Covid 19 - Coronavirus - Two Words - "Mystery" and "Virus" from China

[Soul Crusher]

Research Suggests Lockdowns Didn’t Reduce COVID Deaths
epoch times ^ | 25 March A.D., 2021 | GreenMedInfo
Posted on 3/27/2021, 2:37:39 PM by lightman

A review of data from 87 regions worldwide found that in about 98 percent of the comparisons, there was no evidence that lockdowns reduced the number of COVID-19 deaths.

The locking down of healthy people in their homes in order to prevent the spread of disease is an unprecedented public health move that has had devastating effects on the economy and has set a dangerous precedent for freedom and human rights.

If the lockdowns saved millions of lives, most people would feel they could be justified. But if these lockdowns have been ineffective, they’re easily—as Stanford professor Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Ph.D., put it—the “biggest public health mistake we’ve ever made.” Increasingly, research is confirming that lockdowns, in fact, were largely ineffective in reducing deaths from COVID-19, while also causing “catastrophic” harm to the public.[ii]

Bhattacharya is a professor of medicine at Stanford, and research associate at the National Bureau of Economics Research. He’s also a senior fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, and at the Stanford Freeman Spogli Institute. ‘No Evidence’ COVID Deaths Reduced by Staying Home

In November 2020, an international group of researchers released a study in the journal Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine. It was based on a sophisticated mathematical model that found that staying at home, on its own, didn’t have a major role in COVID-19 disease transmission.[iii] Building on this, researchers from Brazil set out to determine the association between COVID-19 deaths per million people and the percentage of people who remained in their residences on lockdown.[iv]

Using a combination of data from Google’s COVID-19 Mobility Reports,[v] Our World in Data,[vi] and the Brazilian government,[vii] including 87 regions worldwide, they used a novel approach for the study, assessing the association between staying at home and the reduction or increase in COVID-19 deaths. Specifically, they noted:[viii]

“If the variation in the difference between the number of deaths/million in two countries, say A and B, and the variation in the difference of the staying at home values between A and B present similar patterns, this is due to an association between the two variables.”

“In contrast, if these patterns are very different, this is evidence that staying at home values and the number of deaths/million are not related (unless, of course, other unaccounted for factors are at play).”

The researchers published their study in Scientific Reports earlier in March. It has encountered criticism and is currently undergoing a type of peer review and discussion, with the publication waiting to hear from all voices before any final conclusions.

Both a restrictive and global analysis were performed in the study. In the restrictive analysis, direct comparison of two regions took place if three of the four following conditions were similar: population density, percentage of urban population, human development index, and total area of the region. The global comparisons included regions and countries worldwide.

In the restrictive analysis, only one comparison (or 3 percent)—between the state of Roraima, Brazil, and the state of Rondonia, Brazil—was significant, while in the global comparisons, only 1.6 percent were significantly different. “Indeed,” the researchers wrote, “the global comparison confirmed the results found in the restrictive one; only 1.6 percent of the death rates could be explained by staying at home.”[ix]

Put another way, in about 98 percent of the comparisons, there was “no evidence that the number of deaths/million is reduced by staying at home.” The findings were backed up by real-world examples taking place at the time. For instance:

“Our findings are in accordance with the dataset of daily confirmed COVID-19 deaths/million in the UK. Pubs, restaurants, and barbershops were open in Ireland on June 29th and masks were not mandatory; after more than 2 months, no spike was observed; indeed, death rates kept falling.

“Peru has been considered to be the most strict lockdown country in the world, nevertheless, by September 20th, it had the highest number of deaths/million.”

They believe the stay-at-home orders represent a case of “exception fallacy,” also known as stereotype fallacy, in which conclusions are made about an entire group based on data or observations from one individual.[xi] Great Barrington Declaration Calls for End of COVID Lockdowns

Bhattacharya, along with Sunetra Gupta, Ph.D., a professor at Oxford University, and Martin Kulldorff, Ph.D., a professor of medicine at Harvard University, wrote the Great Barrington Declaration in October 2020 to call attention to the devastating short- and long-term health effects being caused by lockdown policies and calling for a return to normalcy for those at low-risk.[xii] A number of harms resulting from lockdowns were identified by the team, including:[xiii]

Worse cardiovascular disease outcomes Deteriorating mental health A rise in opioid and drug-related overdoses Increases in dementia-related deaths Catastrophic learning losses for students Increase in all-cause mortality among 25- to 44-year-olds

The imposed social isolation that occurs during lockdowns deprives human beings of their innate need for social interaction. At least 13 studies demonstrate that social isolation increases mortality risk, and many Americans are experiencing mental crises as a result of the lockdowns and COVID fear-mongering being perpetuated by mainstream media. According to Bhattacharya and colleagues:[xiv]

“In Massachusetts, emergency departments have seen about four times more children and teens in psychiatric crisis than usual. One in four young adults in the U.S. seriously considered suicide this past June.”

Since October, thousands of public health scientists, medical practitioners, and researchers have endorsed the Declaration,[xv] which recommends “focused protection” in lieu of lockdowns, putting strategies in place to protect the elderly at high risk from infection while protecting those who are non-vulnerable from the immense harms of “radical” lockdown measures.

Public health, after all, is about more than infection control; it’s intended to look out for the health and well-being of the entire population, they note, adding:[xvi]

“There is more than a thousand-fold difference in COVID-19 mortality between the oldest and youngest. Children have lower mortality from COVID-19 than from the annual influenza. For people under the age of 70, the infection survival rate is 99.95 percent.”

“For the non-vulnerable, who face far greater harm from the lockdowns than they do from COVID-19 infection risk, the lockdowns should be lifted and—for those who so decide—normal life resumed.”

The GMI Research Group is dedicated to investigating the most important health and environmental issues of the day. Special emphasis will be placed on environmental health. Our focused and deep research will explore the many ways in which the present condition of the human body directly reflects the true state of the ambient environment. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Sign up for the newsletter at www.GreenmedInfo.health

References

Newsweek March 8, 2021 https://www.newsweek.com/stanford-doctor-calls-lockdowns-biggest-public-health-mistake-weve-ever-made-1574540

[ii] Newsweek March 8, 2021 https://www.newsweek.com/stanford-doctor-calls-lockdowns-biggest-public-health-mistake-weve-ever-made-1574540

[iii] Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine November 2020, Volume 196, 105642 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169260720314759?via%3Dihub

[iv] Scientific Reports volume 11, Article number: 5313 (2021) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84092-1#Sec5

[v] Google COVID-19 Community Mobility Report https://www.google.com/covid19/mobility/

[vi] Our World in Data, Coronavirus https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus

[vii] Covid.saude.gov.br https://covid.saude.gov.br/

[viii] Scientific Reports volume 11, Article number: 5313 (2021) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84092-1#Sec5

[ix] Scientific Reports volume 11, Article number: 5313 (2021) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84092-1#Sec5

• Scientific Reports volume 11, Article number: 5313 (2021) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84092-1#Sec5

[xi] Enago Academy https://www.enago.com/academy/what-is-an-exception-fallacy-and-how-does-it-affect-academic-research/

[xii] Great Barrington Declaration https://gbdeclaration.org/

[xiii] Great Barrington Declaration, Focused Protection https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30555-5/fulltext

[xiv] Great Barrington Declaration, FAQs https://gbdeclaration.org/frequently-asked-questions/

[xv] The Lancet Respiratory Medicine November 24, 2020 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30555-5/fulltext

[xvi] The Lancet Respiratory Medicine November 24, 2020 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30555-5/fulltext

[Dave D]

Looking back to what I told you all in January 2020...

And now you know.

Gib when you referred to it as an Ebola virus what did you mean? That covid will mutate into a flesh eating disease or simply that it was going to be a pandemic ?

[Teutonic Knight]

Gib when you referred to it as an Ebola virus what did you mean? That covid will mutate into a flesh eating disease or simply that it was going to be a pandemic ?

 & after all of that BS he was "Returning back to Africa" 

[WalterWhite]

Research Suggests Lockdowns Didn’t Reduce COVID Deaths
epoch times ^ | 25 March A.D., 2021 | GreenMedInfo
Posted on 3/27/2021, 2:37:39 PM by lightman

A review of data from 87 regions worldwide found that in about 98 percent of the comparisons, there was no evidence that lockdowns reduced the number of COVID-19 deaths.

The locking down of healthy people in their homes in order to prevent the spread of disease is an unprecedented public health move that has had devastating effects on the economy and has set a dangerous precedent for freedom and human rights.

If the lockdowns saved millions of lives, most people would feel they could be justified. But if these lockdowns have been ineffective, they’re easily—as Stanford professor Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Ph.D., put it—the “biggest public health mistake we’ve ever made.” Increasingly, research is confirming that lockdowns, in fact, were largely ineffective in reducing deaths from COVID-19, while also causing “catastrophic” harm to the public.[ii]

Bhattacharya is a professor of medicine at Stanford, and research associate at the National Bureau of Economics Research. He’s also a senior fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, and at the Stanford Freeman Spogli Institute. ‘No Evidence’ COVID Deaths Reduced by Staying Home

In November 2020, an international group of researchers released a study in the journal Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine. It was based on a sophisticated mathematical model that found that staying at home, on its own, didn’t have a major role in COVID-19 disease transmission.[iii] Building on this, researchers from Brazil set out to determine the association between COVID-19 deaths per million people and the percentage of people who remained in their residences on lockdown.[iv]

Using a combination of data from Google’s COVID-19 Mobility Reports,[v] Our World in Data,[vi] and the Brazilian government,[vii] including 87 regions worldwide, they used a novel approach for the study, assessing the association between staying at home and the reduction or increase in COVID-19 deaths. Specifically, they noted:[viii]

“If the variation in the difference between the number of deaths/million in two countries, say A and B, and the variation in the difference of the staying at home values between A and B present similar patterns, this is due to an association between the two variables.”

“In contrast, if these patterns are very different, this is evidence that staying at home values and the number of deaths/million are not related (unless, of course, other unaccounted for factors are at play).”

The researchers published their study in Scientific Reports earlier in March. It has encountered criticism and is currently undergoing a type of peer review and discussion, with the publication waiting to hear from all voices before any final conclusions.

Both a restrictive and global analysis were performed in the study. In the restrictive analysis, direct comparison of two regions took place if three of the four following conditions were similar: population density, percentage of urban population, human development index, and total area of the region. The global comparisons included regions and countries worldwide.

In the restrictive analysis, only one comparison (or 3 percent)—between the state of Roraima, Brazil, and the state of Rondonia, Brazil—was significant, while in the global comparisons, only 1.6 percent were significantly different. “Indeed,” the researchers wrote, “the global comparison confirmed the results found in the restrictive one; only 1.6 percent of the death rates could be explained by staying at home.”[ix]

Put another way, in about 98 percent of the comparisons, there was “no evidence that the number of deaths/million is reduced by staying at home.” The findings were backed up by real-world examples taking place at the time. For instance:

“Our findings are in accordance with the dataset of daily confirmed COVID-19 deaths/million in the UK. Pubs, restaurants, and barbershops were open in Ireland on June 29th and masks were not mandatory; after more than 2 months, no spike was observed; indeed, death rates kept falling.

“Peru has been considered to be the most strict lockdown country in the world, nevertheless, by September 20th, it had the highest number of deaths/million.”

They believe the stay-at-home orders represent a case of “exception fallacy,” also known as stereotype fallacy, in which conclusions are made about an entire group based on data or observations from one individual.[xi] Great Barrington Declaration Calls for End of COVID Lockdowns

Bhattacharya, along with Sunetra Gupta, Ph.D., a professor at Oxford University, and Martin Kulldorff, Ph.D., a professor of medicine at Harvard University, wrote the Great Barrington Declaration in October 2020 to call attention to the devastating short- and long-term health effects being caused by lockdown policies and calling for a return to normalcy for those at low-risk.[xii] A number of harms resulting from lockdowns were identified by the team, including:[xiii]

Worse cardiovascular disease outcomes Deteriorating mental health A rise in opioid and drug-related overdoses Increases in dementia-related deaths Catastrophic learning losses for students Increase in all-cause mortality among 25- to 44-year-olds

The imposed social isolation that occurs during lockdowns deprives human beings of their innate need for social interaction. At least 13 studies demonstrate that social isolation increases mortality risk, and many Americans are experiencing mental crises as a result of the lockdowns and COVID fear-mongering being perpetuated by mainstream media. According to Bhattacharya and colleagues:[xiv]

“In Massachusetts, emergency departments have seen about four times more children and teens in psychiatric crisis than usual. One in four young adults in the U.S. seriously considered suicide this past June.”

Since October, thousands of public health scientists, medical practitioners, and researchers have endorsed the Declaration,[xv] which recommends “focused protection” in lieu of lockdowns, putting strategies in place to protect the elderly at high risk from infection while protecting those who are non-vulnerable from the immense harms of “radical” lockdown measures.

Public health, after all, is about more than infection control; it’s intended to look out for the health and well-being of the entire population, they note, adding:[xvi]

“There is more than a thousand-fold difference in COVID-19 mortality between the oldest and youngest. Children have lower mortality from COVID-19 than from the annual influenza. For people under the age of 70, the infection survival rate is 99.95 percent.”

“For the non-vulnerable, who face far greater harm from the lockdowns than they do from COVID-19 infection risk, the lockdowns should be lifted and—for those who so decide—normal life resumed.”

The GMI Research Group is dedicated to investigating the most important health and environmental issues of the day. Special emphasis will be placed on environmental health. Our focused and deep research will explore the many ways in which the present condition of the human body directly reflects the true state of the ambient environment. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Sign up for the newsletter at www.GreenmedInfo.health

References

Newsweek March 8, 2021 https://www.newsweek.com/stanford-doctor-calls-lockdowns-biggest-public-health-mistake-weve-ever-made-1574540

[ii] Newsweek March 8, 2021 https://www.newsweek.com/stanford-doctor-calls-lockdowns-biggest-public-health-mistake-weve-ever-made-1574540

[iii] Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine November 2020, Volume 196, 105642 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169260720314759?via%3Dihub

[iv] Scientific Reports volume 11, Article number: 5313 (2021) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84092-1#Sec5

[v] Google COVID-19 Community Mobility Report https://www.google.com/covid19/mobility/

[vi] Our World in Data, Coronavirus https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus

[vii] Covid.saude.gov.br https://covid.saude.gov.br/

[viii] Scientific Reports volume 11, Article number: 5313 (2021) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84092-1#Sec5

[ix] Scientific Reports volume 11, Article number: 5313 (2021) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84092-1#Sec5

• Scientific Reports volume 11, Article number: 5313 (2021) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84092-1#Sec5

[xi] Enago Academy https://www.enago.com/academy/what-is-an-exception-fallacy-and-how-does-it-affect-academic-research/

[xii] Great Barrington Declaration https://gbdeclaration.org/

[xiii] Great Barrington Declaration, Focused Protection https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30555-5/fulltext

[xiv] Great Barrington Declaration, FAQs https://gbdeclaration.org/frequently-asked-questions/

[xv] The Lancet Respiratory Medicine November 24, 2020 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30555-5/fulltext

[xvi] The Lancet Respiratory Medicine November 24, 2020 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30555-5/fulltext

https://www.aier.org/article/study-indicates-lockdowns-have-increased-deaths-of-despair/

Key Takeaways
There is no denying that 2020 has seen a wave of excess deaths. Part of that is undeniably due to Covid-19 which is dangerous to the elderly and relatively mild for younger populations. However, the increase in excess deaths amongst working-age individuals by the tens of thousands shows that there is another killer out there. Deaths of despair due in large part to social isolation. Regardless of whether they think lockdowns work, policymakers must be cognizant of the fact shutting down society also leads to excess deaths. Whether it’s from the government policies themselves or the willful compliance of society enforcing the soft despotism of popular hysteria, social isolation is taking its toll on the lives of many.

[Thin Lizzy]

So does the media have any responsibility? What do you think people in nursing homes do all day? They watch television. And what were they watching during Covid? Nonstop fear and hysteria being peddled by the main stream media.

I’d also be interested to hear about the staffing levels in nursing homes during this time. At one point, the NYPD had people calling in sick at a rate of 20%. I’m sure the same thing is true in nursing homes which already have high mortality rates that would certainly go even higher if they’re understaffed.

[SOMEPARTS]

The media absolutely is clinging to this for eyeballs. No Trump and no Covid = the end of legacy media. This is it, last hurrah.


CDC Director on MSNBC... "I'm scared" and "impending doom" for opening up.

Meanwhile illegals pouring in unchecked but this level of hysteria from the "expert" in the box...

Disinfo level 100 .... Brave New World, 1984, etc.

Remember many people have gotten the "vaccine" - the ones most at risk, we need 60% for herd immunity, etc. .... but we still need to have lockdowns into 2022. Totally bonkers.

They create/name the problem then identify themselves as the only entity able to fix it.

[Soul Crusher]

More liberal lies

[Primemuscle]

Woah woah woah there.... Prime.. are you seriously telling me that you've never seen/heard of Jurassic Park?

I did see the Original Jurassic Park '93 on VHS. Never watched any of the sequels. Guess I didn't pay close attention to the creature's names. 

[Thin Lizzy]

The media absolutely is clinging to this for eyeballs. No Trump and no Covid = the end of legacy media. This is it, last hurrah.


CDC Director on MSNBC... "I'm scared" and "impending doom" for opening up.

Meanwhile illegals pouring in unchecked but this level of hysteria from the "expert" in the box...

Disinfo level 100 .... Brave New World, 1984, etc.

Remember many people have gotten the "vaccine" - the ones most at risk, we need 60% for herd immunity, etc. .... but we still need to have lockdowns into 2022. Totally bonkers.

They create/name the problem then identify themselves as the only entity able to fix it.

It’s all theatre. Venues in NYC are already booking show for the fall.

Notice how the fear and hysteria always gets ramped up around a holiday when people are going spend a lot of money? Like I said it’s about controlling inflation.

[Moontrane]

The media absolutely is clinging to this for eyeballs. No Trump and no Covid = the end of legacy media. This is it, last hurrah.


CDC Director on MSNBC... "I'm scared" and "impending doom" for opening up.

Meanwhile illegals pouring in unchecked but this level of hysteria from the "expert" in the box...

Disinfo level 100 .... Brave New World, 1984, etc.

Remember many people have gotten the "vaccine" - the ones most at risk, we need 60% for herd immunity, etc. .... but we still need to have lockdowns into 2022. Totally bonkers.

They create/name the problem then identify themselves as the only entity able to fix it.

It's the end of the world as we know it
And I feel fine

[Thin Lizzy]

They did the same shit right before Thanksgiving and Christmas:

I see so many smart people scratching their heads about all these ridiculous rules and restrictions  but if you look at the financial angle, it all makes sense.

There’s massive money printing going on. All of these rules are just ways to prevent too much money from getting into the system and resulting in a worldwide hyper inflation.

Thanksgiving is a big travel weekend when people spend a lot of money. The restrictions have a chilling effect and keep people home.

[SOMEPARTS]

It’s all theatre. Venues in NYC are already booking show for the fall.

Notice how the fear and hysteria always gets ramped up around a holiday when people are going spend a lot of money? Like I said it’s about controlling inflation.

It's not working. Go look at building supplies.

7/16" OSB was $7-10 bucks a sheet for 15 years....$36

2 x 4 x 8' over $8....was mid $2 range for 15 years.

250ft roll of 12/2 wire....$98 up 30% in a month.


Hell even Jimmy John's raised their prices. 

[Zillotch]

It's the end of the world as we know it
And I feel fine

x 2

humanity is wholly useless at this point

useless things r discarded

[tommywishbone]

Impending doom. HAHAHAHA. 

Who the fuck ever talks like that. Cowards. Laughable shit.

[Dave D]

It's not working. Go look at building supplies.

7/16" OSB was $7-10 bucks a sheet for 15 years....$36

2 x 4 x 8' over $8....was mid $2 range for 15 years.

250ft roll of 12/2 wire....$98 up 30% in a month.


Hell even Jimmy John's raised their prices. 

The own and plywood process are ridiculous but isn’t a large part of the building supply prices based on lack of availability? Weren’t mills and logging shut down during the pandemic (even though construction sites weren’t)?

[SOMEPARTS]

The own and plywood process are ridiculous but isn’t a large part of the building supply prices based on lack of availability? Weren’t mills and logging shut down during the pandemic (even though construction sites weren’t)?

Haha, yeah and before that it was a hurricane and it was $26. I find it very hard to believe that loggers, trucking and the automated plant that glues up plywood shut down. Real things are going higher as the dollar weakens. People in commodities are smart enough to get in front of it.

I'm not saying that some things that have multiple supply sources might not have issues - but some of this is real fuckity and if masses of people are not going to work over a couple $1400 checks then we are really screwed long term.

[Dave D]

Haha, yeah and before that it was a hurricane and it was $26. I find it very hard to believe that loggers, trucking and the automated plant that glues up plywood shut down. Real things are going higher as the dollar weakens. People in commodities are smart enough to get in front of it.

I'm not saying that some things that have multiple supply sources might not have issues - but some of this is real fuckity and if masses of people are not going to work over a couple $1400 checks then we are really screwed long term.

Good point on the hurricanes, again the price of some of these materials are insane, Trex decking is cheaper than wood. That is crazy to think about.

 *I meant OSB not own

[Thin Lizzy]

Impending doom. HAHAHAHA. 

Who the fuck ever talks like that. Cowards. Laughable shit.

If it were really that bad would it be wise for public officials to create fear and panic? Shouldn’t they be trying to calm people down?

[El Diablo Blanco]

You would think by now that almost anyone that has stepped foot outside their home have gotten COVID and either felt nothing, a bit sick or severly sick.  I don't see how anyone has avoided this shit so why are they talking about a new wave?  With 10's of millions getting vaccinated already shouldn't the number of infections be wayyy down?  What the fuck are people talking about?  Either the vaccines are bullshit or people can get reinfected.  Two things no one has talked about or showed proof of.

Are we just trusting these vaccines actually work based on limited trials?

[Thin Lizzy]

You would think by now that almost anyone that has stepped foot outside their home have gotten COVID and either felt nothing, a bit sick or severly sick.  I don't see how anyone has avoided this shit so why are they talking about a new wave?  With 10's of millions getting vaccinated already shouldn't the number of infections be wayyy down?  What the fuck are people talking about?  Either the vaccines are bullshit or people can get reinfected.  Two things no one has talked about or showed proof of.

Are we just trusting these vaccines actually work based on limited trials?

That these perfectly legitimate questions have never even been remotely broached by the mainstream media speaks volumes.

[Soul Crusher]

You would think by now that almost anyone that has stepped foot outside their home have gotten COVID and either felt nothing, a bit sick or severly sick.  I don't see how anyone has avoided this shit so why are they talking about a new wave?  With 10's of millions getting vaccinated already shouldn't the number of infections be wayyy down?  What the fuck are people talking about?  Either the vaccines are bullshit or people can get reinfected.  Two things no one has talked about or showed proof of.

Are we just trusting these vaccines actually work based on limited trials?

Yup 

[Thin Lizzy]

If they’re also testing people at the vaccination sites that would explain an increase in cases with so many people getting vaccinated.

[G_Thang]

Are we just trusting these vaccines actually work based on limited trials?

Are you talking cure or spiked cels?  Ask the poor souls who had autoimmune responses when the spiked cells invaded their organs.
e

[njflex]

ITS ALL B.S,,ny/nj cases are up but the vaccination rollout is a rousing success really????so keep wearing masks'mandated'by my state and keep this neverending thing going..

[SOMEPARTS]

CNN medical analyst Dr. Leana Wen says people should have their freedoms restricted until vaccinated. No mention if that applies to travel across the Southern US border???

She is of course held in high regard in globalist groups like the Council on Foreign Relations and the World Economic Forum.

Also, price update on materials at Lowes today....

OSB 7/16  $39.xx
2 x 4 x 8'   $8.35
12/2 wire  $121 (!!!)