Main | How WHO Became China’s Coronavirus Accomplice »

Monday, April 06, 2020

Friday, April 03, 2020

Screen Shot 2020-04-01 at 9.05.59 AM

By Andy Schlafly & Nancy Thorner – 

Hydroxychloroquine is an approved medication that China, India, and various researchers have recommended for treating the Chinese  coronavirus. So why can’t numerous Americans exposed to the disease obtain this or other promising treatments as people in China and India can?

Liberal regulators impede access to this medication, abbreviated as “HCQ,” in the United States. Democratic Nevada Steve Sisolak issued an executive order Tuesday prohibiting use of HCQ to treat coronavirus outside of hospitals, despite Sisolak being neither a physician nor playing one on television.

And he is not the only liberal impeding treatment of coronavirus.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, a career bureaucrat who fawned support for Hillary Clinton as revealed by Wikileaks, has publicly disparaged use of HCQ for COVID-19 because he said there is merely “anecdotal” evidence of its success.

Regulators in Ohio and Texas have issued emergency orders to limit dispensing of HCQ by pharmacies to treat those exposed to the disease.  Supplies of this cheap, safe medication are mysteriously being held up and many pharmacies cannot obtain it to fill prescriptions.

No one doubts that HCQ is a safe medication which has been successfully prescribed for decades in treating malaria, although some question its effectiveness for COVID-19 based on a recent small study in China where nearly everyone recovered anyway.

Here in the United States, public health bureaucrats wield enormous unchecked power to keep Americans from accessing innovative treatments. Out of frustration Congress passed the “Right to Try” law in 2018, which grants Americans limited access to medication if they are close to death anyway.

That moment can be too late for medication to really help. India has authorized HCQ for asymptomatic caregivers exposed to coronavirus.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) selectively impedes innovation while some of its officials seek lucrative jobs in the pharmaceutical industry. They erect regulatory hurdles fraught with enormous expense.

Pharmaceutical companies seek to maximize profits, and have no incentive to fund studies for new uses of inexpensive, unpatentable medication like HCQ. It is not surprising no large studies of using HCQ to treat a new illness such as COVID-19, because there is no way to recoup the costs of such a study.

Fortunately, the use of medication for a purpose different from the one for which it was approved is lawful and widespread, and new studies are not required. This is known as “off-label” prescribing, by which physicians have successfully helped patients for decades based on their own expertise, the needs of the patients, and reports in medical literature about promising new uses for available medication.

Despite this, the media has misleadingly criticized the prescription of HCQ for coronavirus as an “unapproved” use, and liberal officials lacking medical knowledge themselves have sided with interference rather than innovation. We are in a presidential election year, perhaps the most significant of our lifetime, and the Democrats’ playbook is to impugn and shout down virtually anything President Trump says.

Physicians face threats of being reported to their state medical boards if they dare prescribe HCQ for a coronavirus-exposed patient.  In the case of a patient near death from COVID-19 in a Florida hospital, he had to implore his own physician to prescribe him HCQ over the physician’s reluctance to do so.

The patient had already said his final goodbyes to his family, and this was his last chance.  If his physician had been an employee of the hospital then his hands could have been tied by the policies of the hospital, which might have been to deny treatment by HCQ.

Fortunately, the physician courageously prescribed this anti-malaria medication and the patient quickly recovered, as reported in the New York Post.  But then health care providers oddly denied that his recovery was due to the medication, and insisted that he somehow recovered from near death based on his own immunity.

Such denials, disparagement, and outright regulatory interference tend to chill the discovery and use of any new treatment of a new virus. With politicized resistance to finding a cure using already-approved medication, innovative and effective responses to rapidly spreading new viruses are discouraged.

Over-regulation by the FDA also impedes the available of ventilators. Unlike cars, phones, and most other complex devices available in the free market, the FDA requires its approval before a ventilator may be obtained.

Ironically, more spare ventilators are available in communist China at this time than in the United States, and the Tesla CEO Elon Musk bought some there to donate here. On this issue, too, Democrats like New York Governor Andrew Cuomo try to blame Trump rather than the over-regulation which liberals themselves impose.

President Trump should swiftly end these impediments to treatment and recovery with executive orders prohibiting any such interference during this crisis, and beyond.

Monday, March 30, 2020

Image

NOTE: Illinois Review offers a platform for conservatives to share ideas, information and opinions. Opinion pieces are not to be considered Illinois Review’s position or opinion on topics our gracious contributors submit to share with our readership. We encourage responses and comments in support or opposition.

By Nancy Thorner –

Climate change panic is causing us to destroy our ability to produce efficient and affordable energy, endangering the energy grid needed to power civilization, throwing hundreds of thousands out of work, and causing social havoc for future, if not dubious, environmental gains.

The current hysteria of the Covid-19 panic is causing society to shut down in front of our eyes. Our entire way of life is being upended, if not suspended. The difference between it and Climate Change is merely the speed with which we are willing to pay a price. More here and here

Mitchell Shaw

Mitchell Shaw is a freelance writer and content creator that focuses on matters related to the Constitution and liberty. A privacy nerd since before it was cool, he hosts and produces the Enemy of the [Surveillance] State podcast.
Mr. Shaw had this to say in an article for the New American on Wed., March 18, Surveillance State Seizes Coronavirus Pandemic as Opportunity to Expand.

Shaw cites the advice of Rahm Emanuel to “never let a serious crisis go to waste.” The Surveillance Hawks in both government and Big Tech are seizing the “opportunity” provided by the coronavirus pandemic to increase surveillance of citizens.

As reported by The Washington Post:

“The U.S. government is in active talks with Facebook, Google and a wide array of tech companies and health experts about how they can use location data gleaned from Americans’ phones to combat the novel coronavirus, including tracking whether people are keeping one another at safe distances to stem the outbreak.”

Said Shaw: “With coronavirus quarantines, curfews, and other government-mandated measures leading the news, it is hard to keep up with all that is happening. One thing is becoming clear, though; individual liberties are taking a beating at the hands of the State.”

“If the coronavirus scare continues to put Americans in a position to sacrifice individual liberties, the world that existed less than a month ago may be ancient history. More and more government surveillance and government control may be the “new normal” from which America may never return.”

Alex Newman

Alex Newman is an award-winning international journalist, educator, author, and consultant. Alex has written for a wide array of publications in the United States and abroad. He currently serves as a contributor to WND (World Net Daily), an education writer for FreedomProject Media, a foreign correspondent for The New American magazine, a contributor to the Law Enforcement Intelligence Brief, and more.

The Deep State is weaponizing the response to the coronavirus and putting all our liberties at risk, said international journalist Alex Newman in a video about the weaponization of coronavirus. Almost every agenda the Deep State has been pushing for years is being dramatically accelerated in response to the virus.

As Newman indicated, the government historically has been much more dangerous than the viruses. Giving up our freedoms under the guise of saving us from the virus will not save us from the virus, but it will destroy our liberty and prosperity, harming many more people than the virus.

All agenda items that have been pushed by the Deep State are now being manifested in a way that would have been unthinkable just a few month ago.

The following concerns were expressed by Newman:

Cashless Society Agenda – A move to get rid of all cash, which allows the American people to have sense of privacy. Democrats tried to sneak a “digital dollar” scheme in the stimulus bill. There is already a ​proto-global-currency system in place ​run by the IMF known as “Special Drawing Rights” or SDRs.
Threat by federal and state government to commandeer privately owned resources.
Threat of ​martial law to enforce ​police-state measures to keep people in their homes ​and away from church, work and other constitutionally protected activities.
Talk of mandatory vaccines when ​individuals should free to decide for themselves ​what sort of medicine to take, or not.
An economic collapse in which the Deep State and major banks would come in and scoop up everything for pennies on the dollar, much like what occurred after the stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression
Federal Reserve, as a private cartel of private banks, creates money out of nothing and pumps into economy with interest that must be paid back, much of which is being used to buy real assets (like stocks and bonds) with fake money.’

Such moves could take place under the pretext of dealing with the virus on a global scale, but tyranny is never a good excuse to anything.

Despite Newman’s concerns, he did see a silver lining. This nation will end its dependence on China for its drug manufacturing and American will realize the indoctrination taking place in our public schools and choose to home school their children.

Newman expressed regrets that the American people weren’t better prepared for coronavirus with supplies in their house three months ago.

Mr. Newman’s biggest concern is what the Deep State will do to to force us to surrender our liberties, crash our economy, and fundamentally transform life in the U.S.
Clare M. Lopez

Clare M. Lopez is the Founder/President of Lopez Liberty LLC. She formerly served as Vice President for Research & Analysis at the Center for Security Policy and was a career CIA operations officer. To read more reports by Clare M. Lopez, Click Here.

As Clare M. Lopez wrote in her article published Sunday, March 22, 2020, Yes to Confronting Coronavirus, No to Surrendering Liberty:

“The temptation to turn to government in times of crises is natural.
So is the willingness to allow government to follow its natural inclination to seize ever more power for itself. But in that way lies a slippery slope to socialism — a half-step away from communism/Marxis
That is not the direction a free people want to go in.”

Lopaz then referred to what is before us in Communist China:

Xi Jinping’s regime responded to the outbreak as an utterly ruthless, totalitarian authority: with brutal coercion, deliberate deception, and the censorship, detention, and disappearance of brave medical personnel who tried to sound the alarm.
China is spearheading a global disinformation campaign intended to deny all responsibility for the pandemic and shift blame to the United States.
The most recent piece of CCP’s campaign to shut down truthful reporting was its March 17 2020 decision to expel around a dozen U.S. journalists working for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post.

Although Lopez praised the leadership of President Trump and the administration’s White House Coronavirus Task Force headed by Vice President Mike Pence and the massive public-private partnership harnessing the resources of the federal government together with the incredible capacity of our free-market capitalist system to calm fears, she did have a words of caution:

“We need our government’s help in many ways right now, but government is not the solution. It’s there to help, not to take advantage of this crisis to grow the federal, state, or local bureaucracy even larger.”

Further expressed by Lopez:

After a century of relentless growth, progressives would like to see this behemoth become even more vast, more complex — and less accountable. We must not surrender our own individual liberty so much that Bolshevik Bernie loses the race for president, but that we lose the Republic.
“You never want to let a serious crisis go to waste,” was the war cry of Rahm Emanuel, another socialist progressive. This is an echo of Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals,” which is about the collapse of society and seizure of power. Now, no serious American thinks that President Trump intends to unleash the liberty-crushing arrest, detention, social-credit, or surveillance measures wielded by China. But as we have been warned (by Thomas Jefferson?) “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.”
As Andrew McCarthy wrote recently, “It is not sustainable for government to combat the disease by ordering communal and commercial activity to cease, then trying to compensate increasingly destitute citizens by borrowing and printing money to throw at them.”

Lastly, as we confront this crisis, let us be mindful of just how much authority we are ceding to a centralized government authority. We are a free society. If we relinquish that in a moment of fear, we may not get it back. Progressivism, socialism, and communism await those who neglect that “eternal vigilance.

Dr. Birx pops coronavirus panic balloon

During the coronavirus taskforce briefing on Thursday, March 26, Dr. Deborah Birx rebuked much of the media’s panic reporting about the number of estimated deaths related to the coronavirus and the state of America’s medical supplies.

As to the way the media is reporting about coronavirus, sensational reporting is not only causing unnecessary panic among Americans, but, having accepted restriction to their freedoms as a means to combat the coronavirus, Americans will be less likely to be concerned when other restrictions limiting their freedoms are issued by government.

Monday, March 30, 2020 at 09:35 AM | Permalink

Comments
Comment below or sign in with Typepad Facebook Twitter and more…
powered by Typepad
partnered with iPage
Contact IR
Categories

Abortion
ACORN/SEIU
Brinkman’s Reviews
Campaign 2012
Campaign 2014
Campaign 2016
Campaign 2018
Campaign 2020
COVID-19
Di Leo columns
Durbin
Economy
Education
Energy & Environment
Family & Marriage
For the Good of Illinois PAC
Foreign Policy
Free Markets
Government Reform
Health Care
Hesham Shehab Columns
HPV Vaccination
Illinois Hall of Fame
Illinois politics
Immigration
Interviews
IR 2014 Candidate Survey bios
IR Reviews
Jobs & Labor
Legal Issues & Courts
Masters of Manufacturing
Media
Religion
Second Amendment
Taxes
War on Terrorism

Wednesday, March 25, 2020

NOTE: Illinois Review offers a platform for conservatives to share ideas, information and opinions. Opinion pieces are not to be considered Illinois Review’s position or opinion on topics our gracious contributors submit to share with our readership. We encourage responses and comments in support or opposition.

By Nancy Thorner & Ed Ingold –

Unfortunately, in this wheel of politics, there are two sides diametrically opposed. Conservatives have reached the conclusion that no good will come of destroying the nation, while Progressives are determined to continue the present course of action.

Barely a month ago, the same factions were diametrically opposed on the same issues. The president, they said, was overreacting, being racist, xenophobic, and dismissive of experts who said the virus was no big no big deal. President Trump acted swiftly and boldly, despite the mudslinging, to stem the explosive growth of the disease, as opposed to those countries which chose to ignore history and the medical statisticians. His actions bought time to evaluate the situation more clearly.

We have protected the most vulnerable, and least vulnerable, with the same intensity. We have marshaled our resources to provide for those most severely afflicted and provided for the caregivers who administer that aid. It’s time to heal the nation. The opposition sees things differently, that the nation must remain under lock down until no trace of the disease persists. Those of us raised in the sulfonamide era were told anything that tasted that bad had to be good for you.

After working within a bi-partisan way, Senate Democrats sided with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who proposed a 1120-page coronavirus rescue bill which included a Christmas wish list of Democrats’ pet issues having nothing to do with the coronavirus. Watch here Louisiana Senator Kennedy aptly explain Democrat obstruction on coronavirus relief package with Fox News’s Tucker Carlson.

It is just as well that bailouts have stalled in Congress. Money alone won’t solve the problem, with the disease or the economy. It is better to put our efforts in those directions which will yield the greatest benefit to the nation , not one political party or the other. One side wants to help business put people back to work, while the other wants to pay them to stay away. Our nation is ready and able to go back to work, at least if we act quickly. You can jump in the water to escape a swarm of yellow jackets, but sooner or later you must come up and get stung or drown. You don’t need someone to hold your head under the water.

A Shifting Mood
In the interim since March 16, 2020 when President Trump and the White House Coronavirus Task Force issued new 15-day guidelines to help protect Americans during the global Coronavirus outbreak, a shift of mood has begun. It is whether economic bloodletting is helping the nation in its battle against COVID-19, or hurting.

On March 23, 2020, the 8th day of Trump’s 15-day directive, several thoughtful articles appeared on the Internet which compare the cost vs benefit the continued shutdown to its effect on the COVID-19 pandemic.

Article 1

As George Rasley, CHQ editor wrote on 3/23/2020, When the Collectivist Cure Is Worse Than The Individual Disease:

“There’s no doubt that the Wuhan virus or to satisfy those obsessed with political correctness, the COVID-19 virus, can produce a life-threatening condition, especially in the elderly, those with compromised immune systems and compromised pulmonary function.

There’s also no doubt that basic infection control procedures that hospitals, nursing homes, dentists and many other businesses undertake every day can help minimize the risk of transmission: hand washing, regular cleaning and sanitizing of surfaces, gloves, etc. are standard operating procedure in a host of non-medical industries, such as food service, cosmetology, etc. and they work to prevent infections from being transmitted.

We also now know that there are drugs that are both cheap and available that are efficacious against this new disease. So why are Governors and Mayors, mostly in Democrat-controlled jurisdictions using hitherto unknown executive authorities to shut down all economic activity in their communities? One answer that suggests itself is that, as author and political commentator David Horowitz once said, “Inside every Progressive is a Totalitarian screaming to get out.

What all these extra-constitutional actions have in common are that they are sweeping collective cures for what is an individual disease. And, they help grow the power of the state at the expense of individual rights and responsibilities and constitutional liberty.”

Article 2

Michael Levitt, a Nobel laureate and Stanford biophysicist, began analyzing the number of COVID-19 cases worldwide in January and correctly calculated that China would get through the worst of its coronavirus outbreak long before many health experts had predicted. Now he foresees a similar outcome in the United States and the rest of the world. While many epidemiologists are warning of months, or even years, of massive social disruption and millions of deaths, Levitt says the data simply don’t support such a dire scenario — especially in areas where reasonable social distancing measures are in place. “What we need is to control the panic,” he said. In the grand scheme, he says “We’re going to be fine.”

Levitt believes that the number of cases in the United States is still increasing, but the rate of increase has already begun to slow. If that pattern continues and everyone gets on board with social distancing, we should hit a peak in a few weeks and then see a steady decline. Of course, he also warns us that it might not be the last peak, particularly if everyone goes back to normal interactions immediately.

Article 3

As Chicago’s own Dennis Byrne wrote in Chicagonow.com, The coronavirus cure is worse than the disease:

“Call it science, but it’s still speculation. That’s because every single analysis about the gravity of the coronavirus pandemic is based on a fatal flaw. There’s no way to satisfactorily predict how many people–what percentage of the population–will die from coronavirus. That’s because you can catch the disease, but you may never know it. Neither will doctors, healthcare professionals or experts who are estimating the impact of the pandemic.”

“Without knowing the total number of actual cases, you never, not ever, will be able to determine the percentage of people who die from the disease. You can do a representative sample of the entire population, but as far as I know that hasn’t been done prior to launching the economy killing hide-in-place policies. This, of course, is my opinion. But I’m not alone in it.”

Bryne further notes that when examining the death estimates that involve extremely intricate calculations and poorly supported assumptions, they reveal the shaky foundation on which federal, state and local governments have based policies that in the end may have more far-reaching, long-lasting and destructive consequences than Covid-19

Trump Gets It

“We cannot let the cure be worse than the problem itself,” the president tweeted in caps lock, before announcing the reassessment on March 23, 2020. [Source: Fox News ]

Trump has made it clear he’s not happy about this “cure.” Not only is the economy suffering, but every American who can’t even buy a roll of toilet paper is suffering.

Trump isn’t promising to lift this shutdown, but come April 1 he indicated that something must change, maybe even by Easter to get people back working again.

More and more medical, scientific experts are coming forward to dispute the W.H.O. claims of mortality rate of the covid virus. Trump’s projection of Easter may not be too far off. Source: Haaretz: https://bit.ly/3bsKpC3

Concluding Thoughts

The adage, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” has never been more appropriate. Besides its obvious connection to the COVID-19 epidemic, it applies to the economy as well. It should be clear, to anyone outside the Washington Beltway anyway, that we can’t spend our way to recovery, especially by printing money. That is a recipe for disaster, including runaway inflation. No amount of stimulus will replace getting America back to work.

It would be a grave mistake for Trump to accede to demands from the Left to finance their pet projects in an “offer we cannot refuse,” Instead, The President is seeking ways to get the economy restarted and should be supported heartily in this endeavor. Let us put money and effort into lubrication of the sticky parts of the restart. Maintaining the status quo is not only counterproductive, but ultimately futile. This is not a black or white decision. Any actions must be tailored to the situation, and the effects closely monitored.

Don’t expect Democrats to give up easily. COVID-19 is a crisis they are loathe to waste. The “crisis” in Illinois amounts to about 1200 cases in total and 12 deaths. In the worst scenario, our infrastructure is unlikely to be overwhelmed. The question is whether Pritzker will reopen Illinois for business, or cling to the idea that saving even one life justifies the most draconian measures.

This is the time to lead, follow, or get out of the way.

Wednesday, March 25, 2020 at 11:14 AM | Permalink

Comments
Comment below or sign in with Typepad Facebook Twitter and more…
powered by Typepad
partnered with iPage
Contact IR

 

Illinois Review | Crossroads of the Illinois Conservative Community

aturday, March 21, 2020

The spread of the Coronavirus to the United States is thought to be from an open-air meat market in Wahan, China, although recently China spread the tale that the U.S. Army started the Coronavirus outbreak.

The coronavirus most likely jumped from animals that are not eaten here, such as cats, bats, and snakes. Without globalism, the virus could have been easily contained and eradicated by China. This is not, however the first time that an outbreak of a disease far away from our shores has caused pandemic infections in the US . Examples include SARS (related to the current COVID-19) in 2003 and Swine Flue in 2009. SARS was much deadlier (11%), especially to children. Neither resulted in fatalities in the US.

Perhaps, coincidentally, Wahan is also the site of a top-secret biological weapons development lab. One can only wonder if something so deadly might have come from the warfare lab itself. This is vigorously denied by the Chinese government, and the COVID-19 virus is genetically traceable to infections in certain bats in the area.

Even so, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) has been accused of racism for calling the novel coronavirus that first emerged in Wuhan, China, late last year “the Chinese coronavirus, yet in two of the best-known cases – Spanish flu and German measles – the identifications are not even valid: The geographic source of the flu that killed millions in 1918-1919 was never established, and the disease properly known as rubella was nicknamed German measles only because physicians in that country were first to identify it.

According to Robert O’Brien, the White House national security adviser, China did not initially handle the coronavirus outbreak well, likely costing the world two months when it could have prepared and dramatically limited the outbreak. Rather than using best practices, this outbreak in Wuhan was covered up. Chinese doctors were silenced or put into isolation so that the word of this virus could not get out.

O’Brien further praised Trump’s very bold action. Upon realizing the extent of what was happening, President Trump on Jan. 31 stopped air travel coming in from China. We’ll never know how many lives were saved through Trump’s initial travel ban.

An October 2019 “Global Health Security Index” released by the John Hopkins Center for Health Security and the Economist Intelligence unit noted that the U.S. received a score of 83.5 out of 100for its preparation and ability to handle an epidemic or pandemic, while also cautioning that “no country is fully prepared to handle an epidemic or pandemic.” The next highest, the United Kingdom at 77.9.

Coronavirus facts without spin

Information about coronavirus with its non-stop coverage on TV can lead to confusion. One person who has been listening closely to the news and reading all he can is my friend Ed Ingold, a retired process control engineer from Abbott Laboratories, who has added his experience with biostatistics and scientific methods.

Against this, we have heard an endless stream of accusations and invective against the President by the Democrats and liberal news media. “He’s racist. He’s ignoring the problem. He’s slow to respond. He doesn’t believe in science (because he is a climate change skeptic).” Don’t be surprised if Trump is compared to Hitler, plotting to kill off poor people with disease. What you won’t hear from them are positive solutions.

Recently Ed Ingold shared these thoughts with me:

Trump has lagged behind on response to the disease
China concealed the spreading disease until mid-January. At that time President Trump ordered travel restrictions between the US and China. At the time, Washington Democrats decried this action as “racist” and unjustified. Meetings were held with NIH, CDC and FDA for the best way to minimize its effect. Spread of the disease is inevitable, but these measures can slow it down while better solutions are developed.
Decisions regarding COVID-19 should be left to scientists, not politicians
It takes both science and politics to handle this situation. Scientists can recommend, but only politicians can order travel restrictions and economic response. Further, only high-level politicians can resolve jurisdictional disagreements between large government agencies. For example, the FDA restricted development of diagnostic test kits, and the CDC restricted to whom and when they could be administered. When some test kits proved defective, the CDC refused to allow FDA inspectors on cite to investigate.
Trump wasn’t truthful when he said a vaccine could be ready in 6 weeks, contrary to scientific opinions
Potential vaccines have already been created, and more are on the way. They can be engineered from scratch using genetic data from the viruses themselves. However, it can take 1 to 1-1/2 years to show they are effective and have no harmful side effects before they can be administered on a large scale. Government and academic scientists briefed him on all aspects, and the President took the most optimistic part to reassure the public.
Test kits are needed to combat the disease, and not enough are available
China initially refused to share genetic data on the virus with the West. However, Trump met with government agencies and biomedical industries to expedite their production. In a month’s time, availability went from about 15,000 to several million.
Tests will show who is safe and who is not
It’s difficult to prove a negative. While a test will show who has the disease, a patient passing the test can become infected within hours, days or weeks, and in turn, pass it on to others. The real value of testing is to determine who needs medical attention, and possible quarantine and isolation. Secondly, epidemiology is based on data, and test results provide much of this data.
Anyone who wants a test should get it, for free
Cost of the tests will be completely covered by private insurance, Medicare and Medicaid. However, patients will need a doctor’s examination and prescription based on medical evidence, not merely a wish to be tested.
WHO (World Health Organization) declared COVID-19 a “Pandemic”
This designation is based on how widespread is the disease,that it occurs in many countries, rather than the consequences and morbidity thereof. That said, a pandemic which is deadly is more serious than one which is benign.
Testing will probably show the disease is more widespread than currently thought
This is so, however, it is not necessarily a bad thing. We already know who is seriously ill and who has died from its effects. What we don’t know is how many have the disease with mild symptoms or are completely asymptomatic. While the numbers will increase dramatically with widespread testing, these numbers mean that it is less deadly than currently known (same problems, larger denominator). That’s good news. However, we can guess that CNN will concentrate on the raw numbers rather than the consequences.

Until we know more, the best precautions are to wash hands and avoid close contact with crowds and strangers. Those with underlying disease and advanced age need to be especially cautious. The most serious adverse effects so far have been economic – from fear-based uncertainty and misinformation. We don’t want a return to the middle ages, where a cough in public would arouse crowds with pitchforks and torches.

“Flattening the curve”

The curve is from an epidemiological model. Several references on the statistics of an epidemic are below:

https://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/outbreaks/investigating-outbreaks/epi-curves.html
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/flatten-the-curve-how-one-chart-became-a-rallying-cry-against-coronavirus/ar-BB116U3k
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/10/covid-19-coronavirus-flattening-the-curve

In practice, prophylactic measures only delay the onset, but lower the peak value. In the absence of vaccines and preventive drugs, about the same percentage of the population (60% has been tossed out by CDC) will catch the disease. Consequently. the area under the curves will be the same, despite the change in shape.

Transmission of Coronavirus

We have heard from CDC experts that one person can pass COVID-19 to 2.5 other persons, which is less than twice the rate of endemic influenza (1.5). We have also heard that the infection can be transmitted before the one infected is symptomatic, which is about 6 days on the average.

If we assume that it takes a reasonable period before someone becomes contagious, say three days, one person could spread the disease to over 9500 others in one month.

2.5^(30/3) = 9536

In fact, in the last two months we have seen the number of COVID-19 cases in the US increase from about 100 to a little over 1000, a factor of 10 not 9500 (or 9500^2 = 910 billion for two months). Something is wrong with the assumptions, or something we’re doing is working, maybe both.

Anything which reduces the branching factor (2.5) or increases the period of latency reduces the spread of the disease exponentially. At present, we can’t change the course of the disease, but we can reduce the number of people exposed to the disease in several ways – isolation (quarantine), sanitation (hand-washing), and restrictions on outside sources entering the country (travel bans). These things are precisely what President Trump has done, and they appear to be working beyond expectations.

The “experts” could also be overestimated the rate of contagion and underestimating the period of contagious latency. That’s why data from diagnostic and clinical testing is so vital. It’s okay to err on the side of safety, but it has to be balanced against the high cost of over-reacting. Closing schools, businesses and gatherings is probably over-reaction, and should be re-evaluated in a week or two based on the facts, not hysteria (or politics). In any case, the rate of infection will fall as quickly as they arose as more people survive and gain immunity in the process, reducing stress on ICU facilities, and buying time to develop better treatments and vaccines.

Cutting manufacturing ties with China

80 – 90 % of US antibiotics come from China. America is finally waking up to the fact that we have allowed ourselves to become wholly dependent on China for a great many essential pharmaceuticals and the ingredients that go into the production of several others.

Did those who allowed the Chinese to gain control of our antibiotics, generics and penicillin, really think it was wise to allow our chief competitor to oversee the medical needs of America, including our military?

We reached the moon ahead of the Russians because President Kennedy made sure it happened. It will require President Trump to see to it that our pharmaceutical industry is up to the task of supplying Americans with pills, drugs and capsules, that all carry the Made in America label.

It’s bad enough knowing that the Chinese biological warfare labs may not be the most secure in the world, but the country itself is one huge petri dish. How can it be otherwise when large numbers of their people frequent so-called wet markets where consumers can purchase live animals that can be slaughtered on the spot. The menu includes bats, skunks, snakes, foxes, badgers and hedgehogs.

Coronavirus neither Democrat/Republican

We must forget partisanship and work together for the good of our nation. It certainly didn’t help to have Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and other Democrats denounce every action Trump took to deal with the coronavirus.

For Democrats, nothing they have tried so far has worked to undermine Trump. There only shot was to find a way to bring down the economy. Now that this is happening, they must be crowing over the possibility that the coronavirus virus will be the agent to deny Trump a second term in office.

Recently MIT biologist, Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, who does research almost every day into the immune system, says the fear-mongering by the Deep State will go down in history as one of the biggest frauds to manipulate economies, suppress dissent, & push MANDATED Medicine!”

It’s a bad virus but we can’t shut down the entire world every time there is a pandemic. We can’t do this every flu season. The President has been put under tremendous pressure. The press needs to ease up – talk less and listen more.

Monday, March 16, 2020 at 01:38 PM | Permalink

 

 

By Nancy Thorner  and Bonnie O’Neil

The election of 2020 will be a brass knuckle fight for the future of our nation. It is a given that many members of the press and social media sources will try to suppress conservative voices. This is why it is essential we share not only our opinions but facts with those within our spheres of influence. It is also a given that Democrats will once again use new laws such as ballot harvesting and other questionable election practice to win elections.

It was in 2016 that California Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law a change to Section 3017 of the Election Code that allows any person to collect a mail-in ballot from voters and turn in the mail ballot to a polling place or the registrar’s office. Prior law restricted the practice to just relatives of or those living in the same household as the voter.

As reported by Fred Whitaker, chairman of the Republican Party in Orange County on December 4, 2018 in the San Diego Tribune, GOP losses in the county were the “direct result of ballot harvesting allowed under California law for the first time.”

It took a lawsuit by Judicial Watch to get the state and Los Angeles County to further start removing 1.5 million inactive names from the registration list that could be invalid, as required by the National Voter Registration Act. Judicial Watch also found that the state has more registered voters than it does possible voters. Los Angeles County, it found, “has a registration rate of 112% of its adult citizen population.”

Meanwhile, an investigation by the Sacramento Bee found that California officials “still can’t say whether non-citizens voted in the June 2018 primary because a confusing government questionnaire about eligibility was created in a way that prevents a direct answer on citizenship.”

Is it any wonder that Democrats are now refusing to support even the rudimentary step of securing the southern border? As California has shown, an army of non-citizens can help sway elections. And keeping the border open will only bring in more.

Orange County, CA goes from Republican to Democrat

The new “ballot harvesting law took place for the first time during the CA 2018 Primary Elections. Severely criticized from its inception, many Orange County citizens realized how this new law could easily be abused and difficult for authorities to detect. The ballot harvesting law that permitted anyone to go door- to door and offer to take even strangers ballots to the proper authorities proved to have a chilling impact on Republicans.

The obvious problem many citizens saw from its inception became a reality. The Harvesting Ballot law invites fraudulent behavior due to such a small chance of detection. One could go door-to-door, pretend to be a good citizen, offer to help people fill out their ballot and/or take their ballot to the proper source and save them the trouble of this task. It is surprising how many voters are trusting souls who appreciate such a gesture, without realizing the true motives of the volunteer. The innocent person who surrendered their ballot to a stranger likely never considered the offer was for self-serving purposes rather than an altruistic effort.

Citizens of Orange County had every right to be concerned. The first election after the harvesting law was enacted was an absolute shocker. The Republican Party who had traditionally won the majority of seats lost an unexpected, unprecedented number of seats to their opponents.

Decades long Republican seats were lost to relatively unknown Democrats. Consider what happened to Representative Dana Rohrbacher. As a young and bright Washington D.C. intern, he was given a position within the White House under President Reagan. After leaving Washington D.C., he went home, ran for a federal position, was elected, and held his federal congressional seat for decades.

Surveys taken before the election indicated Dana Rohrbacher in the lead for the office he had held for decades. To everyone’s surprise, a relatively unknown Democrat turned up with more votes and won his seat.

If Rohrbacher’s seat had been an oddity — only one shocking loss — there most likely would not have been a public outcry. However, there were other popular Republicans who lost their seats, after polling had indicated they too were well ahead of their opponent(s).

Voters were obviously puzzled when even the polling results just before the election had indicated most every Orange County, Ca. incumbent was leading. How could the election results have been the very opposite? How could polling have been so wrong? How could so many basically unknown Democrats win what appeared solid Republican seats?

Even more problematic is that the seats were lost to relatively unknown Democrats in Republican areas Republicans concluded the newly devised Ballot Harvesting Law that allowed the public to go door to door and offer to take people’s ballots to the proper authorities, as the one different factor in the was the one different factor in the 2018 Primary Elections.

Such a belief does not seem far fetched for Orange County citizen to have concluded, for it allowed strangers to obtain citizens’ ballots, without any oversight to cause the unexpected and surprising election results. It is not likely a coincidence that after the harvesting of ballots law, election results were the opposite of what was predicted. It seems outrageous that anyone would surrender their ballot to a stranger, but the fact is many did just that.

When those who had enacted the new law were confronted, they gave the excuse they were thinking of people in hospitals, nursing homes, etc. and in need of help. Seriously? Are we to believe this questionable law was enacted for this reason? Reasonable person would conclude that it was an invitation for some to abuse the law for their advantage. Specific “harvested” ballots could easily be deposited in the trash rather than delivered to the proper authority.

The Democrat’s only goal is to defeat Trump to reclaim the White House, win back the Senate and keep the House. Their desire for power and control knows no bounds. Are Republicans ready?

Election fraud

Sometimes referred to as election fraud, election manipulation or vote rigging, is illegal interference with the process of an election, either by increasing the vote share of the favored candidate, depressing the vote share of the rival candidates, or both.

In national elections, successful electoral fraud can have the effect of a coup d’état, democracy protest or corruption of democracy. In a narrow election, a small amount of fraud may be enough to change the result. Even if the outcome is not affected, the revelation of fraud can reduce voters’ confidence in democracy.

Although the proceeding article dealt only with ballot harvesting, there are many other ways for ballot fraud to take place to manipulate and change election results. Because the November 2020 election will be a highly contested race for president, coupled with the desire of Democrats to take back the presidency and even the Senate at any cost, it is a given that fraud will take place in states run by Democrats and in all major cities likewise controlled by Democrats.

Forms of voter fraud to watch for and report to authorities include:

Illegal voting by non-citizen.
Destruction or invalidation of ballots for an opposing candidate or party.
Tampering with hardware of the voting machine to alter vote totals.
Disinformation about polling place.
Misleading or confusing ballot paper.
Ballot stuffing.
Misrecording of votes.
Destruction or invalidation of ballots.

Importance of voter Integrity

As reported by The Heritage Foundation in 2018:

The full scope of fraud in U.S. elections is unknown, and many states do not have in place the policies and procedures to detect and deter voter fraud.

Opponents of election integrity also want to deflect attention away from the broad popularity of the measures they attack.

If Americans cannot say with certainty that their votes will be counted, that the process is free of fraud, and the outcome is valid, what incentive do they have to turn out in the first place?

Unfortunately, the latest news on the election integrity front is less than inspiring.

Simply put, the full scope of fraud in U.S. elections is unknown, and many states do not have in place the policies and procedures to detect and deter voter fraud.

Yet efforts at studying the problem, such as President Donald Trump’s thwarted Presidential Commission on Election Integrity, or proactively addressing the issue, like Ohio’s move to clean up voter rolls riddled with errors, are vigorously attacked and opposed by liberal activists and politicians.

They have spent years insisting, despite mounting, incontrovertible evidence—to say nothing of common sense—that election fraud is nonexistent. They claim that “election integrity” is a smokescreen designed to conceal efforts at suppression and disenfranchisement.

What they ignore, or more accurately, seek to bury, are the inconvenient facts that dispel these narratives. Participation rates have increased in states that have adopted voter identification laws.

When states do pass photo identification requirements, they include provisions that ensure that anyone without an acceptable ID can get one for free.

Opponents of election integrity also want to deflect attention away from the broad popularity of the measures they attack. Voter ID, for example, is so uncontroversial that even in our bitterly divided era, a Rasmussen poll found that 70 percent of likely voters favor it.

They also want to deflect attention away from the bitter truth that each illegal ballot that is cast essentially disenfranchises a lawful voter. That is something no American should tolerate.

With elections, the process matters at least as much as the outcome, and Americans deserve a process they can trust.

Friday, March 13, 2020 at 10:15 AM | Permalink

 

Comments