The Great Barrington Declaration

The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. 

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. 

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

Source

Gender dysphoria is often in fact autism

Gender dysphoria is often in fact autism This is interesting to me as a high functioning autistic. But there are of course many varieties of autism. The tale below sounds partly familiar. I have always had male friends but not so much.

Source: Gender dysphoria is often in fact autism.

How many trans-identified children “desist”? That is, how many identify as transgender for a time, and then eventually stop doing so, prior to medical intervention (as distinct from detransitioners, who return to identifying with their natal sex after undergoing some form of medical transition)? The answer is that no one knows, in part because few experts are keeping track, and in part because what research does exist is highly politicized.

Some trans activists and advocates, for instance, object to the very idea of measuring “desistance” in the first place, on the argument that this approach may discourage a child from embracing a transgender identity. One Canadian trans activist and researcher insists that research in this area is simply “not relevant when deciding between models of care.” Others claim that the idea of desistance is rooted in transphobic “myth,” though research often shows otherwise.

High-end estimates of desistance tended to arise from longitudinal studies of children who first reported gender dysphoria at an early age. The vast majority of those children resolved their gender dysphoria before, or early in, puberty. In one 2021 study published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, for instance, 88 percent of boys with gender dysphoria were found to have desisted by their teens or adulthood (and more than 63 percent were same-sex attracted). These results are consistent with established research; yet, in the current ideological climate, they often are seen as suspect. That’s because the traditional “watchful waiting” approach used by clinicians to treat children who present with gender dysphoria—which tends to be associated with a high rate of desistance—has largely been supplanted by a policy of encouraging social transition, an approach associated with an increase in observed dysphoria. Indeed, several studies show that nearly all children on puberty blockers go on to cross-sex hormones.

IT’S LEFTY BAIT AND SWITCH AND VIRTUE SIGNALING: Banned Books?…

IT’S LEFTY BAIT AND SWITCH AND VIRTUE SIGNALING: Banned Books?

I’ve seen a number of FB memes extolling the virtues of reading banned books and listing books that seem relatively innocuous (which is by design because those creating the lists want you to be surprised by the stupidity of those doing the banning) to most people. However, as with the term “anti-vax” getting thrown in the face of those who are anti-mandate, the term “banned” really has no meaning when you realize that anybody can take that list of books to Amazon, or down to their local Barnes & Noble, or their public library and find and buy or check out every. Single. One.

For a book to be truly banned the government needs to step in and forbid and punish the printing and distribution of a book. Like, oh, say what the Soviets did, or what Kim Jong Un does, or what the CCP does…you know, what totalitarian governments do. I challenge anybody getting their knickers in a twist over “banned” books to tell me which of the books on that list are forbidden to be printed, sold, or possessed in the United States. Go on. I’ll wait.

….

But back to the current self-aggrandizing book banning kerfuffle. Just because a high school or elementary school pulls books from its school library or is asked to pull books, does not mean those books are banned. It means that parents at those schools do not think the book is appropriate for the students at that school. As I asked previously, if you are the parent of an eleven-year old, are you comfortable with them reading erotica? Are you comfortable with them reading about kids “exploring their sexuality” in very explicit ways? Be honest now.

….

So, for all those preening over their “support” for banned books…have you stood up for authors that left has tried to cancel? Which is banning? Have you read books by authors with whom you may find yourself disagreeing? Have you told anybody that the response of “well, they’re just not printing any more of that book because it’s racist, but they’re not banning it” amounts to a soft ban? Have you read Huckleberry Finn? Is it a product of its time? Is that horrifying to you? Do you think that Mark Twain should have known that the future would find his books “problematic?”

If you’re patting yourself on the back for reading books on the lists that are going around, why? Did you, like Russians passing around samizdat risk your life to have that book in your possession? Did you get one copy of the book and then type it out so that the typed copies could be distributed…when carbon paper was illegal to own? Have you ever photocopied a book for someone? Was that illegal where you were?

If the answer to any of the above questions is “no” then you haven’t read a banned book. You’ve read a book that some parents or some leftist, or some Karen didn’t like. Those people aren’t actually preventing you or your kids from reading the book in question, are they? Are other parents monitoring what their kids read? Yes. Is it your problem or your business? No.

Books that get pulled from a school library are not banned. If you are upset with your kids’ school librarian pulling a book, get off your ass and buy a copy and give it to your kid. Tell them to read it and pass it along. Or even better, if it’s that important to you, buy several copies, donate a few to your local public library and put the rest out on your front porch with a “FREE” sign.

Source: IT’S LEFTY BAIT AND SWITCH AND VIRTUE SIGNALING: Banned Books?…

Flashback May 2020 Assault On The White House: 60 Secret Service Agents Wounded, President Trump Taken to Secure Bunker

The Democrats’ January 6 clown show was worse than even I expected. Their hysterical, pearl-clutching, lie-filled response to the events on January 6th, what Democrats are clearly hoping will be their transformative Reichstag moment, is unseemly, phony to its core, and purely and solely political.

We know this because there was no outrage over the leftist rioters who attempted to stop the peaceful transition of power during President Trump’s inauguration.  Not only did anti-Trump leftists riot, attack and injure police, set cars and buildings on fire, but they were later rewarded for this attempt to “subvert Democracy” to the tune of $1.6 million in taxpayer money.

Do you know how many Congressional Democrats (or Republicans for that matter) wailed about our “democracy” on the brink?  Do you know how many of these inauguration rioters were hunted down by the FBI, arrested, beaten and mistreated, and held as political prisoners for over a year?  Do you know how many of them were harboring blueprints of the Capitol building . . . or wait, that was an unconstructed, still boxed, Lego set not a “model” used for terroristic purposes or whatever random lunacy the FBI preened at that time.  If you said zero, you’re right on all counts.

And honestly, I think this clear two levels of justice—one for “righteous” protesters, including those who burned, looted, and murdered their way through Democrat-run cities in 2020, and one for J6 “terrorists”—is the reason that Democrats will never amass anything close to majority support for their January 6th witch hunt.

No matter how many deep state darlings like Liz let’s find a country to bomb Cheney they find to bleat about . . . whatever it is she bleats, they will never have the people’s support for treating what happened on January 6 as if it were Pearl Harbor, 9/11, and the Civil War all rolled into one. I mean, really, that’s just crazy—and visibly desperate—hyperbolic verbal vomit.

This failure to convince the American people of their stance is due, in no small part, to their failure to condemn and pursue the criminals guilty of the far worse violence that took place in an attempt to thwart President Trump’s inauguration.  Or to condemn and pursue with criminal charges the thousands of local, state, and federal crimes committed by antifa and BLM.

Nor did they condemn the multi-day May, 2020 assault on the White House that left at least 60 Secret Service agents wounded and forced President Trump to be whisked away to a bunker for his personal safety.

Source: Flashback May 2020 Assault On The White House: 60 Secret Service Agents Wounded, President Trump Taken to Secure Bunker

Progressivism Destroys Intellectual Honesty

I. Introduction

The 1619 Project, which originated in the New York Times, is the most outrageous fraud on this nation in 100 years. It is nothing more than a race hustler’s post-modernist rewrite of American history, explicitly intended to stir racial resentment in this nation for political ends. That is evil.

II. Wilentz honestly challenges the 1619 Project’s accuracy.

According to Wilentz, the 1619 Project promotes “a narrow, highly ideological view of the American past, according to which white supremacy has been the nation’s core principle and chief mission ever since its founding.” He explains more in a recent article, The 1619 Project and Living in Truth:

III. Wilentz destroys his article’s integrity with his obsessive need to lob entirely false and dishonest attacks against conservatives who have made the same arguments he is making.

IV. As a general matter, Wilentz is either fatally naïve, completely blind, or dishonestly partisan when it comes to the left’s role in creating an intellectual mindset supporting and promoting the utterly fallacious, but very damaging, 1619 Project.

V. The Times’s response to the five historians’ letter is a perfect distillation of the historic dishonesty and modern political activism behind the 1619 Project and American leftism in general.

VI. In the end, when given a choice between wisdom and blind partisanship—the red pill or the blue—Wilentz chose the blue pill and the consolation of aligning himself with a political movement that exists to destroy America — and which ironically enough, also means destroying much of Wilentz’s life’s work.

Source: Bookworm Room

WELL, GOOD: Trump Was Right: UV Light ‘Disinfectant’ Injected Into the Body Shows Promise in COVID P…

Trump Was Right: UV Light ‘Disinfectant’ Injected Into the Body Shows Promise in COVID Patients.

Source: WELL, GOOD: Trump Was Right: UV Light ‘Disinfectant’ Injected Into the Body Shows Promise in COVID P…

Not “drinking bleach”.

Also…

CNN’s Don Lemon Rails Against Misinformation About Covid – By Omitting Key Part of Trump Quote. “However, the clip was selectively shortened to exclude the full quote, which showed that Trump, contrary to popular misconception, did not tell people to inject themselves with bleach in response to Covid.”

The left’s ‘crossing state lines’ canard

T.R. Clancy:

It seems the Left cares about borders after all, depending on the border and who crossed it.

Consider Kyle Rittenhouse’s trial and how the continuing progressive slanders about white supremacism and murder always include the unspeakable fact that he crossed the state line with a rifle.

Rittenhouse didn’t cross the state line with a rifle. And if he had, it wouldn’t have been illegal.

….

Now consider that last week, ten FBI agents with a battering ram showed up before dawn to handcuff the underwear-clad Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe and search his house and cell phone, after having done the same to his fellow journalists. The pretext was a search for Ashley Biden’s diary, but the FBI already knew O’Keefe didn’t have it or have anything to do with its disappearance. Besides, since when does a petty-larceny case local police would manage with a stolen-property report rate a federal investigation?

….

Just before the Project Veritas operation, Attorney General Merrick Garland sicced his FBI on uppity parents who dared to question the hive-mind wisdom of school boards. In what has now been exposed as the product of collusion between the White House and the progressive National School Boards Association, the NSBA sent a letter to Biden claiming the nationwide upsurge in angry parents showing up at school-board meetings made the parents domestic terrorists, requiring an aggressive Security State to stop them.

….

All this makes it no surprise that an obstreperous Rep. Jerry Nadler would immediately claim the Rittenhouse verdict “justifies federal review by DOJ.” This wasn’t just Jerry being spontaneous. The Biden administration always intended to use the DOJ to destroy Rittenhouse on the slimmest pretext if the mob didn’t get its way. Between a brave American jury and a raging mob, the jury cannot be allowed to win. And we can never forget that, like the Pinkertons’ unblinking eye, the Left never sleeps.

Source: The left’s ‘crossing state lines’ canard