I am on page 3409 when I write this post. I see pages going to 3414, Is it just pure autismo? Let's see... (I will edit this post after I read 3409-3414)
Edit:
As predicted almost zero valuable information except for the chart with vax efficacy for Omicron. 83.13% pure autismo
It's the vaxx, Victor needs to take it easy or he will have a heart-attack. If he continues to play the sport he won't survive. I can only imagine the carnage we will see when the boosters are mandated for players. The NFL is going to be... America be prepared to see a lot of dead football players.
Forward covers more ground than any other this year
www.afl.com.au
The hard-working half-forward covered the most distance of any player in the AFL so far this season against Hawthorn last Sunday, clocking 17.2km according to figures from the Telstra AFL Tracker.
On average an elite AFL player will run 15km per game, much of the distance in burst sprints. Compared to 10km per game for a soccer player. Every single AFL player will have to be double jabbed with the mRNA vaccines before the new season starts in March.
Die Gesundheitsminister der Länder beraten, ob die Testpflicht für Menschen mit Booster-Impfungen bei 2G plus entfallen kann. Manche Länder verfahren schon so. Gesundheitsminister Lauterbach unterstützt das.
www.tagesschau.de
German health ministers are considering less rules for the boostered. Basically, some places require you to be vaccinated or recovered PLUS you need to be tested. Like my gym, which is highly annoying because it takes another 10 minutes just to get in, and it costs money.
Furthermore, another politician demands that booster jabs should be allowed much earlier (some say even like four fucking weeks after the second jab; mind you that you only count as fully vaccinated two weeks after the second jab, so you'll enjoy a full two weeks of counting as vaccinated before you gotta do the myocarditis lottery again), and that the current certificates should expire much earlier to account for the waning efficacy of the vaccines.
Please, Mr. Bones.
/edit: The best thing is that the Branch Covidians are really pissed off by that because while they're all boostered and vaxx-maxxed, they're also really, really scared by Omicron and don't want fewer boots on their faces.
They'll move officially to a 3 dose vaccination schedule in the next few weeks. 1st jab then second 2 weeks later then 3rd 4 weeks after that, maybe shorter if the dreaded Omicron is running wild. Then a booster every 3 months. This is totally normal and just like the Hepatitis B vaccine, where you have your antibody titres measured before receiving a booster dose 6-12 month after the vaccination if you need it and then you're set for life. Oh and the Hepatitis vaccine actually works. But otherwise exactly the same.
All that's assuming they don't come out with an updated vaccine for Omicron then it'll be another 3 jabs. And for sure you won't count as vaccinated unless you get all the injections on offer.
^Must've been doing the rounds for a while, but this is the best 'big picture' in-a-nutshell explanation I've seen so far. The batshit insanity is merely a bonus.
That is, it's about the only explanation that makes any sense.
I mean, the (accelerating) 'measures' trajectory TPTB seem hellbent on pursuing - in complete contradiction to all previously 'settled science' - has made no sense whatsoever, unless they want to be dragged out into the streets and minecrafted by the mob.
That's what's been bothering me, most recently. Couldn't figure out why - when numerous 'off-ramps' and face-saving opportunities to end the lunacy have been ignored - They chose instead to keep poking the bear. Now I have an answer, at least.
Forward covers more ground than any other this year
www.afl.com.au
On average an elite AFL player will run 15km per game, much of the distance in burst sprints. Compared to 10km per game for a soccer player. Every single AFL player will have to be double jabbed with the mRNA vaccines before the new season starts in March.
They'll move officially to a 3 dose vaccination schedule in the next few weeks. 1st jab then second 2 weeks later then 3rd 4 weeks after that, maybe shorter if the dreaded Omicron is running wild. Then a booster every 3 months. This is totally normal and just like the Hepatitis B vaccine, where you have your antibody titres measured before receiving a booster dose 6-12 month after the vaccination if you need it and then you're set for life. Oh and the Hepatitis vaccine actually works. But otherwise exactly the same.
All that's assuming they don't come out with an updated vaccine for Omicron then it'll be another 3 jabs. And for sure you won't count as vaccinated unless you get all the injections on offer.
Forward covers more ground than any other this year
www.afl.com.au
On average an elite AFL player will run 15km per game, much of the distance in burst sprints. Compared to 10km per game for a soccer player. Every single AFL player will have to be double jabbed with the mRNA vaccines before the new season starts in March.
They'll move officially to a 3 dose vaccination schedule in the next few weeks. 1st jab then second 2 weeks later then 3rd 4 weeks after that, maybe shorter if the dreaded Omicron is running wild. Then a booster every 3 months. This is totally normal and just like the Hepatitis B vaccine, where you have your antibody titres measured before receiving a booster dose 6-12 month after the vaccination if you need it and then you're set for life. Oh and the Hepatitis vaccine actually works. But otherwise exactly the same.
All that's assuming they don't come out with an updated vaccine for Omicron then it'll be another 3 jabs. And for sure you won't count as vaccinated unless you get all the injections on offer.
Are the players jabbed for the current/previous season and if so were there similar incidents? I've been watching football a long time and while there have been incidents of players collapsing/dying on the pitch due to sudden heart issues, it has been happening a lot more this past year, and this is a common view held even by redditors on r/soccer. Prior to Covid, if we're talking about high profile players at the top of their game probably 1 or 2 a decade?
Officially they say the players over-exerted and are overworked, which is a reasonable explanation but still...
Preliminary note -- The extended public slapfight upthread gave me a lot of time to write this. It's long. Hence spoilers so this doesn't entirely rape your monitor and if you're not interested in legal stuff you can skip easier. You're welcome.
(c) Covered entities shall continuously require personnel to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19, absent receipt of an exemption as allowed below. Covered entities shall require all personnel to receive at least their first dose before engaging in activities covered under paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of this section. Documentation of such vaccination shall be made in personnel records or other appropriate records in accordance with applicable privacy laws, except as set forth in subdivision (d) of this section.
(d) Exemptions. Personnel shall be exempt from the COVID-19 vaccination requirements set forth in subdivision (c) of this section as follows:
(1) Medical exemption. If any licensed physician, physician assistant or certified nurse practitioner certifies that immunization with COVID-19 vaccine is detrimental to the health of member of a covered entity’s personnel, based upon a pre-existing health condition, the requirements of this section relating to COVID-19 immunization shall be inapplicable only until such immunization is found no longer to be detrimental to such personnel member’s health. The nature and duration of the medical exemption must be stated in the personnel employment medical record, or other appropriate record, and must be in accordance with generally accepted medical standards, (see, for example, the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services), and any reasonable accommodation may be granted and must likewise be documented in such record. Covered entities shall document medical exemptions in personnel records or other appropriate records in accordance with applicable privacy laws by: (i) September 27, 2021 for general hospitals and nursing homes; and (ii) October 7, 2021 for all other covered entities. For all covered entities, documentation must occur continuously, as needed, following the initial dates for compliance specified herein, including documentation of any reasonable accommodation therefor.
Note that these 2 cases aren't about the de Blasio mandate that was added to the shit stew of mandates a couple weeks ago. This is the amended August mandate that was specific to healthcare employees only.
New York is among a handful of states that require vaccinations for health-care workers without allowing a faith-based exemption. New York’s mandate, issued Aug. 26 by the Department of Health, requires health-care workers to be vaccinated if they are in close contact with patients, residents or other workers. The rule exempts people who have a medical reason for not getting vaccinated.
Two groups of doctors, nurses and other providers contend the mandate violates their constitutional rights. They say they are Christians opposed to the three available vaccines because they have links to cell lines derived from aborted fetuses. They told the court they either have already lost their jobs or will soon lose them.
Two different groups of doctors and nurses (a mix of Protestants and Catholics), in two different lawsuits, that got rolled up and handled together. Plaintiff/defendant briefs for both are attached, along with the court order and Gorsuch's dissenting opinion.
What Are The Arguments?
Patriots:
The nurses in Patriots cited the abortion/fetal stem cell line issue as why they were refusing CoVax. From their brief:
The individual applicants – Diane Bono, Michelle Melendez, and Michelle Synakowski – are New York nurses who have worked throughout the pandemic. They are devout Christians who object to deriving any benefit – no matter how remote – from a process involving abortion, which they believe is morally wrong. App.30, App.45, App.51. Since all three currently available COVID-19 vaccinations use cell lines artificially developed from aborted fetal cells in their testing, development, or production, they cannot receive COVID-19 vaccination without violating their consciences. App.31, App.46, App.51-52.
The other main prong of their attack is arguing that Section 2.61 isn't actually neutral with regards to religion vs non-religion. A "religious gerrymander" means the rule is deliberately designed to disenfranchise or eliminate a specific undesirable group based on religion, much like all those weird spaghetti-string political districts designed to screw over a specific political party.
As the First Circuit recognized and the Northern District of New York held, the evidence shows that the Respondents orchestrated a religious gerrymander to single out religious believers – precisely the type of special hostility that this Court forbade in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Comm’n, 138 S.Ct. 1719 (201. Mills, 2021 WL 4860328 at *9; Dr. A. v. Hochul, 2021 WL 4734404 at *8 (N.D.N.Y Oct. 12, 2021) (holding that § 2.61’s elimination of the religious exemption merely 8 days after the Respondents initially issued a preliminary regulation allowing for religious exemptions was an intentional change in language reflective of a “religious gerrymander”). The
Applicants supply evidence below that the change has its roots in the Respondents’ hostility toward the particular religious beliefs that the Applicants hold, and this key difference between this application and the Mills application makes it likely that another justice will join Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch in granting relief here.
The neutrality argument above I think is interesting, because it calls attention to the fact that the August mandate came out initially allowing a religious exemption, but was quickly amended within days to specifically remove that option. And a few weeks after that change was made, Hochul made a public statement at a religious gathering that may hint at what's called "invidious motivation" behind the abrupt change -- specifically, that her decision wasn't made on neutral, factual grounds, but on sectarian hostility to people with different faith beliefs. (Archive) These remarks from Hochul so far appear to still be the only comments that potentially give a hint as to why the NYC government hurriedly amended the law.
We are not through this pandemic. I wished we were but I prayed a lot to God during this time and you know what - God did answer our prayers. He made the smartest men and women, the scientists, the doctors, the researchers - he made them come up with a vaccine. That is from God to us and we must say, thank you, God. Thank you. And I wear my 'vaccinated' necklace all the time to say I'm vaccinated. All of you, yes, I know you're vaccinated, you're the smart ones, but you know there's people out there who aren't listening to God and what God wants. You know who they are. I need you to be my apostles.
That is a massive no-no, and that starts making this case resemble the famous Hialeah case in Florida (city banned animal sacrifice on health and safety grounds, but one retard behind it made a bunch of public statements about how blocking this religious practice would work great to make the local voudoun/santeria churches go away, Supreme Court said "oh hell no" and overturned it).
The plaintiffs argue that not only is the motivation poisonous and non-neutral, the application isn't neutral either. To wit, you'll note something is missing from Section 2.61 -- any guidance on how the employer handles someone who is granted a medical exemption. It effectively forces removal of someone who refuses the CoVax on religious grounds, but does NOT require a medically-exempted person to be sequestered from patients or the like. An interesting detail to omit, for a mandate that claims the purposes is wholly to keep unvaccinated people away from vulnerable patient populations. Lawyer sass from the filing below:
No question exists that an unvaccinated person poses a risk of contracting and spreading COVID-19. COVID-19 will not walk up to unvaccinated healthcare workers, tap them on the shoulders, and ask them why they are not vaccinated before infecting them. It will not ask them why they are not vaccinated before it turns them into pollinators. In other words, unvaccinated healthcare workers who assert a religious exemption 24 pose the same risks that unvaccinated healthcare workers who assert a medical exemption do.
There's more to the Patriots filing, but I'm going to cut there as the above should get the idea of their argument across, and getting further into the technical legal stuff in their argument is probably not going to interest too many people in the thread and it gets a lot harder to explain it well without detouring into a Constitutional law crash course. I attached their brief to the post for those who want to read the whole thing.
If you do, there's a section in the second half attacking Jacobson, the early 20th century Massachusetts case about compulsory vaccination and government health emergency powers that constantly gets thrown around by tards on the internet that is very interesting if you're comfortable with reading legal arguments. It ties together Roe and Casey v. Planned Parenthood along with a number of very recent COVID related cases to make some plausible arguments about how much power Jacobson has theoretically lost in the courts. (The opposition's brief does argue against this position, unsurprisingly. I attached it, too. I don't have the space to walk through that one too so check it out yourself if you want.) Given the current challenge to Roe, these arguments could end up being very relevant and spicy if and when a CoVax challenge reaches the Supreme Court. I'll probably come back to that stuff and do a writeup if that scenario comes to pass and once I have access to briefs from whichever case ultimately gets there.
Dr. A:
This challenge largely follows Patriots and expands on their arguments, including citing the link to abortion/fetal stem cell stuff as the reason for why they have a religious objection, so I'm just going to pick out a few specific highlights.
They bring up a wrinkle to the damages the plaintiffs would suffer that didn't appear in Patriots - namely, that if you get fired for refusing a CoVax, you lose your rights to unemployment. Nasty. They argue that getting fired AND losing unemployment on top of it is a vicious enough tangible penalty that it can't be handwaved away as an insubstantial burden to their religious practice if you refuse to comply.
Worse, New York now even bars religious objectors who lose their jobs from receiving unemployment compensation. Other workers’ unemployment claims “are reviewed on a case-by-case basis,” but healthcare workers fired over the vaccine mandate without a medical exemption “will be ineligible” for unemployment benefits.
They also make the argument that the revised Section 2.61 has a fatal conflict with Title VII, the federal regulation discussed on numerous occasions earlier in the thread that provides the framework for employers and employees in navigating religious exemption and accommodation in the workplace. Namely, it actually forbids employers from voluntarily granting religious exemptions, even in situations where the employer has concluded that doing so would cause them no serious hassle to do so.
New York’s aggressive position also directly contradicts recent EEOC guidance on Title VII, and it means that Applicants cannot be accommodated on-site, even when their employers previously determined that they could be accommodated without undue hardship.
Their brief also includes another detail that supports suspicion of shitty, potentially impermissible reasoning by Hochul.
Eight days later, on August 26, New York announced an updated version of the mandate. Governor Kathy Hochul explained at a news conference that the religious
exemption was “left off,” and that this omission was done “intentionally.”4 At the same conference, Governor Hochul stated that she is not aware of a “sanctioned religious exemption from any organized religion” and that “everybody from the Pope on down is encouraging people to get vaccinated.”5
Absolutely haram. It's irrelevant what any authority figure in any religion has to say -- all that matters is that the specific people stating they have a religious objection sincerely believe what they claim they're believing. Requiring them to adhere to the opinions or orders of their putative religious leaders would effectively make the secular government a court of Inquisition, making determinations of orthodoxy or heresy. This official statement, in her official governmental capacity, makes the "they're not doing what God wants" statements at the church I cited earlier look even worse. And if you thought it couldn't get any worse, she repeated similar statements at a second church.
How can you believe that God would give a vaccine that would cause you harm? That is not the truth. Those are just lies out there on social media. And all of you, have to be not just the true believers, but our apostles to go out there and spread the word that we can get out of this once and for all, if everybody gets vaccinated.13
6-3, the Supreme Court said "fuck off", without saying anything. They issued a bare order declining to grant injunctive belief. The below is literally the whole thing.
The application for injunctive relief presented to Justice Sotomayor and by her referred to the Court is denied. Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, and Justice Gorsuch would grant the application.
Weird. Four of the justices involved aren't a surprise to me. Roberts I am also not surprised cucked out -- the ACA case seems to have broken his spirit and he predictably rubber stamps anything that protects an exercise or expansion of governmental power. Kavanaugh and Barrett going this way are more concerning. Regardless, the Court declining to intervene with a healthcare employee mandate this incredibly harsh, especially when backed by the loss in unemployment insurance as a penalty kicker, doesn't bode well for mandates relating to this specific job sector.
The federal mandates might still go differently, but if it does it would likely be rooted in reasoning that this is a state/local matter, and that it should be handled at that level of government. I'm going to be in suspense until I see how the non-healthcare private employee NYC mandate challenge goes, as that one is going to be the best hint on what might happen with the broadest federal mandate that the 6th Circuit is handling.
As for the dissent, which is the only actual opinion that was written and published for this case, it including Alito, Gorsuch, and Thomas is expected. The reasoning hits on a lot of the points I covered above -- they think it's motivated by hostility to religious viewpoints (not neutral), and they also think it's massively overbroad.
Maybe the most telling evidence that New York’s policy isn’t narrowly tailored lies in how unique it is. It seems that nearly every other State has found that it can satisfy
its COVID–19 public health goals without coercing reli-gious objectors to accept a vaccine. See Addendum to Ap-plication for Injunctive Relief. Nor has New York “offer[ed]
persuasive reasons” why it, almost uniquely, cannot do the same. Holt, 574 U. S., at 369. To the contrary, as we have seen, what explanations the Governor has chosen to supply
undermine rather than advance the State’s case.
Translation: "NYC, you've gone nuts. Everyone else has figured out less crazy solutions, what's your problem?"
They close with a nice poetic wrapup that warns the other six members of the court they're on track for another Dred Scott tier fuckup, and that everyone needs to get a grip, calm down, and stop letting fear undermine principles. Gorsuch's a pretty elegant writer. I attached his opinion to this post as well. Unlike the four briefs, this one's only 14 pages long and a lot less bogged down in technicalities.
Today, our Nation faces not a world war but a pandemic.Like wars, though, pandemics often produce demanding new social rules aimed at protecting collective interests—
and with those rules can come fear and anger at individuals unable to conform for religious reasons. If cases like Gobitis bear any good, it is in their cautionary tale. They remind
us that, in the end, it is always the failure to defend the Constitution’s promises that leads to this Court’s greatest regrets. They remind us, too, that in America, freedom to
differ is not supposed to be “limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things
that touch the heart of the existing order.” Barnette, 319 U. S., at 642. The test of this Court’s substance lies in its willingness to defend more than the shadow of freedom in
the trying times, not just the easy ones.
We're finally seeing some of the big firms coming out to play. Arnold & Porter was representing a coalition of religious groups who jointly filed an amicus brief in Patriots... who were all against the position that there should be a religious exemption. At first I was surprised to see A&P popping up, especially representing a bunch of nonprofits, until I saw it was anti-exemption and how huge and wealthy some of the NGOs were. Then it all made sense.
Amici are religious and civil-rights organizations that share a commitment to preserving the constitutional principles of free religious exercise and the separation of religion and government. They believe that the right to practice one’s faith is precious, but that it was never intended to override protections for people’s safety and health. Amici therefore oppose applicants’ contention that the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause requires a religious exemption from New York’s vaccination mandate for healthcare workers.
That is a massive no-no, and that starts making this case resemble the famous Hialeah case in Florida (city banned animal sacrifice on health and safety grounds, but one retard behind it made a bunch of public statements about how blocking this religious practice would work great to make the local voudoun/santeria churches go away, Supreme Court said "oh hell no" and overturned it).
Correct! And an underrated little film, Keanu Reeves' wandering Southern accent aside. Was wondering if anyone would catch that. Legitimately a fascinating case IRL as well, and a landmark in 1st Amendment: Free Exercise jurisprudence.
^Must've been doing the rounds for a while, but this is the best 'big picture' in-a-nutshell explanation I've seen so far. The batshit insanity is merely a bonus.
That is, it's about the only explanation that makes any sense.
I mean, the (accelerating) 'measures' trajectory TPTB seem hellbent on pursuing - in complete contradiction to all previously 'settled science' - has made no sense whatsoever, unless they want to be dragged out into the streets and minecrafted by the mob.
That's what's been bothering me, most recently. Couldn't figure out why - when numerous 'off-ramps' and face-saving opportunities to end the lunacy have been ignored - They chose instead to keep poking the bear. Now I have an answer, at least.
Are the players jabbed for the current/previous season and if so were there similar incidents? I've been watching football a long time and while there have been incidents of players collapsing/dying on the pitch due to sudden heart issues, it has been happening a lot more this past year, and this is a common view held even by redditors on r/soccer. Prior to Covid, if we're talking about high profile players at the top of their game probably 1 or 2 a decade?
Officially they say the players over-exerted and are overworked, which is a reasonable explanation but still...
Definitely not. The vaccines weren't available to the under 30's until late September due to vaccine shortages. Combine that with a shit ton of vaccine hesitancy among professional athletes. Rumors are that there are a lot of AFL players who're refusing the jab but aren't being delisted yet as they may consent to the Novovax when it's approved. There's been one player, a devout Christian, who outright refused any vaccine and was sacked by his club.
Bad news is that there's increasing rumbling in the media that the Novovax won't be approved because it 'isn't as good' as the mRNA vaccines. True enough Novovax won't work against Omicron but neither does Pfizer or Moderna. Somehow denying the public a safer vaccine that doesn't work and making them take dangerous vaccines that don't work is pleasing to the Covidians. A just punishment for the doubters of the holy jabs.
^Must've been doing the rounds for a while, but this is the best 'big picture' in-a-nutshell explanation I've seen so far. The batshit insanity is merely a bonus.
That is, it's about the only explanation that makes any sense.
I mean, the (accelerating) 'measures' trajectory TPTB seem hellbent on pursuing - in complete contradiction to all previously 'settled science' - has made no sense whatsoever, unless they want to be dragged out into the streets and minecrafted by the mob.
That's what's been bothering me, most recently. Couldn't figure out why - when numerous 'off-ramps' and face-saving opportunities to end the lunacy have been ignored - They chose instead to keep poking the bear. Now I have an answer, at least.
That's certainly something. I take the Covid clusterfuck as a series of events used to serve particular interests. Denying Trump a second term and enabling fortification of the election through mass postal voting was one. There was certainly a confluence of powerful actors who would do literally anything to be rid of the orange man. Then there's the big one, the debt bubble that was ready to burst in 2020. There's only 3 ways to stop a hyperinflation, massively reduce money supply by stopping quantitative easing and all the other printer goes brrrrr BS, ramp up interest rates or severely repress consumer and business demand. They chose the latter as that meant it was only the nigger cattle who would suffer, lockdowns were the best things that have ever happened to the billionaire class. Of course it only delayed the inevitable as we are all experiencing now. I'm sure they want to lock us all down again but it's probably not feasible unless there is an actual no shit mass death event happening. Watch this space I guess.
Definitely not. The vaccines weren't available to the under 30's until late September due to vaccine shortages. Combine that with a shit ton of vaccine hesitancy among professional athletes. Rumors are that there are a lot of AFL players who're refusing the jab but aren't being delisted yet as they may consent to the Novovax when it's approved. There's been one player, a devout Christian, who outright refused any vaccine and was sacked by his club.
Bad news is that there's increasing rumbling in the media that the Novovax won't be approved because it 'isn't as good' as the mRNA vaccines. True enough Novovax won't work against Omicron but neither does Pfizer or Moderna. Somehow denying the public a safer vaccine that doesn't work and making them take dangerous vaccines that don't work is pleasing to the Covidians. A just punishment for the doubters of the holy jabs.
That's certainly something. I take the Covid clusterfuck as a series of events used to serve particular interests. Denying Trump a second term and enabling fortification of the election through mass postal voting was one. There was certainly a confluence of powerful actors who would do literally anything to be rid of the orange man. Then there's the big one, the debt bubble that was ready to burst in 2020. There's only 3 ways to stop a hyperinflation, massively reduce money supply by stopping quantitative easing and all the other printer goes brrrrr BS, ramp up interest rates or severely repress consumer and business demand. They chose the latter as that meant it was only the nigger cattle who would suffer, lockdowns were the best things that have ever happened to the billionaire class. Of course it only delayed the inevitable as we are all experiencing now. I'm sure they want to lock us all down again but it's probably not feasible unless there is an actual no shit mass death event happening. Watch this space I guess.
I definitely think that COVID-hoax is a cover-up for something bigger. Think: reverse repo in Sep 2019. However, I don't think it was about attack on Trump. Trump is not fighting against Clown World, he is a clown. Probably they decided to temporarily replace Prince Clown with some bumbling dotard so certain failures could be blamed on him, and then Trump comes back as a Lord and Savior.
Trump is connected to globo-homo. He just plays a different role than let's say Pelosi. Pelosi is someone to hate. Trump was supposed to give hope to the pleb and to channel some pent up anger. He fulfilled this role amazingly to a point.
UK is SCRAPPING the red list travel restrictions because "Ministers accept spread of omicron means restrictions are “pointless”" (yet are still voting on restrictions today? On a weird note, my email to my MP got denied and wouldn't go through, had my postcode and all) // First 'real world analysis of Omicron from S Africa shows it is 29% MILDER than the initial covid variant (a) // Genuinely don't know what to make of NHS using hotels and cancelling GP appointments. Cold so bad that grandmas cancer screening is cancelled. Shitshow? (a)
The only way Omicron could be deadly for anyone under the age of 80 or weighing less than 150kg, and what may be explaining the current panic, is if it is some how able to fuck with the vaccinated in particular. They might not know for sure this is happening but they do know it's possible, it's in their own report. If getting a booster is the only way to save some of the vaccinated from a serious illness then I'd encourage them to do so. Yes it will mean being dependent on a drug with shitty side effects to stop from dying but that's the choice they made when they decided to roll up their sleeves. I have absolutely no sympathy. Anyway we'll know in a couple of weeks if this is a thing or not.
If i was double vaxxed i WOULD NOT TOUCH anything more , not boosters ,not flu vaccines nothing
These people have had nuked their immune system and done god knows what to their body. At best the boosters will give them two months before they are back at square one against omricon that doesn't mean another even more oas and ade inducing variant won't pop up . Every single blogger who got this shit right rintrah, steven kirch , el gato malo , geert van den Bosch all of them posted in unison do not take the booster even modified doesn't retrain your immune system . Take the hit now or face worse consequences later .
www.tagesschau.de
www.afl.com.au
. Mills, 2021 WL 4860328 at *9; Dr. A. v. Hochul, 2021 WL 4734404 at *8 (N.D.N.Y Oct. 12, 2021) (holding that § 2.61’s elimination of the religious exemption merely 8 days after the Respondents initially issued a preliminary regulation allowing for religious exemptions was an intentional change in language reflective of a “religious gerrymander”). The
Legitimately a fascinating case IRL as well, and a landmark in 1st Amendment: Free Exercise jurisprudence.
