They know full well that this guidance is going to pretty much end all mask wearing, vaccinated or not.
But I guess they want people to go back to work.
"WW C"- COVID-19, GLOBAL CASES SURPASS 676 MILLION...CASES 676,609,955 DEATHS 6,881,955 US CASES 103,804,263 US DEATHS 1,123,836 8:30pm 1/28/24
- Thread starter lightbright
- Start date
-
- Tags
- vaccination
They know full well that this guidance is going to pretty much end all mask wearing, vaccinated or not.
But I guess they want people to go back to work.
There needs to be a vaccine passport or someway to prove that people have been vaccinated.
Wont be getting it in the state of Florida or the state of Idaho and couple of others i cant think of.
We were about due for this, though. They couldn't impose any form of lockdown or any other restrictions at this point even if they wanted to. AT some point, they have to open the flood gates and see what happens. Also, it's becoming increasingly unfair to vaccinated people that they have to stay shuttered because other folks are making bad decisions.
About all we can hope for at this point is that variants don't become overly vaccine resistant, and that the vaccinated can help delay the spread of things beyond that. We will never get to that herd immunity number unless something else horrible happens, and while I've said in the past that I almost started rooting for the disease, that's not something I'd want to put on anyone (myself included).
Fuck them. I'm keeping mine on. They have no way of determining who is and who isn't vaccinated and businesses aren't gonna enforce it. Recipe for disaster.
Right.
Basically. Y'all have at it, with the no mask regime and 40% white folks refuse to get vaccinated. Once those variants get active, shiiiiit
They give you a card from the CDC with the dates of inoculation and how many once you get jabbed.
I know. I'm fully vaccinated. Folks done already started trying to make phony cards so that isn't good enough.
After the C-Span Live Showing of The Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee A Spar Between Republican Senator Rand Paul and Top NIAID chief medical advisor to the President Dr.Anthony Fauci has sparked interest among top bio researchers .Top researchers are calling for a real investigation into the origin of Covid-19
A group of prominent biologists say there needs to be a “safe space” for asking whether the coronavirus came out of a lab.
by
May 13, 2021
REUTERS/THOMAS PETER
A year ago, the idea that the covid-19 pandemic could have been caused by a laboratory accident was denounced as a conspiracy theory by the world’s leading journals, scientists, and news organizations.
But the origin of the virus that has killed millions remains a mystery, and the chance that it came from a lab has become the theory that cannot be put to rest.
Now, in a letter in the journal Science, 18 prominent biologists—including the world’s foremost coronavirus researcher—are lending their weight to calls for a new investigation of all possible origins of the virus, and calling on China’s laboratories and agencies to “open their records” to independent analysis.
“We must take hypotheses about both natural and laboratory spillovers seriously until we have sufficient data,” the scientists write.
Related Story
No one can find the animal that gave people covid-19
Here’s your guide to the WHO-China search for the origins of the coronavirus.
The letter, which was organized by the Stanford University microbiologist David Relman and the University of Washington virologist Jesse Bloom, takes aim at a recent joint study of covid origins undertaken by the World Health Organization and China, which concluded that a bat virus likely reached humans via an intermediate animal and that a lab accident was “extremely unlikely.”
That conclusion was not scientifically justified, according to the authors of the new letter, since no trace of how the virus first jumped to humans has been found and the possibility of a laboratory accident received only a cursory look. Just a handful of the 313 pages of the WHO origins report and its annexes are devoted to the subject.
Marc Lipsitch, a well-known Harvard University epidemiologist who is among the signers of the letter, said he had not expressed a view on the origin of the virus until recently, choosing instead to focus on improving the design of epidemiological studies and vaccine trials—in part because the debate over the lab theory has become so controversial. “I stayed out of it because I was busy dealing with the outcome of the pandemic instead of the origin,” he says. “[But] when the WHO comes out with a report that makes a specious claim about an important topic … it’s worth speaking out.”
Several of those signing the letter, including Lipsitch and Relman, have in the past called for greater scrutiny of “gain of function” research, in which viruses are genetically modified to make them more infectious or virulent. Experiments to engineer pathogens were also ongoing at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, China’s leading center for studying bat viruses similar to SARS-CoV-2. Some see the fact that covid-19 first appeared in the same city in which the lab is located as circumstantial evidence that a laboratory accident could be to blame.
Lipsitch has previously estimated the risk of a pandemic caused by accidental release from a high-security biolab at between 1 in 1,000 and 1 in 10,000 per year, and he has warned that the proliferation of thousands of such labs around the globe is a major concern.
Even though Chinese scientists have said no such leak occurred in this case, the letter writers say that can only be established through a more independent investigation. “A proper investigation should be transparent, objective, data-driven, inclusive of broad expertise, subject to independent oversight, and responsibly managed to minimize the impact of conflicts of interest,” they write. “Public health agencies and research laboratories alike need to open their records to the public. Investigators should document the veracity and provenance of data from which analyses are conducted and conclusions drawn.”
The chief scientist for emerging disease at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Shi Zhengli, said in an email that the letter’s suspicions were misplaced and would damage the world’s ability to respond to pandemics. “It’s definitely not acceptable,” Shi said of the group’s call to see her lab’s records. "Who can provide an evidence that does not exist?"
“It’s really sad to read this ‘Letter’ written by these 18 prominent scientists.” Shi wrote in her email. “The hypothesis of a lab leaking is just based on the expertise of a lab which has long been working on bat coronaviruses which are phylogenetically related to SARS-CoV-2. This kind of claim will definitely damage the reputation and enthusiasm of scientists who are dedicated to work on the novel animal viruses which have potential spillover risk to human populations and eventually weaken the ability of humans to prevent the next pandemic.”
Shi Zhengli in a high security laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The Chinese virologist says calls by outsiders to inspect her lab's records are "not acceptable."
AP IMAGES
The discussion around the lab leak hypothesis has already become highly political. In the US, it has been embraced most loudly by Republican lawmakers and conservative media figures, including Fox News host Tucker Carlson. The resulting polarization has had a chilling effect on scientists, some of whom have been reluctant to express their own concerns, says Relman.
“We felt motivated to say something because science is not living up to what it can be, which is a very fair and rigorous and open effort to gain greater clarity on something,” he says. “For me, part of the purpose was to create a safe space for other scientists to say something of their own.”
“Ideally, this is a relatively uncontroversial call for being as clear-eyed as possible in testing several viable hypotheses for which we have little data,” says Megan Palmer, a biosecurity expert at Stanford University who is not affiliated with the letter group. “When politics are complex and stakes are high, a reminder from prominent experts may be what is needed to compel careful consideration by others.”
Sign up for The Coronavirus Tech Report
- A weekly newsletter about covid-19 and how it's changing our world.
Sign up
Stay updated on MIT Technology Review initiatives and events?
YesNo
That opinion was seconded by Rear Admiral Kenneth Bernard, an epidemiologist and disease detective who served as the biodefense expert in the Clinton and George W. Bush White Houses. The letter, he says, “is balanced, well written, and exactly reflects the opinion of every smart epidemiologist and scientist I know. If asked, I would have signed it myself.”
The letter echoes some of the concerns of an earlier call for a new investigation published in the Wall Street Journal by a collection of 26 policy analysts and scientists, who demanded more scrutiny of the Wuhan laboratory and argued that “the [WHO] team did not have the mandate, the independence, or the necessary accesses” to carry out a full and unrestricted investigation.
But that group consisted largely of outsiders, and the letter was dismissed by some established virologists on the grounds that its signatories lacked appropriate expertise. “It’s hard to find anybody with relevant experience who signed,” tweeted Kristian Andersen, a Scripps Research Institute immunologist and virus expert who has argued that the available evidence points to a natural origin.
Related Story
Biologists rush to re-create the China coronavirus from its DNA code
Synthetic versions of the deadly virus could help test treatments. But what are the risks when viruses can be synthetized from scratch?
No such dismissal will be possible with this new letter, whose signatories include Akiko Iwasaki, a Yale immunologist who has spearheaded the research on the immune system’s response to SARS-CoV-2, and Ralph Baric, the University of North Carolina virologist who is considered the world’s foremost authority on coronaviruses, and who pioneered techniques for genetically manipulating such viruses that became a major aspect of research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
The new letter also gains extra gravitas from its publication in Science, one of the world’s most prestigious journals. That choice of venue, says Relman, was important. “Some of our coauthors said to us, ‘I’ll participate, but I don’t want to be a part of an open letter to the world, or an op-ed in the New York Times. That’s not how I see my role in this. I’m a scientist. I would much rather be addressing fellow scientists in a scientific journal.’”
If China doesn’t assent to a new probe, it’s unclear what form a further investigation would take, or which countries would participate, Relman acknowledges. Still, he believes the new letter could give useful cover for Democrats and the White House to join the questioning about the origin of covid-19.
“I do think there are ways of organizing an investigation that has value,” says Relman. “It won’t be as incisive as it might have been if it had been undertaken the first week of January 2020 and everything was on the table, but I still think it’s not too late. And even if we don’t get a definite answer, it’s still worth it, because we’ll get further along than we are now.”
Whether or not an investigation uncovers the source of covid-19, Lipsitch says, he believes there needs to be more public scrutiny of laboratory research involving viruses that have the potential to spread out of control. “It’s not all about whether a lab accident caused this particular pandemic,” he says. “I’d like to see the attention focus on the regulation of dangerous experiments, because we’ve seen what a pandemic can do to us all, and we should be extremely sure before we do anything that increases that probability even a little.”
Top researchers are calling for a real investigation into the origin of covid-19
A group of prominent biologists say there needs to be a “safe space” for asking whether the coronavirus came out of a lab.
Top Biosafety Expert Explains Why Fauci’s NIH ‘Gain-of-Function’ Testimony Was ‘Demonstrably False’
https://search.yahoo.com/search?p=Anthony Fauci
Isaac Schorr
Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:07 AM·3 min read
Dr. Roger Ebright, a professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University and biosafety expert, is contesting NIH director Dr. Anthony Fauci’s testimony before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on Tuesday.
Dr. Fauci’s claim — made during an exchange with Senator Rand Paul — that “the NIH [National Institutes of Health] has not ever and does not now fund gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology [WIV]” is “demonstrably false,” according to Ebright.
At least some of the NIH-funded research conducted at the WIV “unequivocally” qualifies as gain-of-function, Ebright told National Review.
Isaac Schorr
Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:07 AM·3 min read
Dr. Roger Ebright, a professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University and biosafety expert, is contesting NIH director Dr. Anthony Fauci’s testimony before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on Tuesday.
Dr. Fauci’s claim — made during an exchange with Senator Rand Paul — that “the NIH [National Institutes of Health] has not ever and does not now fund gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology [WIV]” is “demonstrably false,” according to Ebright.
At least some of the NIH-funded research conducted at the WIV “unequivocally” qualifies as gain-of-function, Ebright told National Review.
- ADVERTISEMENT -
A research article written by WIV scientists, “Discovery of a rich gene pool of bat SARS-related coronaviruses provides new insights into the origin of SARS coronavirus”, for example, qualifies as gain-of-function and was clearly a product of NIH-funding.
Ebright insists that the research can be classified as gain-of-function under a number of different definitions, including those found in two pieces of Department of Health and Human Services guidance on the subject.
The first details the Obama administration’s 2014 decision to halt domestic gain-of-function research, which it defines as that which “may be reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route.”
The second — drafted in 2017 as Fauci was pushing to renew government funding for gain-of-function research — provides a definition of what are called “enhanced potential pandemic pathogen (PPP)” or those pathogens “resulting from the enhancement of the transmissibility and/or virulence of a pathogen.”
Ebright claims that the work being conducted at the WIV, using NIH funds originally granted to Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance, “epitomizes” gain-of-function research under the definition HHS provided in its guidance, and is the exact kind of research that led the Obama administration to conclude that gain-of-function was too dangerous to continue domestically.
‘The Wuhan lab used NIH funding to construct novel chimeric SARS-related coronaviruses able to infect human cells and laboratory animals,” he said. “This is high-risk research that creates new potential pandemic pathogens (i.e., potential pandemic pathogens that exist only in a lab, not in nature). This research matches — indeed epitomizes — the definition of ‘gain of function research of concern’ for which federal funding was ‘paused’ in 2014-2017.”
“Chimeric” coronaviruses refers to those that have been altered and enhanced by man, in this case in such a way as to make them more transmissible and dangerous to humans.
The paper drafted by WIV scientists clearly states that the underlying research was funded by, among other entities, the National Institutes of Health. The NIH’s own database of grantees lists this research and confirms that over $660,000 was spent supporting it.
Fauci appears to have been, at best, mistaken while sparring with Senator Paul on Tuesday. At worst, he was playing tenuous word games meant to deceive.
Biosafety Expert Explains Why Fauci’s NIH ‘Gain-of-Function’ Testimony Was ‘Demonstrably False’
Dr. Roger Ebright, a professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University and biosafety expert, is contesting NIH director Dr. Anthony Fauci’s testimony before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on Tuesday. Dr. Fauci’s claim — made during an exchange with...
Another Group of Scientists Calls for Further Inquiry Into Origins of the Coronavirus
Researchers urge an open mind, saying lack of evidence leaves theories of natural spillover and laboratory leak both viable.
Bats being collected for research and analysis in Guandong Province, China, in 2019. “Theories of accidental release from a lab and zoonotic spillover both remain viable,” scientists wrote.Credit...EcoHealth Alliance
By James Gorman and Carl Zimmer
May 13, 2021Updated 2:33 p.m. ET
A group of 18 scientists stated Thursday in a letter published in the journal Science that there is not enough evidence to decide whether a natural origin or an accidental laboratory leak caused the Covid-19 pandemic.
They argued, as the U.S. government and other countries have, for a new investigation to explore where the virus came from.
The organizers of the letter, Jesse Bloom, who studies the evolution of viruses at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, and David Relman, a microbiologist at Stanford University, said they strove to articulate a wait-and-see viewpoint that they believe is shared by many scientists. Many of the signers have not spoken out before.
“Most of the discussion you hear about SARS-CoV-2 origins at this point is coming from, I think, the relatively small number of people who feel very certain about their views,” Dr. Bloom said.
He added: “Anybody who’s making statements with a high level of certainty about this is just outstripping what’s possible to do with the available evidence.”
The new letter stated: “Theories of accidental release from a lab and zoonotic spillover both remain viable.”
Proponents of the idea that the virus may have leaked from a lab, especially the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China where SARS viruses were studied, have been active this year since a World Health Organization team issued a report claiming that such a leak was extremely unlikely, even though the mission never investigated any Chinese labs. The team did visit the Wuhan lab, but did not investigate it. A lab investigation was never part of their mandate. The report, produced in a mission with Chinese scientists, drew extensive criticism from the U.S. government and others that the Chinese government had not cooperated fully and had limited the international scientists’ access to information.
The new letter argued for a new and more rigorous investigation of virus origins that would involve a broader range of experts and safeguard against conflicts of interest.
The call for further investigation echoed statements urging further inquiry by the Biden administration and other nations, as well as by the director of the W.H.O., Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.
Unlike other recent statements, the new letter did not come down in favor of one scenario or another. Recent letters by another group of scientists and international affairs experts argued at length for the relative likelihood of a laboratory leak. Previous statements from other scientists and the W.H.O. report both asserted that a natural origin was by far the most plausible.
Michael Worobey, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Arizona, said he signed the new letter because “the recent W.H.O. report on the origins of the virus, and its discussion, spurred several of us to get in touch with each other and talk about our shared desire for dispassionate investigation of the origins of the virus.”
“I certainly respect the opinion of others who may disagree with what we’ve said in the letter, but I felt I had no choice but to put my concerns out there,” he said.
Another signer, Sarah E. Cobey, an epidemiologist and evolutionary biologist at the University of Chicago, said, “I think it is more likely than not that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from an animal reservoir rather than a lab.”
But “lab accidents do happen and can have disastrous consequences,” she added. “I am concerned about the short- and long-term consequences of failing to evaluate the possibility of laboratory escape in a rigorous way. It would be a troublesome precedent.”
The list of signers includes researchers with deep knowledge of the SARS family of viruses, such as Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina, who had collaborated with the Chinese virologist Shi Zhengli in research done at the university on the original SARS virus. Dr. Baric did not respond to attempts to reach him by email and telephone.
While this group of scientists does not single out any researchers by name, the letter finds fault with those who have also been vocal in supporting the theory of a natural origin, citing a lack of evidence.
Kristian Andersen, a virologist at the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, Calif., has been a strong proponent of the overwhelming likelihood of a natural origin. He was one of the authors of an often cited paper in March 2020 that dismissed the likelihood of a laboratory origin based largely on the genome of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19. “We do not believe any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible,” that paper stated.
Speaking for himself only, Dr. Relman said in an interview that “the piece that Kristian Anderson and four others wrote last March in my view simply fails to provide evidence to support their conclusions.”
Dr. Andersen, who reviewed the letter in Science, said that both explanations were theoretically possible. But, “the letter suggests a false equivalence between the lab escape and natural origin scenarios,” he said. “To this day, no credible evidence has been presented to support the lab leak hypothesis, which remains grounded in speculation.”
Instead, he said, available data “are consistent with a natural emergence of a novel virus from a zoonotic reservoir, as has been observed so many times in the past.” He said he supported further inquiry into the origin of the virus.
Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at University of Saskatchewan’s Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization, has criticized the politicization of the laboratory leak theory.
She supports further investigation, but said that “there is more evidence (both genomic and historical precedent) that this was the result of zoonotic emergence rather than a laboratory accident.”
World Health Organization investigators arriving at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in February. The letter challenged the team’s conclusion that a natural origin of the leap from animals to humans was most likely.Credit...Hector Retamal/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Another Group of Scientists Calls for Further Inquiry Into Origins of the Coronavirus (Published 2021)
Researchers urge an open mind, saying lack of evidence leaves theories of natural spillover and laboratory leak both viable.
This is why the CDC need to slow down
Gravitas: Did Dr. Fauci fund Wuhan Virus research?
Did Joe Biden's pandemic advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci fund Wuhan Virus research? Republican Senator Rand Paul says Fauci could be personally involved in the origin of the virus. Palki Sharma separates facts from fiction.
WION -The World is One News, examines global issues with in-depth analysis. We provide much more than the news of the day. Our aim to empower people to explore their world. With our Global headquarters in New Delhi,India, we bring you news on the hour, by the hour. We deliver information that is not biased. We are journalists who are neutral to the core and non-partisan when it comes to the politics of the world. People are tired of biased reportage and we stand for a globalised united world. So for us the World is truly One. Please keep discussions on this channel clean and respectful and refrain from using racist or sexist slurs as well as personal insults. Subscribe to our channel at https://goo.gl/JfY3NI Check out our website: http://www.wionews.com Connect with us on our social media handles: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/WIONews Twitter: https://twitter.com/WIONews Follow us on Google News for latest updates
Even in India they are getting in on the lab leak Theory
Rep. Gallagher bill would force Biden to declassify Wuhan coronavirus lab leak theory intel
Experts including former CDC Director Robert Redfield have said lab leak theory is entirely possible
By Tyler Olson | Fox News
A group of House Republicans is introducing a bill on Thursday that would force the Biden administration to declassify intelligence related to the possibility that the coronavirus could have leaked from a Chinese lab.
Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., is leading the effort, which follows the introduction of a similar bill in the Senate last month by Sens. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and Mike Braun, R-Ind.
The new House bill, first obtained by Fox News, would force the director of national intelligence to "declassify any and all information relating to potential links between the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origin of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID–19), including … activities performed by the Wuhan Institute of Virology with or on behalf of the People’s Liberation Army"
"Now we know certain facts too that stack up in favor of the lab leak hypothesis," Gallagher said in an interview with Fox News. Those include, he said, information released by the Trump administration that some workers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were getting sick in autumn 2019.
COVID-19 Origin Act by Fox News
WUHAN ‘LAB LEAK' CORONAVIRUS THEORY IN FOCUS AS HOUSE REPUBLICANS DEMAND ANSWERS
"There is the nature of the disease itself. If it were truly of zoonotic or animal origin, you would expect it to be most infectious in the host species, i.e. bats, less infectious in intermediate species like pangolins and least infections in humans," Gallagher said. "This disease operates in the opposite fashion."
These facts, Gallagher said, point to the possibility the virus could have been the subject of "gain of function research."
"Admittedly, we don't know," if the virus came from the Wuhan lab, Gallagher added. "All I'm saying is lets get to the bottom of it. Is there any more important question in the world right now?"
The bill includes in its findings notable comments from former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director (CDC) Robert Redfield in which he says the lab leak theory is the "most likely" explanation for how the spread of COVID-19 began.
"I am of the point of view, I still think the most likely etiology of this pathogen in Wuhan was from a laboratory, escaped," Redfield told CNN earlier this year. "Science will eventually figure it out. It's not unusual for respiratory pathogens that are being worked on in a laboratory to infect the laboratory worker."
Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., conducts a news conference after a meeting off the House Republican Conference in the Capitol Visitor Center on Tuesday, June 4, 2019. (Photo By Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call) (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Getty Images)
Fox News reported as early as April 2020 that sources had "increasing confidence," based on classified and open-source documents, that the coronavirus outbreak may have originated in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, not as a bioweapon but as part of China's attempt to demonstrate that its efforts to identify and combat viruses are equal to or greater than the capabilities of the United States.
Reps. Guy Reschenthaler, R-Pa.; Dan Bishop, R-N.C.; Jason Smith, R-Mo.; Dusty Johnson, R-S.D.; Scott Perry, R-Calif.; Tom Rice, R-S.C.; Brian Babin, R-Texas; John Rutherford, R-Fla.; Paul Gosar, R-Ariz.; Bob Gibbs, R-Ohio; Daniel Webster, R-Fla.; Madison Cawthorn, R-N.C.; and Jody Hice, R-Ga., are co-sponsoring the lab leak bill with Gallagher.
The lab leak theory has come more into focus in recent weeks and months after being roundly dismissed by many in 2020. CNN as recently as March dismissed the lab leak theory as "a controversial theory without evidence."
But the Biden White House, which has battled with China on multiple fronts in its first few months, has declined to take the theory off the table as well. A World Health Organization report in late March said the theory that the virus transmitted from animals to humans, rather than leaking from a lab, was "likely to very likely."
But Psaki said the report provided a "partial, incomplete picture" and that China has "not been transparent" with investigators' on the virus' origins.
She called on China and the WHO to allow international experts "unfettered access" to data and to allow them to ask questions of people on the ground at the time of the outbreak. Psaki said that U.S. medical experts are still reviewing the report, but the White House believes it "doesn’t meet the moment."
More recently, other House Republicans have asked Secretary of State Anthony Blinken to release documents that may be related to the lab leak theory.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
If China was responsible for the coronavirus, which has killed 3.3 million people worldwide, nearly 600,000 Americans, ground many economies to a halt and is still ravaging countries like India, Gallagher said there needs to be some kind of accountability for the Chinese Communist Party.
"At a minimum we need to reduce if not eliminate entirely their influence over the World Health Organization – the way in which they're blocking Taiwan from participating in the World Health Organization – that would be sort of the minimum criteria," Gallagher said.
"There's another debate about whether you could create a legal construct to hold the CCP accountable for the billions if not trillions of dollars of damages that they've caused through their malfeasance," he continued.
Rep. Gallagher bill would force Biden to declassify Wuhan coronavirus lab leak theory intel
A group of House Republicans is introducing a bill on Thursday that would force the Biden administration to declassify intelligence related to the possibility that the coronavirus could have leaked from a Chinese lab.
Complete retardation
Occidental leadership
Is all fluff no substance
Occidental leadership
Is all fluff no substance
They better get this under control or the Olympics is going to be very sketchy this year
They need to cancel da Olympics but greed and pride won't let 'em. And just think, these idiots are trying to life mask mandates here. All these cautionary tales and warnings and these stupid muthafucka still refuse to do da right thing.
I feel as though the CDC is bowing down to the pressure. They need some type of proof of vaccination.They need to cancel da Olympics but greed and pride won't let 'em. And just think, these idiots are trying to life mask mandates here. All these cautionary tales and warnings and these stupid muthafucka still refuse to do da right thing.
You already have a very non-compliant population who the majority of the states are not vaccinated to even above 50%.
In the CDC's defense, they have very little choice in the matter.
Short of drastic orders or martial law, there's no way to get certain people on board with getting vaccinated. And even if you did that, it still might not get them to go along with it. Heck, it would just feed into their conspiracy theories on the matter.
They could use the carrot or the stick. They need to use the stick
And to top it all off... they got an extremely low vaccination rate there.....They need to cancel da Olympics but greed and pride won't let 'em. And just think, these idiots are trying to life mask mandates here. All these cautionary tales and warnings and these stupid muthafucka still refuse to do da right thing.
.
Fool.... why are you even still trying?Naw buddy thats showing that you are desperate as hell.Im predicting next they might come up with vaccine sweepstakes.
36% of Americans have been fully vaccinated
sidebar: be willing to bet good money that your EuroCracker ass has been vaccinated.... with your bosses Sputnik crap.... please let me cough and spit in your face
125% amazed that you can even think
.
.