, acute kidney failure, septic shock, and hypertension.  The drug was never approved by the FDA to be safe for any disease.  However, on the National Institutes of Health (NIH) website, Anthony Fauci said, “Every doctor in the country has to use Remdesivir only.”  America was the only country to treat all Covid patients from January of 2020 to October of 2020 with Remdesivir.  Dr. Ardis said America had the most deaths from Covid because Fauci had mandated this dangerous drug.  More negligent homicide by Fauci?

Dr. Michael Yeadon

Former Pfizer Vice President and top scientist, Dr. Michael Yeadon has had plenty to say about this “warp speed” developed injection for a virus that 99.75 recover from and he’s not happy.  He says, “Severe adverse reaction and mass death from mRNA Covid vaccines are virtually guaranteed, especially for pregnant women and 0.8% of treatment recipients will die within 2 weeks. Most of the rest will die within three years.

He declares that the pandemic is a fraud, masks are useless, why distancing is absurd, why PCR tests are meaningless, why quarantining healthy people is stupid, why variants of virus strains are no threat, and why Covid vaccines should be rejected. Yeadon says many of his colleagues privately agree with this appraisal but remain silent to protect their salaries and research grants. It’s all about money. He concludes that, because of the massive number of deaths that will follow within a few years of vaccination, there clearly is an agenda to deliberately eliminate billions of people from the earth and to enslave those who remain.

Doctors for Covid-19 Ethics, founded by Dr. Yeadon, a group of over 160 independent medical experts worldwide, have issued a stern warning to public health agencies about the experimental Covid-19 vaccines, slamming the jabs as “unnecessary, ineffective and unsafe” and likely to lead to “foreseeable mass deaths.”

mRNA Inventor, Dr. Robert Malone

Dr. Robert Malone, MD, MS Physician Scientist and Inventor of the messenger RNA “vaccine” technology says there have been an increasingly desperate and abrupt number of rollouts of information beginning with Pfizer’s alert that after six months, a booster will be needed.  Fauci, who has never treated a patient, reprimanded them, and then the government flip-flopped and said there would be a need for boosters especially in elderly and immunocompromised!

Are you kidding me? They want those “useless eaters” dead just like Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel and the five governors who put Covid patients in nursing homes and killed off thousands.

In a recent interview, (scroll to episode 1129 and start at the 15 min. mark.) Dr. Malone, like Dr. Montagnier explains that the “vaccine” actually causes the virus to become more infectious than in the absence of vaccination.  This is another reason so many of the unvaccinated are also getting sick, the jabbed are spreading a more infectious virus.  Malone goes on to explain that it has happened with other vaccines in the past and caused more deaths.  He states that Dr. Fauci is being disingenuous, actually a liar, and mutations are another misleading set of statements from Fauci.  He says the government is obfuscating what is happening.

Malone also stated that the FDA was aware that the spike proteins were “biologically active and could travel from the injection site and cause adverse events, and that the spike protein, if biologically active, is very dangerous.”

He tells us that the Pfizer inoculation in the waning phase is causing the virus to replicate more efficiently than it would otherwise.  It is called antibody dependent enhancement or less precisely, disease enhancement.

He says the action that needs to take place is to immediately stop the jabs, and use the drug treatments that have been largely suppressed at the FDA level, particularly Ivermectin.  The French Pasteur study actually shows how well ivermectin can treat Covid-19.  Unless the active drug trials are by the NIH, which are paid for by Bill Gates and friends, they deny the available safe and cheap drugs.  Dr. Malone says the government officials from FDA, NIH, CDC seem to be coming off the rails as the actual data rolls out. Dr. Malone states that the spike protein is toxic.

Bottom line to all of this, the CDC says the inoculations are failing and those who received the jab can be super spreaders.  Yet mainstream media never comments on the thousands of illegal aliens who are being planted all over the USA, but democrats made sure they passed a bill that allow illegal aliens to be hired as congressional staffers.

Deaths from Covid are at a 16-month low despite the delta and lambda variants.  Harvard Medical School professor Martin Kulldorff, cited the Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus Research Center as its source, which shows U.S. Covid deaths conspicuously peaked around the third week of January 2021.  What we’re not being told are the actual deaths from the Covid jab.

PCR Tests

We know the PCR tests gave false positives because they were run too high, but after the jab came out, they lowered the test and now it looks as though the Covid jab is working.  It is not.  Just recently the CDC withdrew the EUA on the tests because they don’t differentiate between Covid and influenza.  That’s what caused the health authorities to decide Covid was an asymptomatic spread and react with despotic authority.

Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test once said Anthony Fauci “doesn’t know anything and is willing to lie on television.” He claimed, “Most of the people like Fauci are administrative only and know nothing about medicine or what’s going on in the body.  They have a personal agenda and make up their own rules as they go. They change them when they want to. And they smugly, like Tony Fauci, do not mind going on television and lying directly into the camera,” Mullis added.

Now the CDC is tossing the entire PCR test since their buddies, George Soros and Bill Gates announced their intention to buy a COVID-19 test manufacturer based in the United Kingdom.

A physician from Johns Hopkins reported that the yearly deaths from 2018 through 2020 were approximately the same, but the article was pulled only two days after it was posted.  Makes one wonder how many died of seasonal influenza instead of Covid, especially since the CDC Director has now declared mandatory vaccine passports may well be a path forward in the US, for a flu virus that 99.75 recover from, isn’t this special?!

Stop the Jab!

Fifty-seven top scientists and physicians have released a report on the Covid inoculations and they are demanding an immediate stop to all C-19 injections.  Around the world, governments are promoting the “vaccine” and blocking the cheap and safe drugs that save lives.  The push for inoculation is over the top, and in the works are Biden’s door-to-door sales pitches.

Asking serious questions about deaths and devastating side effects results in scorn and censorship from mainstream and social media.  Even worse is the derision from administrators of FDA, NIH and CDC who have never treated Covid patients or any patients for that matter.

Most people are just following what the government tells them rather than doing any research at all.  Unfortunately, for a growing number, deaths and terrible adverse effects result.

Conclusion

Thousands of honest physicians and scientists are screaming the truth and they’re being censored and deleted.  The 1947 Nuremberg Code stands as a testament against medical experimentation.  Yet, worldwide history is repeating itself. This is a new genocide…

Will Americans wake up to the realization of medical tyranny and murder or will they believe the mainstream media comrades when they spew the lies of Covid variants or another virus?  Only time will tell.

©Kelleigh Nelson. All rights reserved.

Medical Schools Are Now Denying Biological Sex

Democrats take a wrecking ball to yet another venerated field of science rendering it …… a tragic joke.

Med Schools Are Now Denying Biological Sex

Professors are apologizing for saying ‘male’ and ‘female.’ Students are policing teachers. This is what it looks like when activism takes over medicine.

By: Katie Herzog, July 27, 2021:

Today we bring you another installment of Katie Herzog’s ongoing series about the spread of woke ideology in the field of medicine. Her first story focused on the ideological purge at the top medical schools and teaching hospitals in the country. “Wokeness,” as one doctor put it, “feels like an existential threat.”

Katie’s latest reporting illustrates some of the most urgent elements of that threat. It focuses on how biological sex is being denied by professors fearful of being smeared by their students as transphobic. And it shows how the true victims of that denial are not sensitive medical students but patients, perhaps most importantly, transgender ones. 

Some of you may find Katie’s story shocking and disconcerting and perhaps even maddening. You might also ask yourself: How has it come to this? How has this radical ideology gone from the relatively obscure academic fringe to the mainstream in such a short time?

Those are among the questions that motivate this newsletter. We feel obligated to chronicle in detail and in primary accounts the takeover of our institutions by this ideology — and the consequences of it. 

So far, it has taken root in some of our leading medical schools. Some. Not all. But I’m left thinking: What state will American medicine — or any other American institution —  find itself in after being routed by this ideology?  

If you think reporting like Katie Herzog’s is important I hope you’ll support us by subscribing here.

— BW


During a recent endocrinology course at a top medical school in the University of California system, a professor stopped mid-lecture to apologize for something he’d said at the beginning of class.

“I don’t want you to think that I am in any way trying to imply anything, and if you can summon some generosity to forgive me, I would really appreciate it,” the physician says in a recording provided by a student in the class (whom I’ll call Lauren). “Again, I’m very sorry for that. It was certainly not my intention to offend anyone. The worst thing that I can do as a human being is be offensive.”

His offense: using the term “pregnant women.”

“I said ‘when a woman is pregnant,’ which implies that only women can get pregnant and I most sincerely apologize to all of you.”

It wasn’t the first time Lauren had heard an instructor apologize for using language that, to most Americans, would seem utterly inoffensive. Words like “male” and “female.”

Why would medical school professors apologize for referring to a patient’s biological sex? Because, Lauren explains, in the context of her medical school “acknowledging biological sex can be considered transphobic.”

When sex is acknowledged by her instructors, it’s sometimes portrayed as a social construct, not a biological reality, she says. In a lecture on transgender health, an instructor declared: “Biological sex, sexual orientation, and gender are all constructs. These are all constructs that we have created.”

In other words, some of the country’s top medical students are being taught that humans are not, like other mammals, a species comprising two sexes. The notion of sex, they are learning, is just a man-made creation.

The idea that sex is a social construct may be interesting debate fodder in an anthropology class. But in medicine, the material reality of sex really matters, in part because the refusal to acknowledge sex can have devastating effects on patient outcomes.

In 2019, the New England Journal of Medicine reported the case of a 32-year-old transgender man who went to an ER complaining of abdominal pain. While the patient disclosed he was transgender, his medical records did not. He was simply a man. The triage nurse determined that the patient, who was obese, was in pain because he’d stopped taking a medication meant to relieve hypertension. This was no emergency, she decided. She was wrong: The patient was, in fact, pregnant and in labor. By the time hospital staff realized that, it was too late. The baby was dead. And the patient, despite his own shock at being pregnant, was shattered.

Professors Running Scared of Students

To Dana Beyer, a trans activist in Maryland who is also a retired surgeon, such stories illustrate how vital it is that sex, not just gender identity — how someone perceives their gender — is taken into consideration in medicine. “The practice of medicine is based in scientific reality, which includes sex, but not gender,” Beyer says. “The more honest a patient is with their physician, the better the odds for a positive outcome.”

The denial of sex doesn’t help anyone, perhaps least of all transgender patients who require special treatment. But, Lauren says, instructors who discuss sex risk complaints from their students — which is why, she thinks, many don’t. “I think there’s a small percentage of instructors who are true believers. But most of them are probably just scared of their students,” she says.

And for good reason. Her medical school hosts an online forum in which students correct their instructors for using terms like “male” and “female” or “breastfeed” instead of “chestfeed.” Students can lodge their complaints in real time during lectures. After one class, Lauren says, she heard that a professor was so upset by students calling her out for using “male” and “female” that she started crying.

Then there are the petitions. At the beginning of the year, students circulated a number of petitions designed to, as Lauren puts it, “name and shame” instructors for “wrongspeak.”

One was delivered after a lecture on chromosomal disorders in which the professor used the pronouns “she” and “her” as well as the terms “father” and “son,” all of which, according to the students, are “cisnormative.” After the petition was delivered, the instructor emailed the class, noting that while she had consulted with a member of the school’s LGBTQ Committee prior to the lecture, she was sorry for using such “binary” language. Another petition was delivered after an instructor referred to “a man changing into a woman,” which, according to the students, incorrectly assumed that the trans woman wasn’t always a woman. But, as Lauren points out, “if trans women were born women, why would they need to transition?”

This phenomenon — of students policing teachers; of students being treated as the authorities over and above their teachers — has had consequences.

“Since the petitions were sent out, instructors have been far more proactive about ‘correcting’ their slides in advance or sending out emails to the school listserv if any upcoming material has ‘outdated’ terminology,” Lauren tells me. “At first, compliance is demanded from outside, and eventually the instructors become trained to police their own language proactively.”

In one point in the semester, a faculty member sent out a preemptive email warning students about forthcoming lectures containing language that doesn’t align with the school’s “approach to gender inclusivity and gender/sex antioppression.” That language included the term “premenopausal women.” In the future, the professor promised, this would be updated to “premenopausal people.”

Lauren also says young doctors are being taught to declare their pronouns upon meeting patients and ask for patients’ pronouns in return. This was echoed by a recent graduate of Mount Sinai Medical School in New York. “Everything was about pronouns,” the student said. The student objected to this, thinking most patients would be confused or offended by a doctor asking them what their pronouns were, but she never said so — at least not publicly. “It was impossible to push back without worrying about getting expelled,” she told me.

This hypersensitivity is undermining medical training. And many of these students are likely not even aware that their education is being informed by ideology.

“Take abdominal aortic aneurysms,” Lauren says. “These are four times as likely to occur in males than females, but this very significant difference wasn’t emphasized. I had to look it up, and I don’t have the time to look up the sex predominance for the hundreds of diseases I’m expected to know. I’m not even sure what I’m not being taught, and unless my classmates are as skeptical as I am, they probably aren’t aware either.”

Other conditions that present differently and at different rates in males and females include hernias, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, multiple sclerosis, and asthma, among many others. Males and females also have different normal ranges for kidney function, which impacts drug dosage. They have different symptoms during heart attacks: males complain of chest pain, while women experience fatigue, dizziness, and indigestion. In other words: biological sex is a hugely important factor in knowing what ails patients and how to properly treat them.

Carole Hooven is the author of T: The Story of Testosterone, the Hormone that Dominates and Divides Us and a professor at Harvard who focuses on behavioral endocrinology. I discussed Lauren’s story with her and Hooven found it deeply troubling. “Today’s students will go on to hold professional positions that give them a great deal of power over others’ bodies and minds. These young people are our future doctors, educators, researchers, statisticians, psychologists. To ignore or downplay the reality of sex and sex-based differences is to perversely handicap our understanding and our ability to increase human health and thriving.”

A former dean of a leading medical school agrees: “I don’t know the extent to which the stories you relate are now widespread in medical education, but to the extent that they are — and I hear some of this is popping up at my own institution — they are a serious departure from the expectation that medical education and practice should be based on science and be free from imposition of ideology and ideology-based intimidation.”

He added: “How male and female members of our species develop, how they differ genetically, anatomically, physiologically, and with respect to diseases and their treatment are foundational to clinical medicine and research. Efforts to erase or diminish these foundations should be unacceptable to responsible professional leaders.”

There is no doubt the rules are changing. According to the American Psychological Association, the terms “natal sex” and “birth sex,” for example, are now considered “disparaging”; the preferred term is “assigned sex at birth.” The National Institutes of Health, the CDC, and Harvard Medical School have all made efforts to divorce sex from medicine and emphasize gender identity.

When Asking Questions Can Destroy Your Career

While it’s unclear if this trend will remain limited to some medical schools, what is perfectly clear is that activism, specifically around issues of sex, gender, and race, is impacting scientific research and progress.

One of the most notorious examples is that of a physician and former associate professor at Brown University, Lisa Littman.

Around 2014, Littman began to notice a sudden uptick in female adolescents in her social network who were coming out as transgender boys. Until recently, the incidence of gender dysphoria was thought to be rare, affecting an estimated one in 10,000 people in the U.S. While the exact number of trans-identifying adolescents (or adults, for that matter) is unknown, in the last decade or so, the number of youth seeking treatment for gender dysphoria has spiked by over 1,000 percent in the U.S.; in the U.K., it’s jumped by 4,000 percent. The largest youth gender clinic in Los Angeles reportedly saw 1,000 patients in 2019. That same clinic, in 2009, saw about 80.

Curious about what was happening, Littman surveyed about 250 parents whose adolescent children had announced they were transgender — after never before exhibiting the symptoms of gender dysphoria. Over 80 percent of cases involved girls; many were part of friend groups in which half or more of the members had come out as trans. Littman coined the term “rapid-onset gender dysphoria” to describe this phenomenon. She posited that it might be a sort of social contagion, not unlike cutting or anorexia, both of which were endemic among teenage girls when I was in high school in the ’90s.

In August 2018, Littman published her results in a paper called “Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Study of Parental Reports” in the journal PLOS One. Littman, the journal, and Brown University were pummeled with accusations of transphobia in the press and on social media. In response, the journal announced an investigation into Littman’s work. Several hours later, Brown University issued a press release denouncing the professor’s paper.

Littman’s paper was republished in March 2019 with an amended title and other minor, mostly cosmetic changes. The journal has since confirmed that, while the paper was “corrected,” the original version contained no false information.

But Littman’s career was forever altered. She no longer teaches at Brown. And her contract at the Rhode Island State Health Department wasn’t renewed.

Littman is hardly alone. Trans activists have also targeted Ray Blanchard and Ken Zucker in Toronto, Michael Bailey at Northwestern, and Stephen Gliske at the University of Michigan for publishing findings they deemed transphobic. In a recent case, trans activists shut down research that was to be conducted by UCLA psychiatrist Jamie Feusner, who had hoped to explore the physiological underpinnings of gender dysphoria.

Nor is this limited to academia. Journalists who question the new ideological orthodoxy, like Abigail Shrier and Jesse Singal (with whom I co-host a podcast), have also been smeared for their work. After the American Booksellers Association included Shrier’s book, Irreversible Damage, in a promotional mailing to bookstores, activists went ballistic, prompting the ABA’s CEO to apologize for having done “horrific harm” that “traumatized and endangered members of the trans community” and “caused violence and pain.”

I had a similar experience in 2017 after writing about de-transitioners — people who transition to a different gender and then transition back — for the Seattle alt-weekly The Stranger. After the piece came out, people put up flyers and stickers around Seattle calling me transphobic; someone burned stacks of the newspaper and sent me a video of it. I lost many friends, and later ended up moving out of the city in part because of the turmoil.

But far more concerning than the treatment of journalists chronicling this story is the treatment of patients themselves.

Patients Are Suffering

Julia Mason is a pediatrician in the Portland suburbs who, unlike most doctors I spoke to, allowed me to use her name. Mason explained that she works at a small private practice and her boss is a libertarian. In other words: she won’t get fired for being honest.

Mason has been practicing for over 25 years, but it wasn’t until 2015 that she saw her first transgender patient: a 15-year-old trans boy who Mason referred to a gender clinic, where the patient was prescribed testosterone.

Since that first patient, she says there have been about 10 more requests for referrals to gender clinics. As this number increased, Mason started wondering about the advice her patients are getting at these clinics.

“A 12-year-old female came to see me, and the dad told me that they went to a therapist, and in the first five minutes, the therapist was like, ‘Yep. He’s trans,’” she told me. “And then they went to a pediatric endocrinologist who recommended puberty blockers on the first visit.”

Mason generally avoids prescribing puberty blockers, which inhibit the development of secondary sex characteristics like breasts or facial hair. The reason, she says, is that because there have been no controlled studies on the use of puberty blockers for gender dysphoric youth, the long term effects are still unknown. (In the U.K., a recent review of existing studies found that the quality of the evidence that puberty blockers are effective in relieving gender dysphoria and improving mental health is “very low.”)

In girls, Mason says, blockers inhibit breast development, but “you end up shorter, and the last thing a female who wants to look male needs is to be shorter.” Other side effects may include a loss of bone density, headache, fatigue, joint pain, hot flashes, mood swings and something called “brain fog.” In boys, blockers inhibit penis growth, which can make it harder for them to achieve orgasm and for surgeons to later construct those penises into “neo-vaginas,” a procedure known as vaginoplasty.

Trans activists often claim the effects of puberty blockers are fully reversible, but this remains unproven, and studies show that the overwhelming majority of teens who start on puberty blockers later take cross-sex hormones (testosterone for females and estrogen for males) to complete their transition. The combination of puberty blockers followed by hormones can cause sterility and other health problems, including sexual dysfunction, and the hormones must be taken for life — or until detransition. Little is known about their long-term effects. While the line that blockers are “fully reversible” is oft-repeated by activists and the media, last year, England’s National Health Service back-tracked this unsubstantiated claim on its website.

Mason is one of several doctors who voiced concerns about the fast-tracking of adolescents seeking to transition — and the new normal in the medical establishment, which seems to encourage that fast-tracking.

In 2018, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommended that pediatricians “affirm” their patients’ chosen gender without taking into account mental health, family history, trauma, or fears of puberty. The AAP recommendations say nothing about the many consequences, physical and psychological, of transitioning. So perhaps it is not surprising that surgeons are performing double mastectomies, or “top surgery,” on patients as young as 13.

One leading clinician, Diane Ehrensaft, has said that children as young as three have the cognitive ability to come out as transgender. And the University of California San Francisco Child and Adolescent Gender Center Clinic, where Ehrensaft is the mental health director, has helped kids of that age transition socially.

But not all clinicians have cheered these developments. In a paper responding to the AAP guidelines, James Cantor, a clinical psychologist in Toronto, noted that “every follow-up study of [gender dysphoric] children, without exception, found the same thing: By puberty, the majority of GD children ceased to want to transition.” Other studies of gender-clinic patients, stretching back to the 1970s, have found that 60 to 90 percent of patients eventually grow out of their gender dysphoria; most come out as gay or lesbian.

In an email to me, Cantor said: “The deafening silence from AAP when asked about the evidence allegedly supporting their trans policy is hard to interpret as anything other than their ‘pleading the 5th,’ as you in the U.S. put it.”

Erica Anderson, a clinical psychologist at the UCSF Child and Adolescent Gender Center Clinic and a trans woman herself, also voiced skepticism about the AAP’s approach to would-be transitioners. Unlike Mason, Anderson says withholding puberty blockers from dysphoric children is “cruel.” But she is suspicious of the sharp spike in young people, and especially young women. While she doesn’t like phrases like “rapid-onset gender dysphoria” or “social contagion,” she said something is definitely going on.

“What makes us think that gender is the one exception to peer influence?” she told me. “For 100 years, psychology has acknowledged that adolescence is a time of experimentation and exploration. It’s normal. I’m not alarmed by that. What I’m alarmed by is some medical and psychological professionals rushing kids into taking blockers or hormones.”

Because Anderson has been so vocal, including a recent 60 Minutes appearance in which she discussed detransitioners, she regularly gets calls from frantic parents. She told me she’d gotten off the phone with the parents of a 17-year-old who had announced that they were trans and wanted hormones. “It’s alarming to these parents,” Anderson said.

Anderson isn’t opposed to pediatric transition when patients are properly diagnosed, but she wants to see more individualized care rather than the activist-driven, one-size-fits-all approach. That, however, goes against current AAP guidelines.

Will Science Prevail?

Medicine is not impervious to trends.

“In the 90s, when I was training, everything was about controlling pain,” said a pediatrician in the Midwest who declined to be named for fear of repercussions. “We were taught that it was really hard to become addicted to narcotics. Look where that got us.”

Around the same time, she says, there was a rash of kids being diagnosed with bipolar disorder, something we now know is exceedingly rare in children. Before that, there was the recovered memory craze, multiple personality disorder, and rebirthing therapy, a bizarre treatment for attachment disorders that lead to the deaths of several children in the U.S. So how does this happen?

“Some idea will get picked up by major medical associations that put out reports and their members turn to those instead of the actual literature,” this pediatrician said. “And when you get too far ahead of the research, that’s when you get into trouble. That’s what’s happening now.”

For her part, Lauren, the medical student in California, is both hopeful for the future — and not. “On the one hand, I have this idea that the truth will eventually come out and science will ultimately prevail,” she said.

But the difference between things like rebirthing therapy or multiple personality disorder and the new gender ideology is that the latter is portrayed as a civil rights movement. “It seems virtuous. It seems like the right thing to do,” she said. “So how can you fight against something that’s being marketed as a fight for human rights?”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

How the Democrats Have Used COVID-19 to Bankrupt the United States

COVID Stats Prove The CDC’s New Mask Rule Is Idiotic.


Welcome to the Peoples Republic of America.

How the Left Has Used COVID-19 to Bankrupt the United States

By Stephen Moore, The Spectator, July 31, 2021:

I have never bought the conspiracy theories that COVID-19 was a diabolical political plot to undermine the country. But what is apparent with each passing week is that the virus has been the springboard for the Left’s agenda to transform America in a way that Sen. Bernie Sanders, Michael Moore, or Rachel Maddow could have never imagined.

Without COVID-19, President Joe Biden would never have been elected, of course. So, for the Left, the virus defeated former President Donald Trump. COVID-19 is now the gateway to the Left’s utopian agenda of multitrillion-dollar climate policies, hyperregulation of the economy, the rebirth of the welfare state, and a radical redistribution of income.

Under Trump policies, we had one of the most robust financial and economic expansions on record, especially regarding minority advancement and historic reductions in poverty. The entitlement state was in retreat as income growth and record job openings pushed millions of people out of the welfare state into work. If the Left truly cared about the plight of the poor, they would have celebrated. Instead, the results showing tax cuts, deregulation, and laissez-faire policies work made liberals miserable.

COVID-19 made the rebirth of big government possible. Last year, with Trump still in the White House, Congress spent $6 trillion, much of it (such as the $600-a-week bonus unemployment benefits) wastefully and ineffectively. But it was emergency spending.

We would be aggressively cutting government spending in a rational world, as we did after victories in World War II and the Cold War.

Instead, the Left has leveraged COVID-19 fears to call for a $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation bill on top of the $1.9 trillion spent in March on welfare programs and now $4.1 trillion in public works programs; labor union protections; Green New Deal subsidies; Medicare and Medicaid and food stamps expansions; and bailouts of Amtrak, urban transit, and schools. The public schools in many blue states were shut down for a year, yet taxpayers have to give the teachers unions $100 billion. Explain that one.

The Congressional Budget Office calculates all of this will add $20 trillion of new debt spending over a decade — and that is with a massive tax increase.

COVID-19 has somehow given a new license to even the nuttiest leftist ideas. So, we have Democrats speeding forward with a plan to raise tax rates to more than 50 percent and implement welfare benefits that can pay families more than $100,000 in annualized wage equivalent benefits. The government could hit and remain above 50 percent of GDP, matching the European socialist nations.

Spending programs that were once scoffed at with price tags in the billions of dollars are now sailing through with trillion-dollar budgets. Moreover, COVID-19 has unleashed Modern Monetary Theory, meaning that the federal government apparently has a no-limit credit card.

COVID-19 is all but over, and the toll has been awful. Life expectancy fell in 2020 for the first time since World War II. Tragically, the “cure” — or should I say, the carnage — of the Biden post-COVID-19 progressive experiment might, in the end, be far more devastating and long-lasting than the terrible disease itself.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Despotic Democrats Announce ‘Carbon Border’ Tax to Raise Prices on Consumers

Behind the Vaccine Veil: Doctor cites ‘whistleblowers’ inside CDC who claim injections have already killed 50,000 Americans

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

CRICKETS CHIRP: Benchmark Inflation Measure Hits Highest Level In 30 Years

The coup is in the rear view mirror for the communist-usurpers and their march of destruction is at full tilt.

Benchmark Inflation Measure Hits Highest Level In 30 Years

Factoring out food and energy costs — which rose by 24.2% and 0.9% respectively — the metric saw a 3.5% increase, therefore reaching its highest level since July 1991.

By  Ben Zeisloft • Jul 30, 2021 • Daily Wire •

The U.S. Department of Commerce revealed that a key inflation metric rose to its highest level since the early 1990s.

According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index — which the Federal Reserve uses as a key guide for monetary policy decisions — has risen 4% between June 2020 and June 2021.

Factoring out food and energy costs — which rose by 24.2% and 0.9% respectively — the metric saw a 3.5% increase, therefore reaching its highest level since July 1991.

Beyond rising inflation, American households increased their expenditures. The Bureau of Economic Analysis explains:

The estimate for June personal income and outlays reflected the continued economic recovery, reopening of establishments, and continued government response related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Government social benefits associated with pandemic-related assistance programs declined in June. The full economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic cannot be quantified in the personal income and outlays estimate because the impacts are generally embedded in source data and cannot be separately identified.

Real disposable income, however, decreased by 0.5% in June despite an increase in personal income.

A similar report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics revealed that “average hourly earnings” in the United States have risen year-over-year by 3.6%. However, when considering inflation — specifically through the Consumer Price Index, which has risen year-over-year by 5.3% — “real average hourly earnings” have fallen by 1.7% over the past year.

An American making $50,000 per year would therefore witness his annual earnings fall by $850.

As The Daily Wire previously reported, the Federal Reserve is refusing to taper its aggressive monetary stimulus despite the accelerating inflation rate. A statement from the Federal Open Market Committee after the conclusion of its most recent two-day meeting confirms that the bank will keep targeting a near-zero interest rate and purchasing $120 billion in assets every month.

President Joe Biden likewise holds the position that rising inflation is a temporary phenomenon.

“I want to be clear,” he said in a recent speech. “My administration understands if we were to experience unchecked inflation over the long-term, that would pose a real challenge to our economy. So, while we’re confident that isn’t what we’re seeing today, we’re going to remain vigilant about any response that is needed.”

The Department of Labor is scheduled to reveal its data for July inflation on August 11…

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

President Trump Raises More Than Any Ex-President in History: $82 MILLION

But “Biden” got the most votes in American history.

Trump Raises More Than Any Ex-President in History: $82M

Reporting an unprecedented haul, former President Donald Trump has raised more than $82 million in the first half of 2021 and has $102 million in the war chest from his political action committees, according to Federal Election Commission filings.

By: Newsmax, August 1, 2021:

Trump is the first former president to report nine figures in donations for his political operation, Politico reported.

All this comes despite bans from Big Tech and social media platforms, making the achievement even more notable.

The period reported is from Jan. 1 to June 30 of this year, as the former president has battled obstruction of election fraud investigations and constantly rebuked the struggles of the Biden administration, including the border, pandemic, foreign policy, and inflation.

Trump-affiliated political action committees raised nearly $82 million in the six months from 3.2 million contributions, Axios reported from a representatives’ emailed statement.

“The committees have approximately $102 million cash on hand,” the statement added.

The rough total dollars and contributions averages out to be around $25.63 per donation.

The president has not decided to run for office again, but he has teased it and said “antiquated” campaign finance laws are keeping him from making an official campaign announcement.

Trump’s major fundraising arms are the Save America PAC and his Make America Great Again PAC and the majority of his funds raised are being stockpiled and not spent, The Washington Post reported.

“This man has no intention of going away,” Dan Eberhart, a major Republican donor who has been critical of Trump, told the Post. “To me, the $64,000 question is how much money he’s going to spend on primaries. Is he going to save it for himself, or is he going to go completely nuts on five different House races and spend a tremendous amount of money?”

“It seems like he’s going to go all out for his chosen people.”

That means spending to bolster Trump-endorsed Republicans in the 2022 midterms to help the Republican Party take back the House and Senate majorities.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

DEADLY SHOTS! Former Pfizer Employee Confirms Poison in COVID ‘Vaccine’ [Video]

EXCLUSIVE! Karen Kingston, a former Pfizer employee and current analyst for the pharmaceutical and medical device industries, came forward with indisputable documentation that should be shared with the ENTIRE WORLD!

The inoculation being referred to as ‘COVID Vaccines’ is a poisonous death sentence, and nobody should subject themselves to the shots.

©Stew Peters Show. All rights reserved.