The only rights of conscience that Catholics have who work for the Vatican are apparently the rights to shut up and obey. Remember this the next time a prelate prates on the rights of workers.
The Latest From Our Pastoral Pope
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
The vaccines aren’t that effective against the receding variant and they’re not effective at all against the new one. All of our institutions are run by deeply mediocre people.
More coal, less ginger bread men;
https://spiritdaily.org/blog/news/pope-demands-humility-from-cardinals-bishops
Just in time for Christmas. Sweet.
In fairness to the pope, at least he did urge workers to look to St. Joseph. I mean, they’re really going to need his intercession after getting the pontifical shaft.
I wonder how much Cdl Turkson’s recent resignation had to do with the Vatican pushing vaccines since he met earlier this year with Dr. Robert Malone.
At one time I thought our priests believed the homilies they gave on the Truth of the Bible. Now they hide behind the “science” and not the Magnificence of God. What are they so afraid of? The few in the pews can see they are frauds. Our family roams around from parish to parish enduring weak sermons and supplement them with YouTube priests who give real homilies. There should be NO fear among God’s people.
“Please Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Unvaccinated. I Was Born That Way.”
https://twitter.com/delbigtree/status/1474025765213810699
There is so much misinformation out there. The vaccine makes a HUGE difference not only in reducing the incidence of infection (including Omicron) but also in the level of severity in those who do contract it (including Omicron). People are free to risk their lives by avoiding the vaccine. How that choice is “proLife” is beyond me.
The vaccine makes a HUGE difference not only in reducing the incidence of infection (including Omicron) but also in the level of severity in those who do contract it (including Omicron).
Have you ever considered applying the most basic of considerations to that claim, such as “how can you tell how sick someone would have otherwise been”?
Remember that at least half of diagnosed cases have no symptoms. And that has been the case from the start.
Then again, the attempt to brow-beat people into violating the conscience by using vaccines that involve murdered children using equivocation on the meaning of “prolife” suggests that honest consideration of the situation is not your goal.
Meanwhile, the people who were paying attention know that the doctors who discovered the Omicron variant– in unvaccinated people– noted that it was odd in that it hardly even had cold symptoms, just people being very tired.
For the first bit when they actually reported the vaccination status of those who’d caught it, it was disproportionately hitting those who were fully vaccinated. That triggered them to start saying that you had to have boosters, too, and then they went straight to raw case numbers.
John, omicron has been around so briefly that we’d only be guessing whether the vaccine reduces the number and/or severity of cases. My hunch is yes on both counts, and I’d encourage anyone to get vaccinated, but it’s really too soon to say definitively.
Covid has been very seasonal in the US, hitting the hot states in the summer and the cold ones in the winter. We’re at about half the number of hospitalizations we saw last year at this time. It does look like the unvaccinated are reporting positive tests at a higher rate than the vaccinated, but God willing and present trends continuing, we should see next to no deaths by March.
John, omicron has been around so briefly that we’d only be guessing whether the vaccine reduces the number and/or severity of cases. My hunch is yes on both counts, and I’d encourage anyone to get vaccinated, but it’s really too soon to say definitively.
Here’s a suggestion: when the ratio of the vaccinated to the unvaccinated in your case reports matches that of the general population, the vaccine isn’t having an effect on the headline numbers.
Have you ever considered applying the most basic of considerations to that claim, such as “how can you tell how sick someone would have otherwise been”?
You cannot. You can assess the severity of illness in the two subpopulations, controlling for other factors (age, obesity).
Art:
… when the ratio of the vaccinated to the unvaccinated in your case reports matches that of the general population, the vaccine isn’t having an effect on the headline numbers
Has the CDC released this information? The most recent release I’ve found from them showed that 29% of those hospitalized for Covid in August were vaccinated. That was up from 16% in July and 8% in June … They seem to have stopped releasing this information after that … and these data are about hospitalizations, not cases.
John:
Common sense would seem to dictate that mRNA treatments keyed on the original virus’ spike protein would be (far?) less effective against a variant with 35 mutations to the spike proteins alone.
Has the CDC released this information?
The CDC doesn’t have that information– they have only those who are registered as vaccinated more than 14 days prior, and various levels of unknown.
There is also the issue of in the hospital for, vs in the hospital with, diagnosis by symptoms, and the ever popular recording reactions shortly after receiving the vaccine as a case of COVID.
I can’t even blame doctors for not sending in information, since various states and authorities are openly threatening folks’ ability to practice medicine if they say something which is declared to be medical misinformation.
Anybody heard if the American Heart Association’s report of results has gotten their researchers’ licenses yanked, yet?
Why doesn’t the CDC have the numbers? They had them from April – July https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7037e1.htm?s_cid=mm7037e1_w
During April 4–June 19, fully vaccinated persons accounted for 5% of cases, 7% of hospitalizations, and 8% of deaths overall; these percentages were higher during June 20–July 17 (18%, 14%, and 16%, respectively)
Check the fineprint on that study; it’s not the states, it’s from COVIDNET, and the actual data is anyone hospitalized within 14 days of a medical provider ordering a COVID test that came back positive. That would, of course, include people who are being tested before admission because of policy.
They don’t have any better numbers because the states don’t have the numbers– Iowa is notable because before the very expensive and available to the public chart was downsized, they use to list it as “not fully vaccinated or status not known.”
That COVIDNET linked above is unusual exactly because they have access to both your vaccination status and your hospitalization status, assuming they were both done in hospitals in their network.
If you’ve been following that still-unreleased-last-I-heard study on pregnancy and the COVID vaccine, that should be making your ears perk up. I can’t remember if they’re on the same network, but it is similar — it rests on the assumption that the data was complete, when it is known not to be.
It’s also kind of like how they reported the specific co-morbidities that folks were dying with until people went “wait, why are most of these people listed with various terminal cancers?” and then the report became by how common each comorbidity was (that’s when a BMI over 25 became the most common comorbidity… BMI between 25-30 is associated with the best survival when you’ve got serious illness).
Or the issue where places were reporting positive tests as cases.
They are reporting data that is known not to be anywhere near as complete as they are saying as if it were reasonably complete.
Thanks Foxfier … it seems like that would be good data to collect, you know, if you cared whether your mandated treatments were effective. 😖
You seem interested in the data, how can I not share the information I’ve got?
It’d be useful, but setting up a well designed study for anything medically related is expensive— that’s why they keep cheesing it out using hospital networks that will share the data for free, and trying to treat it like it’s a properly designed medical survey.