Freedom Day aka Discrimination Day

The great conservative Christian hope, Dominic Perrottet fails at his first hurdle. He becomes the first Australian political leader to ever mandate medically-based discrimination. Those infected who’ve been vaccinated can mingle in pubs, cafes and gyms. Those uninfected who haven’t been vaccinated can’t. Go figure.

My first day on Monday of being unclean. Passed my local pub, the Oaks Hotel Neutral Bay. Quite crowded. Mostly youngish people who faced no risk from Covid yet are all vaccinated. Status checked at the door. Can’t go in, not credentialed.

I broke the law today (Tuesday). Sat in an oft-frequented café – the owner doesn’t check. But I ordered my coffee in a takeaway cup so that I could scarper if I saw the fuzz. It’s a $1000 fine. And probably more for the café owner. Strange times.

I’ve noticed how little media conservatives care about medical apartheid. They just rabbit on about Freedom Day in NSW. Freedom for some; hang the others.

Andrew Bolt is disingenuous. Argues that the unvaccinated can stay at home if they like but shouldn’t be allowed to prevent everyone else from being free. I almost vomit at this duplicity. Doesn’t want to own his previous comments that the unvaccinated should continue to be locked up. Ergo he twists his argument.

Of course, his argument is twaddle. The unvaccinated largely form a cohort who never wanted anyone locked up at any time. What a ponce Covid has made of him; as it has of so many putative conservatives.

Fair (Work) Lady says it all

“The statements by politicians that those who are not vaccinated are a threat to public health and should be “locked out of society” and denied the ability to work are not measures to protect public health. They are not about public health and not justified because they do not address the actual risk of COVID. These measures can only be about punishing those who choose not to be vaccinated. If the purpose of the PHOs is genuinely to reduce the spread of COVID, there is no basis for locking out people who do not have COVID, which is easily established by a rapid antigen test. Conversely, a vaccinated person who contracts COVID should be required to isolate until such time as they have recovered…All Australians should vigorously oppose the introduction of a system of medical apartheid and segregation in Australia. It is an abhorrent concept and is morally and ethically wrong, and the anthesis of our democratic way of life and everything we value.”

Fair Work Commission Deputy President Lydall Dean. Minority decision Fair Work case 27 September. Wonderful; nothing more need be said.  

Covid passports must be date stamped

In the Weekend Australian, Cameron Stewart, known Trump hater, wrote that, “an unvaccinated person is five times likelier to spread the virus.” No source for this definitive assertion. Typical of today’s shoddy journalism. I searched and found the likely source. It is a well-publicised CDC study dated 24 August.

The study’s sample was 43,127 infections which occurred in Los Angeles County during the period from 1 May to 25 July. Using outcomes as at 25 July, the study, among other things, concluded that the rate of infections among the unvaccinated was five times (4.9 actually) the rate among the vaccinated. Incidentally, the study confirmed other studies (from the CDC and Public Health England for example) in concluding that the viral load of the vaccinated and unvaccinated is the same.

Of course, you can’t pass the infection on unless you’re infected. But a first point to make is that this is one very narrow and very specific study. And, as with all studies based on a small sample, it may not be representative and may well have flaws.

Second, account does not appear to be taken of the time since vaccination. A sample of people with an average time of two months since the second jab is likely to give a radically different result than if the average was six months, when the effect of the vaccine will have markedly reduced. So, if Mr Stewart feels safer sitting next to vaccinated people, he’d better ask them how long since they were vaccinated.

Making a sweeping statement, as Stewart does, is entirely inappropriate and ill-founded. Most journalists have become Covid whores. They search around for the fattest wallet. In this case for anything which backs their preconceptions and agendas.  Searching for the truth be damned.

Memo to journos: Please don’t share your medical history

Andrew Bolt, evening after evening touts vaccination. Overwhelmingly those in hospital for Covid are unvaxxed he says; those dying are unvaxxed and so on. And, too boot, he is on the record as effectively supporting medical apartheid. OK, he’s not nearly so far gone as Covid crazies like Greg Sheridan but it’s troubling nonetheless.

Why watch him? He’s good on identity politics, on the ‘stolen generations’ factoid, on climate change hysteria, on transgenderism and men with no shame pretending they’re women in order to win women’s sporting contests, on the perversion of children’s education, and so on.

I just don’t get it. It’s not hard to understand that these Covid vaccines are not like any other. They’re based on novel technology. By definition no longitudinal clinical trials have been undertaken. As I pointed out in a previous post, pregnant women have been recklessly advised to take one or other on scant evidence. They don’t prevent people catching and passing on the virus. And their effectiveness rapidly wanes. Witness the experience of early starter Israel; memo to Bolt and his ilk, not late starter Australia. Be journalists!

On reflection, I can’t recall any commentator on Sky News, whatever the slant of his or her views, who hasn’t shared their personal medical history and told me that they’ve been vaxxed. Who hasn’t, as well, said that they’re pro-vaccine, whatever in the world that means? Are they pro-aspirin too? On the other hand, I can’t recall anyone telling me that they haven’t been vaxxed. Does anyone know of someone? Rowan Dean maybe? I don’t know.

Worth noting. In all of this Steve Waterson, writing in The Australian, is a heroic standout. Such an evident clash of civilisations in the one place and time: Waterson (Reason) and The Australian newspaper (Going rapidly Woke).

To be jabbed or to be a pariah?

A local real estate agent cold-called me today, as they do, to offer me a free valuation of my flat. Did she know of a place I could escape to if I were to sell, I asked? Some island haven perhaps, free of despotic Covid diktats. Anyway, I asked her to call back next year if she came up with anything.  ‘Twas in jest of course.

At the same time, I don’t know how much more of this I can take. And, mind you, I’m not locked out of employment, living in cramped accommodation, with two or three kids to home school. Or a small business person whose debts are piling while his or her doors have been barred shut to customers. Those situations of suffering are too nightmarish for me to contemplate.

My main problem is the mental anguish brought on by the sociopathic idiocy that has laid waste to civil society for eighteen months and which shows no sign of ceasing, if the pathetic roadmaps tell the tale. And, as an unvaccinated person, politicians and woke corporations (meaning nearly all corporations) are about to make my life even more miserable.

I don’t know whether I can hold out. No travel, no pubs, no cafes, no movies, no gym, harried and hounded. So tired, feel like giving in to the body snatchers. How to keep awake? Survival tips welcome.

Jab-a-jab-jab. Are fetuses in the firing line?

This is from the Australian Government’s “COVID-19 vaccination decision guide for people [men get preggers too, don’t you know] who are pregnant, breastfeeding or planning pregnancy,” dated 19 August 2021. Of the key points, this is central: “Real-world evidence has shown that Comirnaty [Pfizer] is safe for those who are pregnant and breastfeeding.”

The “real-world evidence,” mainly relied upon, is the preliminary findings of a study published on the website of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) on 21 April 2021. This is the conclusion:

“Preliminary findings did not show obvious safety signals among pregnant persons who received mRNA Covid-19 vaccines. However, more longitudinal follow-up, including follow-up of large numbers of women vaccinated earlier in pregnancy, is necessary to inform maternal, pregnancy, and infant outcomes.”

Notice the word “preliminary” and the need for follow-up longitudinal studies. But anyway, back to the Government’s decision guide, where it is noted: “This [NEJM] study also reported the pregnancy outcomes for 827 people whose pregnancies were completed. They did not identify any safety concerns for those who received an mRNA COVID19 vaccine in pregnancy.”

Hold on here, subsequently (September 8), the NEJM published a letter on its website validly questioning the statistical methodology of the study. To wit: “As stated in the article [the study], among the 827 participants with a completed pregnancy, 700 received their first eligible vaccine dose in the third trimester. These participants should be excluded from the calculation [of spontaneous abortions] because they had already passed week 20 when they received the vaccination.” In other words, the conclusions of the study are worthless. The study relied upon in the Government’s decision guide for pregnant women.

Now, true, the authors of the study cobbled together additional research (also referenced on the NEJM website on September 8) before reaffirming their conclusion. But, I suspect, there might be more to play out. In any event, are (provisional and qualified) preliminary findings compelling enough evidence to advise pregnant women that the vaccines are safe?

I’m not a doctor. I’m not saying that pregnant women should not get vaccinated. Apparently getting Covid-19 presents distinct risks for pregnant women and their babies. What I’m querying is whether the headlong rush to have everyone vaccinated, is taking away from the abundance of caution which is normally applied when prescribing medicine to pregnant women (and I should add to children).

(PS: For clarification, I am not the Peter Smith, who as a guest of doverObeach, wrote that excellent preceding piece.)

Flying Blind

Just read this pro-vaccine article about booster shots on the BBC’s website. Danny Altmann, professor of immunology at University College London, is extensively quoted.

Quandaries abound. Are booster shots necessary, how well do they work, when should they be given, to whom, should the booster vaccine be different from the original, does the order matter and so on into evidence-less conjecture. A number of quotes struck me. But here are two to conjure with:

“One ghastly thing about this pandemic is that people get cross with us [scientists] because we change our minds, because it’s such a moving target.” [And] “Again, it’s like so many other things – you know that expression, we’re trying to build the aeroplane while we fly it, and doing it all as fast as we possibly can.”

We’re being cajoled, coerced and blackmailed into being vaccinated and soon enough revaccinated and undoubtedly next year re-revaccinated. All the while, scientists are changing their minds and trying to build an aeroplane while flying it. And, feel free to be horrified, they’re vaxxing children and pregnant women. It has not yet been nine months since the first vaccination in Isreal. And, pardon me for asking, because questioning has become verbotten, were children or pregnant women ever included in any trials?

Roadmap to a brave new enlightenment

Under the Gladys Berejiklian’s lauded dispensations, “Only fully vaccinated people and those with medical exemptions will have access to the freedoms allowed under the Reopening NSW roadmap.” For example, the Monday after the 70% target is reached, retail will be opened. Drool in envy Melbournians. If only Dan was so enlightened. If you doubt that tune in to Sky News.

Continue reading “Roadmap to a brave new enlightenment”

Interaction with a pleasant cop

I was pulled up by the police this morning for not wearing a mask. Walking down a lane at the back of the apartment building in which I live, I spotted a police car. The policemen looked directly at me. Unmasked, I looked back thinking I might be operating within the NSW law. I quite honestly don’t know. My aging brain can’t keep up with the changes. Is this a possible defence?

Of course, everyone outside was masked but then most were masked before the recent tightening of the rules. Anyway, nothing happened and I walked on to my local café and ordered a coffee. And there was the police car again. It had snuck up on me. This time I knew I was breaking the law – loitering unmasked immediately outside a café. He called over to me. “Put your mask on.”

“Sorry I forgot,” I said and put on my mask. We waved to each other and he drove off. Strictly speaking he could have fined me $500. That’s the fine set my local member Gladys Berejiklian whose role, I seem to recall, is to represent my interests. Ah well.

If we leave aside the useless and demeaning imposition of masks, the story is a good one. Old style community policing. He operated within the law. He was civil. And implicitly issued a warning rather than a fine. Is there hope in there for us?

Lockdowns our fault, apparently

“The reality is that we can’t live in lockdown forever. We have to live with Covid and that means getting vaccinated as quickly as possible.” Reportedly, said Josh Frydenberg, taking aim on Monday at Australians who refuse to get the jab. Of course, name most every politician and their media cheerleaders from the left or right and you get the same message. It’s a message that they’ve changed in unison.

Continue reading “Lockdowns our fault, apparently”