#53: "Alarming" Data Signals, Differences in (Political) Opinions & More
A rundown of the last few days - and there's quite a bit of movement to cover.
Hello All,
A few updates since our last post - and we have movement on many different fronts.
1.) Trudeau revokes the Emergencies Act after one (long) week.
In a bit of a surprising move, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau revoked the Emergencies Act on Wednesday, only days after it survived a high-profile vote in the House of Commons. Interestingly, Trudeau made the move just before the Canadian Senate was set to determine the fate of his decision to invoke the Act. More here from Rebel News:
“We are confident that existing laws and bylaws are now sufficient to keep people safe,” Trudeau said during the press conference, noting Ottawa will continue supporting local police in keeping streets clear of “Freedom Convoy” protesters.
Trudeau’s decision to invoke emergency powers in his crackdown on the Freedom Convoy faced intense opposition, both within Canada and abroad - especially his administration’s efforts to target funds intended for the truckers, as well as the personal accounts of people who donated to their cause. Regardless of Trudeau’s decision on Wednesday, he will not escape scrutiny for invoking such powers in the first place.
Scott Moe, Premier of Saskatchewan, echoed a similar sentiment.
Importantly, the Canadian Government has also taken steps to begin the “unfreezing” of bank accounts as described below.
More to come on this into the coming weeks, as part of the procedure for invoking the Emergencies Act involves a formal inquiry process within 60 days.
2.) Opinions Differ for Americans on the Crackdown on the Freedom Convoy
Before the announcement of the Emergencies Act being revoked, The Daily Wire covered the results of an interesting survey regarding opinions of Prime Minister Trudeau’s crackdown on the Freedom Convoy. The headline (and link) is included in the tweet below:
From the article linked:
A new poll from Trafalgar Group and Convention of States Action and provided exclusively to The Daily Wire shows that 55% of likely general election voters disapprove of Trudeau’s handling of the protesters. Thirty-five percent approve of Trudeau’s heavy-handed tactics and 10% said they were unaware of what was happening north of the U.S. border…
Democrats overwhelmingly favored Trudeau’s response with 65% approval to 17% disapproval. Republican responses were weighted even more heavily against Trudeau, however, with 87% of likely GOP voters disapproving to just 8% approving. Respondents who said they did not belong to either one of the two main parties cut against Trudeau’s crackdown with 74% disapproving versus 21% approving.
Those are pretty incredible contrasts along political lines, with Democrats strongly supportive of the crackdown at 65% vs. Republicans at just 8%. Frozen bank accounts, harassment for donators, seized assets… those are serious actions for any country to take against one’s own citizens, let alone a Western democracy. We’ve seen such contrasts before between Democrats and Republicans in a prior post here - it’s pretty difficult to forget the percentage of Democratic voters supporting fines, home confinement, tracking programs, or temporary REMOVAL OF CHILD CUSTODY for those unwilling to receive COVID-19 vaccinations.
Scary stuff to see such widespread opinions among voters of a major party. But on the topic of vaccinations, this isn’t limited to likely-voting American Democrats…
3.) Pre-print Study: Vaccinated People Have High Antipathy Toward Unvaccinated People
Unlike Trudeau revoking the Emergencies Act, I can’t say I’m surprised by this one. A study including responses from 10,740 people across 21 countries revealed strong, deep-seated feelings of dislike among the vaccinated toward the unvaccinated. The researchers suggest that their results are representative of 58% of the world’s population.
From the pre-print linked:
Using conjoint experimental data, we demonstrate that vaccinated people have high antipathy towards the unvaccinated, 2.5 times more than towards a traditional target: immigrants from the Middle East. This antipathy reflects, in part, stereotypic inferences that unvaccinated individuals are untrustworthy and unintelligent, making the antipathy resemble prejudice towards other deviant groups. Antipathy towards the unvaccinated is larger in countries that suffered fewer COVID-19 deaths and that have higher social trust. In contrast, we find no evidence that unvaccinated respondents display antipathy towards vaccinated people, although they are equally prejudiced against immigrants. While previous research recommends framing vaccination as a moral obligation in order to increase uptake, our research documents the costs of this strategy. Whether understandable or not, the antipathy faced by the unvaccinated may exacerbate marginalization and mistrust, which are core causes of their initial vaccine hesitancy, and further entrench the conflict. The novel socio-political cleavage we document may thus be an indication that societies worldwide will leave the pandemic more divided than they entered it.
There’s quite a bit to unpack there - first off, talk about a disappointing reality for mankind overall with both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals displaying equal prejudice against immigrants. Yikes.
Specifically with regard to COVID vaccines, however, particularly the worldwide effort to frame vaccination as a “moral obligation” - I think we’re seeing the ugly side of such a strategy in this study. Vaccinated people look at unvaccinated people as being untrustworthy and unintelligent, and therefore worthy of prejudice - these feelings very much derive from the incessant messaging from public health agencies that everyone should “do their part” in the fight against COVID-19. And that, of course, means lining up for a vaccine that does not stop infection, does not stop transmission, and is associated with rare side effects - but more on that in a moment.
On the flip side, unvaccinated people DO NOT display such antipathy toward the vaccinated.
Overall, the researchers suggest that societies worldwide will exit the pandemic more divided than they entered it. As one who has faced plenty of questions on my decision not to get vaccinated for COVID from family, friends, coworkers and randoms alike - I’ve certainly seen such antipathy in action. What was it all based on? Dr. Bhattacharya puts it succinctly:
Those “horrible other people” that the public health system shamed for a year! According to the data, many feel similarly - and it never should have been this way. But now that such negative feelings are here, and so entrenched, what’s the plan for undoing the damage? (*crickets*)
4.) German Health Insurance Company Reveals “Alarming” Data on COVID Vaccine Complications
I mentioned side effects from the COVID vaccines above, which researchers are only barely beginning to understand. News came Wednesday from a German health insurance company that suggests a larger number of side effects than those previously reported.
Many of the stories circulating were in German, which unfortunately is beyond my comprehension. But Dr. Aaron Kheriaty offered the translation below:
So according to a large German health insurance company, the number of doctor visits for vaccine side effects is potentially far larger than previously known - at the very least, this new data is considered an “alarm signal.” Pair this with previously-shared data from the life insurance industry of deaths being up 40% for those 18-64 years of age, and one has to wonder - what other data is out there that could help us make sense of these alarm signals? Oh wait…
5.) The CDC is Not Publishing All of it’s COVID-19 Data (NY Times)
An article in The New York Times offered a surprising admission from the CDC on its COVID-19 data that many have yearned for over a year. As it turns out, the CDC does have data - detailed, specific data that could help us better understand hospitalizations, the impact of vaccinates and boosters, and more… and large portions of that data are sitting unpublished. A link to the story is embedded in Dr. Bhattacharya’s tweet below:
From the article:
Last year, the agency repeatedly came under fire for not tracking so-called breakthrough infections in vaccinated Americans, and focusing only on individuals who became ill enough to be hospitalized or die. The agency presented that information as risk comparisons with unvaccinated adults, rather than provide timely snapshots of hospitalized patients stratified by age, sex, race and vaccination status.
But the C.D.C. has been routinely collecting information since the Covid vaccines were first rolled out last year, according to a federal official familiar with the effort. The agency has been reluctant to make those figures public, the official said, because they might be misinterpreted as the vaccines being ineffective.
So let’s get things straight - we can’t see the data because it could lead us to “misinterpret” the figures as the vaccines being ineffective. Well, on a similar note, I make an excellent homemade pizza that just might be the best thing pizza-lovers have ever tasted. But I can’t let you see or taste my pizza to make your own conclusion, because that might cause you to misinterpret my pizza recipe as being gross and ineffective. You’ll take my word for it, right!?
Yeah… I think we’d all appreciate the chance to see that data, wouldn’t we? Well, at the rate things are trickling out - perhaps one day we will!
Thanks for reading, folks! More to come.
-G