The Biggest of Bets

Back in 2010 when Obamacare was being debated Nancy Pelosi made a statement that will long linger in history.

When being questioned about the wisdom of rushing the bill through Congress on strict party line votes without full transparency and a debate about what was in the bill, Pelosi said this.

"We have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it."

Source: https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/03/09/pelosi-pass-health-reform-so-you-can-find-out-whats-in-it

This week an FDA advisory committee recommended the Pfizer Covid vaccine be authorized for "emergency use" for children ages 5-11.

The FDA and CDC are expected to follow the recommendation with formal authorization within the next week.

Interestingly, the FDA group conceded in its discussions about the vaccine that it does not know the long-term risks to kids.

One of the voting members said this as the reason for his affirmative vote.

He sounded like he was channeling Nancy Pelosi.

"We are never going to learn about how safe the vaccine is unless we start giving it. That's just the way it goes."

We are now openly experimenting on millions of children in a mass clinical trial?

It is true that all vaccine and drugs have to be tested at some point on humans.

However, these trials are usually carefully staged and limited to numbers necessary to balance clinical needs while limiting the risks to large populations groups if there are any adverse events or effects.

For example, the polio vaccine was first developed in 1952 but full approval was not granted for use for all children until eight years later.

A large trial was undertaken in 1954 but the administration of the vaccine was suspended in 1955 after it was found that some children were contracting polio from the vaccine produced from one manufacturer. 

This was true even though early evidence showed that the vaccine was effective. However, was it SAFE?

You can see how polio cases dropped after the introduction of the vaccine in this chart.

Have we seen anything that in any way resembles this chart with the introduction of the Covid vaccines?

For context, consider the fact that there are 28.5 million children in the United States between the ages of 5-11.

There have been 97 total deaths among children in this age group with Covid in the last 22 months.

Almost every one of these deaths has involved a child with a significant contributing comorbidity (cancer, heart defect, congenital abnormality, etc).

Source: https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1453514170859655173/photo/1

During the same time period there have been 5,716 deaths of children from all causes. That means that 98.3% of the deaths of children over the last 20 months have been from something completely removed from Covid.

The CDC reports that between March, 2020 and August, 2021 just 562 out of 28 million children had been hospitalized with Covid. Most had serious underlying medical conditions such as chronic lung disease, neurologic disorders or obesity. This was a slide that was shown at the FDA meeting that convened to discuss authorizing the vaccine for children.

Source: https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1453428437264252938/photo/1

I also found it interesting that 68% of hospitalizations were Black and Hispanic children. Is this because many in these populations do not have primary care physicians and are more likely to go to hospital emergency rooms for care? Is there another reason?

It is also likely that almost half of those hospitalizations involved admissions to the hospital for another condition and a positive Covid test was discovered when the child was admitted to the hospital. This was the conclusion of an American Academy of Pediatrics study of Covid cases for ages 0-17 earlier this year.

All of these data points makes me wonder why would we have even contemplated vaccinating children in the first place?

The risk to children from Covid is infinitesimal and we have known that for a long time.

The other interesting fact to contemplate is that CDC data indicates that children in the age 5-11 cohort are more likely than any other population in the United States to have been exposed to Covid and developed natural antibodies to the virus.

The CDC estimates that 42% of children ages 5-11 had infection induced seroprevalence as of June, 2021. This estimate was before the recent Covid infection wave we have seen over the last several months so that number is undoubtedly higher today.

Note that natural seroprevalence in the 5-11 age group is almost 3 times that of those in the 65+ age group.

Why are we vaccinating children with limited knowledge of the risks when the potential benefits are so much smaller than in the older populations?

When the polio vaccine was rolled out, who did we vaccinate?

Did we vaccinate everyone? No. 

I got the polio vaccine in the late 1950's but they did not vaccinate my mother, father and grandparents.

Do you know why that was the case?

They were not considered at significant risk because of prior natural immunity.

I had always wondered why polio spiked up so significantly after World War II in the United States. I found this answer in "The History of Polio".

It is likely that polio has plagued humans for thousands of years. An Egyptian carving from around 1400 BCE depicts a young man with a leg deformity similar to one caused by polio. Polio circulated in human populations at low levels and appeared to be a relatively uncommon disease for most of the 1800s.

Polio reached epidemic proportions in the early 1900s in countries with relatively high standards of living, at a time when other diseases such as diphtheria, typhoid, and tuberculosis were declining. Indeed, many scientists think that advances in hygiene paradoxically led to an increased incidence of polio. The theory is that in the past, infants were exposed to polio, mainly through contaminated water supplies, at a very young age. Infants’ immune systems, aided by maternal antibodies still circulating in their blood, could quickly defeat poliovirus and then develop lasting immunity to it. However, better sanitary conditions meant that exposure to polio was delayed until later in life, on average, when a child had lost maternal protection and was also more vulnerable to the most severe form of the disease.

Similarly, it seems that the strong immune systems of children are well suited to quickly fight off Covid based on everything we know.

Why then do we want to risk interfering with a vaccine that might somehow alter or damage the natural immune system with unknown longer-term consequences for the child and society? 

How many children were included in the Covid vaccine trials? A shockingly, low number.

All of the data below is taken directly from the FDA Briefing Document on the Emergency Use Authorization for the Pfizer vaccine to be administered to 5-11 year old children in the United States.

There were only 1,527 children in the main clinical trial (out of a population of 28.5 million children 5-11 in the United States) who were given the vaccine. There were an additional 757 participants who received a placebo in the trial.

The participants in the vaccine trial were only observed for efficacy and safety of the vaccine for a mere two months!

Two months with 1,500 children? That is the sum total of looking at the safety and efficacy of the vaccine?

What kind of clinical trial is that?

Most vaccine trials last for years. That was the case for the polio vaccine when the threat to children was far greater than that posed by Covid today.

Is it any wonder that the FDA committee member said we have to start giving the vaccine to children in order to find out if it is safe?

What were the efficacy results?

No children died from Covid in either the vaccine arm or the placebo group.

No children had to be hospitalized in either the vaccine arm or those who got the placebo. 

All cases were mild. There were no severe cases in either the vaccinated or unvaccinated groups.

There were 19 total confirmed symptomatic cases of Covid in the 2,250 in the total trial (.0084 infection rate).

3 were among those who were double vaccinated. 16 were in those that were not.

This equates to what Pfizer calculates to be a 91% vaccine efficacy.

However, in absolute numbers, the fact is that 741 of 757 placebo participants were not infected during the clinical trial. In other words, 97.9% were not infected with Covid despite the fact they were not vaccinated.

Yes, those vaccinated had a better result in not being infected. Only 16 out of 1,500 got Covid who were double vaccinated--about 1%--were infected over the clinical trial period. However, the trial went on for only two months. In adults, we are finding that vaccine efficacy wanes considerably over time and is low enough after six months that boosters are now recommended for many who have already been vaccinated with two doses.

A study by Cornell University researchers found that protection dropped to 20% 5-7 months after the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine.

A Swedish study on the effectiveness of the Covid vaccines shows that they have ZERO effectiveness after eight months and may actually INCREASE susceptibility to Covid infection after that. You can read an analysis of the the study here.

Protection is good for the first 90 days (the period the original vaccine trials ran for) but protection dropped quickly thereafter. The child trials were only run for 60 days.

The crucial question is whether the benefit of the vaccines are worth the risks for children?

Below is the actual model from the FDA briefing document on the EUA request for the Pfizer vaccine for 5-11 year old children on benefits/risk outcomes under different scenarios.

It projects that under most model scenarios 1 million children will have to be vaccinated to prevent one death from Covid.

Source: https://www.fda.gov/media/153447/download

The way models usually work, consider this a best case scenario for the vaccine.

The risks of the vaccine look particularly high for males.

Under Scenario 3, which assumes assumes Covid incidence similar to what we saw in June, it is projected there would be over 4x more hospitalizations with boys from myocarditis with the vaccine than from hospitalizations with Covid!

What about other long-term risks of the vaccines? These were not modeled because the fact is no one knows what the true long-term risks are of these vaccines. They simply have not been in use long enough to determine that. 

For a 75-year old, that unknown long-term risk may be outweighed by the near-term benefit of some form of protection against severe Covid and death.

What about a 5 year old who has an entire life ahead of them?

Nobody really knows.

Do the risks outweigh the benefits?

Every parent is going to have to make that judgment as it now stands.

If that is where it ends, so be it.

However, taking that step could inhibit the child's immune system from providing the natural protection against other competing respiratory viruses for the remainder of their lives ("Original Antigenic Sin").

For society generally, mass vaccination of children could prove disastrous as they are the essential reservoir of building herd immunity against this virus and any direct mutations.

This view is summarized in this substack post on the topic of Original Antigenic Sin and how this relates to mass vaccination of children.

The most dangerous thing to do, at this point, would be to vaccinate children. The virus is not a threat to them, and if they are infected by the new forms of SARS-2 that are sure to emerge every winter, we will begin to establish – through them and the as yet unvaccinated – the layered immunity that is the only way of coming to terms with SARS-2 in the longer term. As long as the vaccinators are permitted to continue their radical and increasingly insane campaign, though, nothing will improve. Indeed, their policies threaten to bring about a semi-permanent pandemic state for generations to come.

 

My personal judgment is that the risks of these vaccines for children FAR OUTWEIGH any benefits. That takes account of both individual and societal risks of the vaccines.

The problem that we will soon face with the FDA decision is that states, localities, school boards and others are undoubtedly going to take this action and use it to mandate the vaccines for children.

"The FDA and CDC say it is ok." "They say our children need this."

In so doing, free choice is going to be replaced with coercion, threats and public castigation.

The Oakland, CA  Unified school district has already set a January 1 deadline for students 12 and over to be vaccinated. The vaccine for those ages 12-18 is still only authorized for emergency use for these ages.

Source: https://abc7news.com/oakland-unified-school-district-vaccination-ousd-student-vaccine-mandate-board-schools-deadline/11176364/

Students who do not take the Covid vaccine have to switch to an independent study program or unenroll from school.

70% of students in the school district are African American or Hispanic.

If you think the subject of vaccine mandates has caused division and discord already, you haven't seen anything that compares with what is coming if they try to mandate the vaccines for children.

You can be sure that parents who have chosen to not to take the Covid vaccine are not going to vaccinate their children.

However, there is undoubtedly a very LARGE number of parents who took the Covid vaccine who are not going to consider doing the same to their children right now.

Only 27% of parents in this recent survey suggest they are definitely going to get their child vaccinated.

30% say definitely not. 5% say they will vaccinate their children only if required.

Many parents right now are indicating that they want to take a "wait and see" attitude on whether to vaccinate their child. (33% in the survey above)

This includes this M.D., MPH scientist on Twitter who states that he is in that category and is happy to let those parents who are eager to knock down the doors to get their child vaccinated to allow him to see how the experiment unfolds.

I hope it goes well for those parents who line up first with their children and knock the doors down to get them vaccinated.

I hope it also goes well for our society.

However, I have found that placing bets based on HOPE rarely pay off.

And this looks to be an awfully BIG BET based on all of the facts and data before us right now.

Strategically Senseless

The supply chain is breaking down.

Inflation is surging.

The border is in chaos and immigration enforcement is nonexistent.

Energy prices are soaring.

The burden of federal budget deficits grows by the day.

China is building nuclear-capable hypersonic missiles and launching satellites that may be capable of grabbing and crushing U.S. satellites.

There are so many challenges facing the United States today where smart strategies are necessary to address the problems that grow more serious by the day.

What have Joe Biden and Kamala Harris been working on?

Despite all of the problems we are facing right now they have chosen to spend their time and attention on developing a National Gender Strategy.

Isn't that great to know?

What is the strategy supposed to address?

This strategy addresses barriers faced by those who belong to underserved and historically marginalized communities that have long been denied full opportunity: women and girls of color, LGBTQI+ people, people with disabilities, and all of those whose lives are affected by persistent poverty and inequality.

Ensuring that all people have the opportunity to live up to their full potential, regardless of gender identity or other factors, is not only a moral imperative. It is a strategic imperative—a continuation of our national journey toward justice, opportunity, and equality set forth in our creation—that will advance prosperity, stability, and security at home and abroad in the years to come.

These are examples of those who are among those the gender strategy is focused on.

The woman migrating with her children to flee gender-based persecution and seek a safer life.

The transgender athlete who dreams of the chance to compete free from discrimination.

However, didn't Biden and Harris just subject millions of Afghan women to a lifetime of gender-based persecution at the hands of the Taliban due to their ill-conceived strategic withdrawal from that country?

In addition, how does allowing a biological male to compete in an athletic competition with women advance gender equity for females?

When speaking about opportunity, Biden and Harris also seem oblivious to the fact that women are now the ones with the "opportunity" advantage in the United States.

Women make up a record 60% of the students in college today according to a recent article by The Wall Street Journal.

It is projected that if the trend continues two women will earn a college degree for every man in the next few years.

Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/college-university-fall-higher-education-men-women-enrollment-admissions-back-to-school-11630948233

 

This education gap, which holds at both two- and four-year colleges, has been slowly widening for 40 years. The divergence increases at graduation: After six years of college, 65% of women in the U.S. who started a four-year university in 2012 received diplomas by 2018 compared with 59% of men during the same period, according to the U.S. Department of Education.

In the next few years, two women will earn a college degree for every man, if the trend continues, said Douglas Shapiro, executive director of the research center at the National Student Clearinghouse.

No reversal is in sight. Women increased their lead over men in college applications for the 2021-22 school year—3,805,978 to 2,815,810—by nearly a percentage point compared with the previous academic year, according to Common Application, a nonprofit that transmits applications to more than 900 schools. Women make up 49% of the college-age population in the U.S., according to the Census Bureau.

A recent op-ed in The Week reveals what should be self-evident to anyone paying attention to these trends over the last decade or so.

The burgeoning gender gap is an open secret in higher education. With none of the fanfare that accompanies their pursuit of racial diversity, many institutions give an admissions advantage to men. One reason is that administrators fear women are also less likely to enroll when the male student population drops below 40 percent.

Women's success in admissions isn't only a dilemma for colleges trying to balance their books. Because elite institutions hire almost exclusively college graduates, campuses are the point of departure for female dominance of publishing, the culture industry, and areas of the corporate world — particularly the massive human resources industry. 

Skeptics might observe that the upper tiers of these fields remain dominated by men. That's right, but largely a generation effect. Today's non-profit trustees, tenured professors, and executive editors began their careers decades ago, when college student bodies were more equally divided (and in some cases, exclusively male). It would be surprising if the gender ratio in upper management remained the same in another 20 years. 

We are not just talking about undergraduate degrees.

Women now make up the majority of medical students.

Women make up the majority of law students.

Females have made up more than 50% of dental school graduates since 2019.

Women also already hold about 75% of all of the Human Resources managerial positions in the United States.

Are we to believe that these women in HR, who are setting the compensation structures, pay scales and advising others on hiring pay, annual increases and promotional increases, are discriminating against other women?

At one point in my career, I had specific responsibility for Benefits and Compensation for a Fortune 500 corporation. The vast majority or people I worked with in this role were women. I can also tell you that not once did gender ever enter into any compensation decision that I was a part of. Not once was there any thought that if a woman was in a job that she would be paid less than a man.

As is the case with so many issues, the private sector and normal market forces are taking care of a problem that needed to be solved. More can always be done but what has already occurred in the last several decades is pretty remarkable when balanced against the previous 200 years of our history.

As is also the case, the federal government is arriving with a "strategy" that is already well on its way to being fixed.

However, what kind of opportunities are there going to be available to anyone if we lack a reliable supply chain, affordable and accessible energy, open borders, hyperinflation and federal debt requirements that crowed out all private capital?

Why do we always have leaders trying to solve yesterday's problems? 

Why aren't we focusing on the truly BIG problems that affect EVERYONE?

How many years will it be before someone realizes that it is just as harmful to have men underrepresented in college and in positions of power as it is for women?

It is interesting that the National Gender Strategy does not discuss any strategies for one gender that represents half of the American population.

The facts suggest that gender equity may take on a whole new meaning within a decade or so based on current trends.

Is the National Gender Strategy considering this?

In the section of the national strategy on "Ensure Equal Opportunity and Equity in Education" it is stated that women represent the majority of college students. However, there is not one word about doing anything to encourage and better equip men for college.

What is mentioned as an important priority?

In the United States, girls—particularly girls of color, girls who are English Learners, girls with disabilities, and LGBTQI+ youth—face unique challenges in school. For example, Black girls experience disproportionate rates of school discipline—often for discriminatory dress-code and hair violations—and criminalization. Black girls and other girls of color, girls with disabilities, and LGBTQI+ youth are overrepresented in school-based arrests that foster a school-to-prison pipeline, among other harmful outcomes.

The National Gender Strategy is concerned about a school-to-prison pipeline for women?

Have they looked at the gender breakdown from the Federal Bureau of Prisons of those incarcerated in federal prisons at the current time?

Source: https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_gender.jsp

The National Gender Strategy also seems to be more concerned about females in other countries than males in our country.

Globally, over 132 million girls are out of school, and a persistent gender gap in secondary education leaves girls without basic literacy and numeracy skills, at risk of child, early, and forced marriage, and with limited economic opportunities.

Meanwhile, as stated above, who was recently responsible for a number of those girls being denied access to school?

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/17/taliban-ban-girls-from-secondary-education-in-afghanistan

 

The Taliban have effectively banned girls from secondary education in Afghanistan, by ordering high schools to re-open only for boys.

The edict makes Afghanistan the only country on earth to bar half its population from getting a secondary education. 

Isn't it comforting to have such great STRATEGIC thinkers in charge? 

Strategically senseless? That is being charitable right now.           

Mysteries, Puzzles and the China Box

As much as I would like to write about something other than Covid it continues to be hard to ignore.

It persists in our lives every day.

Covid is also a subject that consistently results in more views when I write about it. This tells me that many are still very interested in seeing facts that they may not see elsewhere.

Winston Churchill was asked in 1939 what role the Soviet Union might ultimately play in World War II.

His reply has become a popular response over the years to other puzzling, mysterious, complex and hard to understand topics and questions.

"It is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma."

That statement could certainly also be applicable to Covid.

You could say the following quote might describe Covid even better.

"It's a mystery. Broken into a jigsaw puzzle. Wrapped in a conundrum. Hidden in a Chinese box."

Hidden in a Chinese box? So true regarding Covid.

These words were those of The Riddler in a Batman comic book, The Long Halloween.

Let's look at the puzzles and mysteries of Covid in this edition of BeeLine.

Oceania Now Has More Covid Cases Per Capita Than South America

For most of the pandemic Australia, New Zealand and the South Pacific islands that comprise Oceania have had the lowest rates of Covid cases in the entire world.

South America has had some of the highest rates.

That has now changed. 

Oceania now has about 50% more cases per capita than South America.

Australia and New Zealand are both dealing with higher numbers of confirmed cases than any time during the pandemic.

This is despite the fact that both countries have had some of the strictest lockdown measures in the world and high vaccination rates.

Covid Infections-Vaxxed vs. UnVaxxxed in UK

The UK has much better national health reporting systems than the United States. This would seem to follow in that it has a national health care system under centralized control of the UK government.

Public Health England has a weekly Covid surveillance report in which it reports Covid infections by age and by vaccination status.

This chart shows Covid infections by age group and vaccination status from weeks 36-42 in the UK.

Source: https://twitter.com/tlowdon/status/1451419487421353987

It shows that a large number of the Covid cases in the UK over the last 7 weeks have been among those under age 18 who were unvaccinated. Of course, the majority of those in this age group were ineligible for the vaccination. No one age 15 and under in the UK was fully vaccinated thru Week 42. Less than 20% of 16-18 year olds were fully vaccinated.

However, for those age 30 and higher, Covid infection rates are actually higher in those vaccinated than in those unvaccinated. These are infection rates per 100,000, not absolute numbers, since the vast majority of those in these age groups are vaccinated. For those ages 65+ in the UK well more than 90% are fully vaccinated.

For context, consider that for those age 70-79 in the UK in weeks 38-41, there were 27,360 total Covid cases. 658 were unvaccinated, 24,916 were fully vaccinated, 227 were partially vaccinated, and 1,559 were unlinked meaning they did not have a Vax status. Of those with Vax status, 96.6% of the cases were fully vaccinated, .9% were partially vaccinated and 2.5% were not vaccinated.

Source: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1027511/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdf

What I find even more interesting about the chart above that shows trends over weeks 36-42 is that is appears that cases per 100,000 are generally increasing among the vaccinated while cases among the unvaccinated are decreasing among those age 30 and higher.

Why are we seeing this?

The same UK report does support the argument that vaccination may provide protection against death from Covid for older age groups.

Source: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1027511/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdf

However, it raises further questions about the potential benefit of the vaccine compared to the risk for those under age 50 as I have pointed out in these pages since the vaccination program began. The difference in risk of death for those vaccinated or not vaccinated for those under age 50 is almost indistinguishable.

For example, I wrote this on January 28, 2021 at a point that the vaccines has just been deployed for general use a month earlier and we were getting the first VAERS reports on adverse events.

Looking at the data, I would have a hard time recommending anyone under age 50 take the vaccine right now. This seems even more true for females. I just don't see the benefits outweighing the potential costs.

I can't say that subsequent data has made me change my opinion on the risk/benefit equation of vaccinations for those under age 50.

This is particularly true now for those under age 30 (particularly males) and the risks of myocarditis with risk apparently being higher with the Moderna vaccine. Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Iceland have all suspended use of Moderna for those 30 and under until more research can be done.

Meanwhile in the United States we are now authorizing the vaccine for children as young as 5 years of age?

Why Are Deaths Among 15-44 Age Groups Rising in U.S. and Europe?

Deaths are rising among the 15-44 age groups in the United States and Europe in 2021 and it does not appear connected to Covid deaths.

This is a chart showing excess deaths in Europe in 2021 compared to the previous five years and the baseline.

Overall excess deaths in Europe are running just slightly lower in 2021 than 2020.

Source: https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/#excess-mortality

However, in ages 15-44,  deaths have been running higher all year and have increased substantially since the middle of the year.

Source: https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/#excess-mortality

Excess deaths in the age 25-44 age group also spiked shortly after the middle of the year. Note that U.S. data lags the reporting from Europe.

Source: https://twitter.com/Covid19Crusher/status/1452208570959863818/photo/1

What is the reason for the excess deaths? Drug deaths? Suicides? Interventions due to Covid?

Another interesting factoid in the Europe data is that excess mortality in Europe for the first half of 2021 for ages 0-14 years was running below the baseline and below all of the previous four years. It increased above the baseline beginning in July but has not still not increased beyond the excess deaths levels in 2019.

Source: https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/#excess-mortality

Again, who can unequivocally state that that the benefits of vaccinating children exceed the short-term and long-term risks?

What is the "Best" Vaccine?

This question has been asked a lot since the three major vaccines in the United States were first introduced.

A research paper was published recently that looked at breakthrough infections in 620,000 U.S. veterans in the period February 1, 2021 to August 13, 2021.

Source:https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.13.21264966v1.full.pdf

That study found each of the vaccines had diminished efficacy over time.

Moderna held up the best over the period studied

Pfizer was next.

J&J/Janssen was effectively useless after five months.

Extrapolate those curves out a couple more months and you can understand why Boosters are being pushed so hard. 

In a normal world, a vaccine that is not at least 50% effective to prevent disease or transmission for at least one year would have never been authorized for use.

The China Box

Of course, the biggest mystery and riddle wrapped in the conundrum and jigsaw puzzle of Covid is how the country it all originated in has almost totally avoided its effects?

The United States has had 2,035x the number of cumulative cases that China has had Per Capita.

South America 1,313x.

Europe 1,260x.

World  461x.

Asia  251x.

Oceania  84x.

What is hidden in the China box????

Now That I Think About It...

Campus Reform recently did video interviews at the University of Florida asking students if they were in favor of ethnic and race-based quotas in college admissions and hiring decisions by businesses.

View the video via this link if it does not play in your browser.

Almost all of the students stated they were strongly in favor of diversity and equity in making sure that all groups were represented in proportion to their representation in the community.

It is interesting to see how quickly the students agree to the narrative about diversity and quotas. It is almost as if they have been told this for the last 12-15 years in school.

They were then asked whether they believed that same principle should be applied to sports teams at the university.

For example, should the University of Florida field a football team based on quotas?

The students just as quickly stated that quotas made no sense in sports. Those that played should be those with the most skill and talent. Quotas made no sense. You needed to look at each individual's ability.

The students were then shown what the Florida offensive starting lineup would look like if it was based on the makeup of the overall student body at the university.

This is the starting offensive lineup for the Gators in 2021.

None of the students had a problem with the lack of diversity on the football team. They all stated it should be based on who is the best.

The students were then asked if they believed that to be the case for the football team and other sports teams, why would they want their school or workplace to be less than the best by making decisions on something other than skill, talent or ability?

It seemed to be an "AHA" moment for the students.

In the end, they agreed that quotas made no sense just to have "diversity."

How did they explain the change in their views?

They said this.

"NOW THAT I THINK ABOUT IT".

Isn't that the core issue underlying a lot of the problems we have today?

Not enough people are really "thinking about it".

Not enough are applying any kind of critical thinking skills.

Even worse, we are living in a world today where we are often being told not to question anything.

People are discouraged from thinking for themselves or challenging the prevailing narrative.

We are being told what to think and any thinking to the contrary is not allowed.

The "science is settled".

"We have to trust the experts."

"Our problems will be solved if we just ____________ (fill in the blank of any liberal progressive wish).

I came across an interesting example of that this week when I saw the news that Washington State football coach Nick Rolovich had been fired for refusing to take the Covid vaccine as he was deemed to be non-compliant with both university and state policies.

Rolovich was the highest-employee in the state of Washington making an annual salary of $3.2 million per year. He was in the second year of a 5-year, $15.6 million contract meaning he is giving up $10 million for his principles.

That is an awful lot of money.

I have a lot of respect for anyone who is willing to put their principles that high above money.

Rolovich clearly did not make this decision lightly and without a lot of thought (and most likely) prayer.

Rolovich is 42 years old and appears to be in excellent physical shape.

I imagine he has done his research on his mortality risk from Covid which the latest CDC data shows is .0004276 for the age group 35-44 over the last 20 months.

Source: https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1450968142818287618/photo/1

Despite that, I saw someone react to this news on social media with this snarky comment.

"I guess he will now have plenty of time to do his "own research".

Someone gives up $10 million and this person suggests that there is something wrong about thinking for themselves?

Do you know hard it is to think for yourself rather than succumb to group think?

Have you ever seen this photograph from 1936?

Source: https://allthatsinteresting.com/august-landmesser

Who was REALLY THINKING about what they were doing in 1936 Germany?

It made me wonder what would occur if someone came along and offered $3.2 million in cash now and another $9 million over the next three years for anyone that agreed TO NOT TAKE THE VACCINE?

"Now that I think about it..."

We might actually see some real critical thinking if it was put in those terms.

How long would the line be to sign up for that money?

Why should it require that?

Thinking for yourself is free.

However, there are way too many today that want those who are "thinking" for themselves to pay extraordinary costs for doing so.

Think about it.

Monday Meanderings-10/18/21

Another edition of Monday Meanderings looking at interesting factoids that may make you say "hmmm", "ahah" or bang your head against the wall.

Small Business Outlook Not Good

I wonder what happened in 2017 that gave small business such a positive outlook?

We know what happened in early 2020 for that outlook to fall but why is it heading even lower in 2021?

I wonder.

Source: https://twitter.com/LizAnnSonders/status/1447923132019453966/photo/1

Job Happiness With Younger Workers Not Good Either

Over 60% of the 18-34 age group voted for Joe Biden and the Democrats.

Why aren't they happy working?

The decline started right after Biden took office?

Did they think they would not have to work and stimulus money would continue forever?

Prices of Food

CPI- Food Index.

What inflation?

Source: https://twitter.com/asymmetricbets/status/1447391322852270083

According to the White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki this is because of the "progress" that the Biden administration has made with the economy.

"We're at this point because the unemployment rate has come down and been cut in half,"..."because people are buying more goods, because people are traveling, and because demand is up, and because the economy is turning back on."

I get dizzy with that much SPIN. 

Energy Prices

A chart of prices for oil and natural gas over the last 12 months.

Oil + 96%

Natural Gas +157%

Oil (blue/left scale) and Natural Gas (orange/right scale) Prices Over Last 12 Months
Source:https://www.macrotrends.net/2500/crude-oil-vs-natural-gas-chart

Winter is coming and oil and natural gas become pretty important at that time of year.

More progress I guess.

The Rise, Fall and Rise of Covid Cases

There is a cool data visualization that someone has done on the 7-day average of Covid cases from the beginning of the pandemic to early October time lapsed over 60 seconds.

It gives a great perspective on how the virus has moved seasonally and regionally over time irrespective of interventions.

Here is a screenshot from October 1, 2020.

Here is a screenshot from October 1, 2021.

What jumps out at you?

Cases in both years are clustered more predominantly in the northern states as the weather gets cooler and people spend more time indoors.

However, we had many more cases in 2021 than in 2020.

This is after almost 80% of the adult population has received at least one dose of the vaccine that we were told was going to end the pandemic.

Is this more progress?

By contrast, here is the screenshot for August 1, 2020.

Cases clustered more in the Sunbelt where people are seeking air conditioning to beat the summer heat.

Here is the screenshot for August 1, 2021.

By the way, Florida which was the hot spot in August is now ranked 49th in per capita cases (tied with CT) among the 50 states despite employing no interventions--no mask, vaccine or other mandates.

The U.S. states and territories with the lowest 7-day averages in cases per 100,000 per the latest New York Times summary.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/covid-cases.html

The big question right now is what the map is going to look like on December 1, 2021?

This is what it looked like on that date last year.

Approximately 80% of those age 12+ should be double vaccinated by December 1. Millions will have had boosters. We will have started vaccinating children as young as 5 years of age. Untold numbers will have been terminated from their jobs or not allowed to go into a restaurant or other public space for not agreeing to the vaccine mandate.

If the map doesn't look almost completely green at that time is someone going to admit that something is not working as designed?

If Only There Was A Vaccine For Hopelessness

The Biden administration has mandated that all military service members be vaccinated against Covid or risk being terminated from duty.

This headline puts the lunacy of that mandate in perspective.

More U.S. military members died of suicide in one quarter of the year than have succumbed to Covid in over a year and a half and it makes sense to discharge those who don't want to be vaccinated?

The Navy, in particular,  must be getting nervous about the loss of highly trained pilots, SEALs, nuclear and language specialists due to the mandate because it is now telling sailors that they may be liable for paying back all of their training costs if they don't comply.

Training costs for pilots and SEALs and other specialities can run into the millions of dollars.

Discharge is no longer a sufficient threat?

Is this real life? 

We have entered the Twilight Zone.

No masks allowed for Halloween. Required every other day.

If you doubt we have entered the Twilight Zone consider this directive from the Wheaton North High School in suburban Chicago.

No masks allowed for Halloween.

Masks required every other day of the school year.

Nothing to prevent the clear identity of the student?

Benefits and Risks 

I have written multiple times in these pages about the fact that every medical intervention carries benefits and risk that must be weighed.

That is particularly true for the Covid vaccines.

The benefit/risk profile is different for everyone. 

It may make a lot of sense for someone older. It may make little sense if younger.

Despite that fact, we have heard a constant narrative that the vaccines are safe and effective for EVERYONE. That will soon include children as young as 5 years of age.

I am reminded of a physical exam I had with my physician when I was in my late 30's where he told me I should take a daily low aspirin as a preventive measure against a heart attack or stroke. He told me I was at the age where I should start that regimen and continue it for the rest of my life.

This is advice that has been generally given for decades. It was SCIENCE.

Until now.

It seems that it has now been decided that the risks of the intervention outweigh any benefits.

It only took them 40 years to reach that conclusion.

Why would there be any reason to have any questions or concerns about a new vaccine, using new technology, that was authorized for emergency use faster than any drug or vaccine in history?