The combined Clarke/O'Reilly cases hinge on due process rights for tenured teachers, but how the Court of Appeals rules could have broader implications for workers protected by state labor laws.
As of September 2024, we now know that masks don't prevent infection, and the vaccines have a limited window of effectiveness. (Do you know ANYONE who got the vax & did not later get the virus anyway?) What are the implications of those two facts on this matter?
Nothing prevents infection. It is a matter of steps limit the possibility. We don't live in sterile environments.
Masks reduce the transmission distance and likelihood of contraction. When coupled with good hygiene and proper distancing, we know that infection rates are reduced greatly. This has been known for decades. The lack of proper hygiene and the fact that people constantly touch their eyes, nose, ears, and mouth. Do a quick test. Actively count how many times them... you'll be amazed. Now count how many times you touch common surfaces and then touch your eyes, nose, and mouth. Including eating food without properly washing your hands.
We also understand that vaccines do not prevent inoculation. They've never done that. They provide the body with a leg up on its response. In cases of viruses, especially those with fast rapid evolutions, vaccines have limited effective windows. The flu vaccine, for example, is redone yearly. And even then, it's the best guess by virologists.
"When coupled with good hygiene and proper distancing, we know that infection rates are reduced greatly..." What real world study showed that?
The Cochrane review (among other studies) showed that "masking" did not reduce rates of infection. It is of course possible that a correctly and consistently worn RESPIRATOR could reduce rates of transmission if it is replaced at regular intervals, but that assumes that practices that are rarely achieved even with employer supervision and reinforcement. There was essentially NO chance that "community masking" would be done that way.
With respect to my statement regarding the limited window of utility of the vaccine, I ask again:
Do you know of ANYONE who got the vaccine and did not subsequently contract the illness?
I'd had 3 shots before I tested positive for Covid, the most recent one ~ six months before getting the virus. The vaccines were and still are very experimental. We lack good data on how long any protection lasts, and we have no data on any long term effects of the novel mRNA platform affects other systems in the body. We are now told that having had the vaccine makes infections less severe, but I'm not aware of any RCTs which actually show this.
Many more studies exist beyond the covid 19 debate as well.
60 years of settled medical science and practice have verified this.
Additionally, the effectiveness of hand washing has been well known for decades and yet, 70% of adults fall to ask their hands even 4 times a day... BTW the recommendation is 6 to 10.
Yes I do. I also know that everyone's who ever got any vaccine had likely contracted the disease as well. Again... vaccines don't prevent inoculation. Youre attempting to circumvent reality with some simple minded argument. A vaccine gives your body a leg up. It doesn't prevent your body from reacting just shortens the cycle.
Remember, the fever and other "symptoms" are you're bodies reaction to an infection... not the infection itself.
I don't disagree we don't know how long the protection lasts. Although, we know there are many vaccine that have very limited protection times. The adult typhoid vaccine has a KNOWN protection period of only a few months. With boosters required every two years.
We are now finding that certain diseases can have an immuno- compromising effect that may negate some or possibly all of the bodies antibody memory. Measels is one. Studies are now showing that a full blown case of measels could completely erase any antibody memory your body has. Rendering you susceptible to all of the diseases you've built a lifetime creating.
Polio was experimental when it was rolled out. Wild polio is functionally extinct. So why do we vaccinate? Because the threat now lies in the version of polio we created. Does that mean the millions of children who survived, unharmed, weren't worth the experimental vaccine?
Come now. Science is about progress. Progress begins somewhere. Beginnings are always messy.
That's really a question for Jimmy Wagner, but my observation about this topic is that it seems related to the second Beck-Nichols criterion he mentions, namely that the policy must have a legitimate purpose.
I've also seen the question of whether mandates served a legitimate purpose come up in a lot of other cases, and different judges view it differently. The recent ninth circuit decision on the Los Angeles mandate comes to mind as an example in which the judges didn't see the mandate as having a legitimate purpose. (See https://healthfreedomdefense.org/huge-legal-victory-hfdf-wins-appeal-in-ninth-circuit/)
It's hard to say how our Court of Appeals judges will view that issue, but it seems to me that Wagner was smart to address legitimacy by pointing out the fact that even remote teachers were required to get vaccinated, instead of just arguing that the vaccine itself didn't work well. I've seen other judges flat out reject that idea.
Jimmy; continue to fight for what is fair and right. Your argument is strong; especially now, when the adverse effects of the vaccine has become so apparent. I love how you pointed out how the ruling can be manipulated to terminate higher paid workers.
Aimee, THANK YOU for providing coverage where there was none. So much would be lost if you didn't go. You are tireless. See you at Jeremiah Hosea's Presentation on September 29th at MFA! (Linked below). --Joanna from Medical Freedom Alliance (MFA) https://mfany.org/jeremiah-hoseas-host-of-the-bassline-special-presentation-on-september-29-2024-at-130pm-at-mfa/
As of September 2024, we now know that masks don't prevent infection, and the vaccines have a limited window of effectiveness. (Do you know ANYONE who got the vax & did not later get the virus anyway?) What are the implications of those two facts on this matter?
Nothing prevents infection. It is a matter of steps limit the possibility. We don't live in sterile environments.
Masks reduce the transmission distance and likelihood of contraction. When coupled with good hygiene and proper distancing, we know that infection rates are reduced greatly. This has been known for decades. The lack of proper hygiene and the fact that people constantly touch their eyes, nose, ears, and mouth. Do a quick test. Actively count how many times them... you'll be amazed. Now count how many times you touch common surfaces and then touch your eyes, nose, and mouth. Including eating food without properly washing your hands.
We also understand that vaccines do not prevent inoculation. They've never done that. They provide the body with a leg up on its response. In cases of viruses, especially those with fast rapid evolutions, vaccines have limited effective windows. The flu vaccine, for example, is redone yearly. And even then, it's the best guess by virologists.
Your arguments are flawed at their core.
"When coupled with good hygiene and proper distancing, we know that infection rates are reduced greatly..." What real world study showed that?
The Cochrane review (among other studies) showed that "masking" did not reduce rates of infection. It is of course possible that a correctly and consistently worn RESPIRATOR could reduce rates of transmission if it is replaced at regular intervals, but that assumes that practices that are rarely achieved even with employer supervision and reinforcement. There was essentially NO chance that "community masking" would be done that way.
With respect to my statement regarding the limited window of utility of the vaccine, I ask again:
Do you know of ANYONE who got the vaccine and did not subsequently contract the illness?
I'd had 3 shots before I tested positive for Covid, the most recent one ~ six months before getting the virus. The vaccines were and still are very experimental. We lack good data on how long any protection lasts, and we have no data on any long term effects of the novel mRNA platform affects other systems in the body. We are now told that having had the vaccine makes infections less severe, but I'm not aware of any RCTs which actually show this.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10446908/
https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2014564118
https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2021/09/surgical-masks-covid-19.html
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7263814/
https://www.ucdavis.edu/coronavirus/news/your-mask-cuts-own-risk-65-percent
Many more studies exist beyond the covid 19 debate as well.
60 years of settled medical science and practice have verified this.
Additionally, the effectiveness of hand washing has been well known for decades and yet, 70% of adults fall to ask their hands even 4 times a day... BTW the recommendation is 6 to 10.
Yes I do. I also know that everyone's who ever got any vaccine had likely contracted the disease as well. Again... vaccines don't prevent inoculation. Youre attempting to circumvent reality with some simple minded argument. A vaccine gives your body a leg up. It doesn't prevent your body from reacting just shortens the cycle.
Remember, the fever and other "symptoms" are you're bodies reaction to an infection... not the infection itself.
I don't disagree we don't know how long the protection lasts. Although, we know there are many vaccine that have very limited protection times. The adult typhoid vaccine has a KNOWN protection period of only a few months. With boosters required every two years.
We are now finding that certain diseases can have an immuno- compromising effect that may negate some or possibly all of the bodies antibody memory. Measels is one. Studies are now showing that a full blown case of measels could completely erase any antibody memory your body has. Rendering you susceptible to all of the diseases you've built a lifetime creating.
Polio was experimental when it was rolled out. Wild polio is functionally extinct. So why do we vaccinate? Because the threat now lies in the version of polio we created. Does that mean the millions of children who survived, unharmed, weren't worth the experimental vaccine?
Come now. Science is about progress. Progress begins somewhere. Beginnings are always messy.
That's really a question for Jimmy Wagner, but my observation about this topic is that it seems related to the second Beck-Nichols criterion he mentions, namely that the policy must have a legitimate purpose.
I've also seen the question of whether mandates served a legitimate purpose come up in a lot of other cases, and different judges view it differently. The recent ninth circuit decision on the Los Angeles mandate comes to mind as an example in which the judges didn't see the mandate as having a legitimate purpose. (See https://healthfreedomdefense.org/huge-legal-victory-hfdf-wins-appeal-in-ninth-circuit/)
It's hard to say how our Court of Appeals judges will view that issue, but it seems to me that Wagner was smart to address legitimacy by pointing out the fact that even remote teachers were required to get vaccinated, instead of just arguing that the vaccine itself didn't work well. I've seen other judges flat out reject that idea.
Jimmy; continue to fight for what is fair and right. Your argument is strong; especially now, when the adverse effects of the vaccine has become so apparent. I love how you pointed out how the ruling can be manipulated to terminate higher paid workers.
Fantastic coverage as always from Aimee !
That's what I was going to write. 😄