President Trump Tests Positive for Covid But What Does It Really Mean?

The media and large parts of the medical community are stroking the panic surrounding COVID-19.

A positive PCR test on an asymptomatic person is problematic. PCR tests are notoriously inaccurate as they are based on detecting small portions of viral RNA, which are then amplified many times to increase the sensitivity. This New York Times article explains exactly why PCR testing is flawed.

President Trump recently tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, presumably using a PCR test. The PCR test is considered the “gold standard” among the various tests. 

In essence, the PCR is overly sensitive and basing policy on just “cases” is not good science. Early on in the COVID-19 spread, testing was mainly done on healthcare workers and people exhibiting symptoms. Later on, in the spring and summer months, testing was widely available and the emphasis shifted to testing the general asymptomatic population. From March 15 to April 15, 623,000 thousand cases were recorded in the U.S. with approximately 42,000 deaths registered from May 1 to June 1. It takes anywhere from five to six weeks from the onset of COVID-19 symptoms to the time when subsequent death occurs and is recorded. From July 1 to August 1, 2.03 million cases were recorded and six weeks later starting on August 15 through Sept. 15, approximately 27,000 deaths were recorded.

So, we can see with a 300+% increase in cases there was a 36% decrease in deaths. It seems pretty obvious that increasing testing among an asymptomatic population will only increase the number of cases while the mortality rate continues to decrease in the latter stages of this pandemic.

The virus peaked in the spring in the Northern latitudes with a second, weaker wave in the Southern latitudes during the the summer months. Testing asymptomatic people is bad science and it accomplishes very little.

In fact, current research has shown that T cell testing may be a more accurate predictor of both infection and immunity for COVID-19 than PCR and antibody testing. 

President Trump has certainly been overworked lately due to campaigning and because of his age is definitively more susceptible to a normal cold infection (also a coronavirus) or a flu. The positive tests results of President Trump and the First Lady Melania are widely being celebrated by the Left. Before the champagne bottles are opened, it has to be pointed out that President Trump and Melania have overwhelming odds of doing just fine.

With 1 million deaths recorded worldwide and 750,000,000 infections, the death rate is .13% — just like the flu. The left worships the WHO, so they should accept this as gospel. Maybe President Trump when he no longer tests positive will realize how ridiculous a policy it is to push for increased testing and delaying a full return to normalcy.

It’s true that COVID-19 disproportionately affects older people with co-morbidities. President Trump is certainly overweight but as far as we know, has no underlying medical conditions and does not smoke or drink. He also seems far from being a frail elderly person and displays an amazing amount of stamina, (as evidenced by his busy campaign schedule and energy during his rallies), which many young people would envy.

President Trump’s latest positive test makes it glaringly obvious that PCR testing is detecting a weaker mutated variant of SARS-CoV-2, increasing the number of cases without a subsequent spike in deaths. Although COVID-19 is still highly contagious, it causes far fewer deaths and milder, more transient symptoms than when it first appeared months ago. It’s time to stop the futility of hiding from this virus (with masks, social distancing and lockdowns) and like all other viruses, accept its natural progression as it nears its end. We have dealt with viruses in the past without crazy, unproven responses and should do the same again.

coronavirus

T Cell Immunity: What Fauci and the Panic Crowd Don’t Want You to Know

Recently, Senator Rand Paul and Dr. Anthony Fauci got into a heated debate over COVID-19.

Sen. Paul, who is also a medical doctor, tried to explain a plausible explanation for Sweden’s apparent success fighting COVID-19. Sen. Paul spoke about the possibility of herd immunity being achieved in Sweden and put forth the possibility of cross reactivity accounting for the low death rate in Japan. (For reference, the National Center for Biotechnology Information defines cross reactivity as a measure of the extent to which different antigens appear similar to the immune system.)

Also, the well-respected Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory gives direct credence to Sen. Paul’s assertions about the critical role cross reactivity can play in thwarting further spread of COVID-19. Researchers at the lab state, “Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 specific T-cell receptors in ImmuneCode reveals cross-reactivity to immunodominant Influenza M1 epitope.” The lab was ranked No. 1 in the world for research output by Nature magazine, produced eight Nobel Prize winners and was the location where American molecular biologist Dr. James Watson developed his groundbreaking work on the true nature of DNA’s structure.

Dr. Fauci was triggered by Sen. Paul’s statements and loudly proclaimed no country has achieved herd immunity and that cross reactivity amounts to bogus science. Cross reactivity in the context of the spread of COVID-19 means someone exposed to any coronavirus that is not COVID-19 will in the future be somewhat immune to COVID-19.

The current research and science behind this seems to be in favor of Sen. Paul and shows that Dr. Fauci is either uninformed or being his usual deceptive self.

If the “duh” here is not quite evident, let’s dive into a bit of the biology and scientific facts behind Sen. Paul’s reasoning. In order to do this, a basic understanding of T cell immunity is necessary. As Britannica eloquently explains, a T cell, also called a T lymphocyte, is a type of leukocyte (white blood cell) that is an essential part of the immune system. T cells are one of two primary types of lymphocytes—B cells being the second type—that determine the specificity of immune response to antigens (foreign substances) in the body. 

The T cells found in bone marrow mature in the thymus. One of the mature T cells formed in the thymus is called memory T cells, which possess the distinct ability to remember infections and help us fight future infections. According to an article published in the prestigious Science magazine, it’s precisely this specific type of T cell that “bode[s] well” for long-term immunity. 

Two separate studies revealed those infected with COVID-19 harbor T cells that target the virus—and may help them recover. Both studies also found some people never infected with SARS-CoV-2 have these cellular defenses, most likely because they were previously infected with other coronaviruses.

This was precisely what Sen. Paul was attempting to convey to the defensive Dr. Fauci. It has to be stressed that antibodies only prevent the SARS -CoV-2 virus from entering the body but it is the job of the T cells to kill the virus once cells are infected. A fascinating article by New Scientist details how Swedish researchers concluded patients with COVID-19 had very high levels of T cell activity and they hypothesized that some of it may have been the result of previous coronavirus infections (like colds).

This would explain why, among those who have been infected, the antibody detection rate is below 10%, which by our current understanding of the concept, could not produce herd immunity. However, when coupled with new evidence of memory T cell-induced immunity, this certainly could explain why countries such as Sweden and even New York City now have such low new cases and deaths. Simply put, most people in places where the virus was widespread have now effectively developed “herd immunity.” This concept is not very popular among the vaccine crowd who are set on widespread vaccine dissemination (once the vaccine is released) and refuse to look at data suggesting a vaccine is unnecessary. While antibody tests have been notoriously inaccurate, a laboratory in England has just developed a fast and accurate test for T cells

As the BBC wrote in its coverage of the lab’s work: “The company’s trials found some people who had coronavirus but tested negative for antibodies went on to test positive for T cells – meaning more people may have some immunity than previously thought – and for longer.”

Among the elderly, T cell response is far weaker and this would explain the extremely high morbidity rate in those over 80 years old. Teach Me Physiology explains: “The thymus involutes as we age and so produces fewer naïve T cells over time. This means that older people have reduced T cell diversity, which contributes to the increased susceptibility to infections seen with age.” 

I can’t emphasize strongly enough that this research is huge. T cell immunity could be the answer to restoring some sense of normalcy to our lives. According to Dr. James Hindley, executive director of Indoor Biotechnologie, who has a PhD in T cells, “We don’t know with this virus how long [T cells] will last, but it might be for many years.”

Six months ago, we knew very little about COVID-19. Now, with the world focused on this virus, we’ve quickly gained a lot of information about how it functions and how we can fight it. This new T cell research may render an antibody-stimulating vaccine unnecessary, which is bad news for the big pharmaceutical companies hoping to cash in on its widespread distribution but good news for us, a population who has already been through so much and should not be subject to a rushed-to-be-developed vaccine.

Do Masks and Social Distancing Work? Not According to the CDC.

In its latest bulletin, the CDC claimed that SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted by aerosol. The CDC updated its coronavirus website on Friday, saying COVID-19 can commonly spread, “through respiratory droplets or small particles, such as those in aerosols, produced when an infected person coughs, sneezes, sings, talks, or breathes.” (Well, for sure we can’t stop breathing if that’ll be the next CDC recommendation.)

This admission in effect destroys the argument that people should wear masks or even socially distance. It’s documented that masks are unable to filter small particles. For example, even in the case of a properly fitted N95 mask, tiny particle smaller than 0.3 µm can still permeate the mask and cloth masks are far more permeable. As this article explains, airborne particles can travel long distances and reach those not in the immediate vicinity of the aerosol release.

There is growing evidence that droplets and airborne particles can remain suspended in the air as they travel distances far beyond six feet. Choir practice, indoor restaurants and fitness classes are all examples of activities where participants standing more than six feel away can still inhale airborne particles. In general, indoor environments without good ventilation increase this risk, according to the CDC’s new guidance. 

But we wouldn’t be called The Politics of Duh if we simply took the CDC’s reporting at face value. So, without further ado, let’s dive in: Because the particles are traveling via aerosol transmission, there really is no good determination for exactly how far they could travel.

This realization would explain why mask-wearing, social distancing and quarantining were extremely ineffective in many countries against the spread of COVID-19. Belgium, for instance, had one of the strictest quarantines and extremely stringent rules regarding the use of masks and yet, the country has the second-highest mortality rate in the world.

In contrast, we have the Swedish model, well-known for minimal use of masks, lax social distancing policies and a general penchant to keep its economy open. At this point, Sweden has reported few new actual cases and almost no new deaths. It should be noted that many of the “new cases” in Sweden (at least 3,700) there were false positives because of a faulty Chinese-supplied COVID-19 test created by BGI Genomics. The faulty test skewed the death counts; if a person died 30 to 60 days after a positive test for COVID-19 was administered, authorities recorded it as a COVID-19 death regardless of the underlying conditions. So, if the test produced a false positive for COVID-19, it follows that the death was also wrongly recorded.

And let’s pause for a minute and examine the worthiness of BGI Genomics. This company has produced 35 million test kits approved for sale in more than 50 countries, including the USA. Given its widespread distribution and Sweden contesting the test’s validity, can we really consider the death counts in all countries to be accurate?

Put together, it looks like we’ve got ourselves a pretty toxic brew muddying the already-muddled COVID-19 waters. The admission by the CDC that the virus is airborne basically renders masks futile because it means they’ll have minimal impact on transmission, as will six-foot social distancing rules. Add in the fact that BGI has supplied 35 million test kits and you really throw the COVID-19 story for a loop.

Today, (and not surprisingly) the CDC announced the organization will be modifying its statements about aerosol transmission because they were allegedly published in error. This reminds me of the recent admission by the CDC that only 6% of the deaths in the United States were actually due to COVID-19 alone. The new statement about aerosol transmission is equally damaging to the credibility of the CDC. If it’s true, it would be utterly damaging to the CDC’s narrative about social distancing and mask use. Is the CDC so poorly run that statements are not scrutinized or approved by panels of professionals within the organization before release? It all sounds very suspicious and either CDC employees are completely and consistently incompetent or someone released damaging information. Now the CDC is attempting to put the genie back in the bottle. But truth, as we know, cannot be contained, and it’s only a matter of time before it becomes unmasked.

Breaking: Sweden and U.S. Record Exactly Same Amount of Covid Deaths per Million for First Time Ever

Today for the first time according to Worldometer, the United States and Sweden have exactly the same amount of deaths per million at 577. This is really an interesting day because Sweden did not lock down, did not use widespread social distancing or advocate for mandatory mask use. Instead, the nation opted to go for herd immunity over the draconian measure of quarantining healthy people.

Sweden would’ve had far less deaths if the country understood that older people — especially those over 70 — and those with co-morbidities were the most susceptible to COVID-19. In fact, recent CDC statistics show that 82% of the deaths were those over the age of 65.

However, in the early days of COVID-19 so little was known about the virus that we have to give Swedes a pass on protecting older home care patients; 89% of the people who died in Sweden were 70 years of age or older.

For the past month, Sweden has had very few new cases and a low number of  mortalities. Hopefully the Swedish experiment can give President Trump confidence to never again order lock downs of the severity and comprehensive nature instituted in the United States during the height of the COVID-19 crisis.

The CDC and the Imperial College of London were wrong and their recommendations caused untold misery all over the world, and especially right here in the United States. I believe President Trump learned this lesson and will never again shut down what was the greatest and strongest economy in the world. Joe Biden, on the other hand, is stuck in the old political and non-scientific way of thinking that advocates for shut downs, masks and a host of other crazy measures proven to do nothing against the spread of the virus. It is highly unlikely that Joe Biden even possesses the faculties to assess any situation logically and will completely be influenced by left-wing ideologues.

CDC Releases Shocking New Data and It Shows COVID-19 Lockdowns Were an Overreaction

The CDC recently released data analyzing the various co-morbidities connected with COVID-19 deaths.

Respiratory diseases, circulatory diseases, cancer and other diseases were shown by data tables to have been widely present in COVID-19 mortalities. In fact, there were 2.6 additional conditions present in 94% of COVID-19 mortalities. The data also broke down the fatalities due to these various illnesses by age. Of the approximately 161,000 deaths only 6% were due solely to COVID-19 and not other underlying medical conditions. The data showed approximately 82% of the deaths were 65 and older.

Via CDC.gov

This is truly a remarkable admission by the CDC. How in the world can lockdowns, masks and social distancing be justified by such remarkably low numbers of fatalities caused solely by COVID-19?

This large data release by the CDC had the 6% number buried between a huge amount of information and data as almost an afterthought. In a normal world this 6% number would have been front page news. The 6% figure was really a remarkable revelation because nowhere in the data tables or charts did the CDC authors have a line strictly for COVID-19-only mortalities. The 6% statement was in a footnote, and almost seemed like it was a data point they did not want to represent but somehow made it into the published report.

In the same report, the CDC showed 330 deaths under the age of 24. If you use the 6% number for COVID-19-only deaths and do some simple math (330 x 0.06), you can assume 18 deaths due to COVID-19 only occurred in those age 24 and under in the entire United States.

We already know that deaths among young people due to COVID-19 are extremely rare. It’s irrational to close or limit re-opening schools due to 18 (or possibly less) deaths nationwide. According to CDC numbers, almost all the deaths for those under age 24 were related to influenza and pneumonia or obesity. As pointed out in my earlier article about school re-openings, deaths in California and New York among young people are almost non-existent.

Another point of contention in the CDC report was the section about all the factors that contribute to a lag in reporting deaths due to COVID-19. Here are several of the major reasons listed as to why mortality numbers were reported with major delays:

Via CDC.gov

So, as per the CDC’s own admissions, some of the current deaths evident in the charts occurred weeks ago and we should see a drop in deaths as the virus diminishes in late summer and early fall.

But despite the positive news, the actual news continues to advocate for keeping our country shut down. A second wave of fear-mongering has already solidified among left-leaning government officials, politicians and the media as possible lock downs are already being contemplated for November 2020, which will mark the beginning of the flu season.

With the spotlight on COVID-19, we can only imagine what the flu season will do to our economy. In previous years, the flu season came and went; no one spoke about it even though many thousands died and hospitals were packed with flu patients. This year you can bet that there will be massive testing in November and a major push to vaccinate people with an insufficiently tested vaccine.

Of course, the CDC with Dr. Fauci at its helm will recommend lockdowns, social distancing, masks and all the other nonsense. PCR testing will be widely used even though this test is highly suspect and picks up any coronavirus, including colds. It is also hyper-sensitive to old remnants of COVID-19; examples run rampant of those who had COVID-19 and tested positive for weeks, even though their symptoms were long gone. This will get the population worked up about another pandemic coming. Rather than protect the elderly — and especially those in nursing homes —  and people with serious illnesses, a one-size-fits-all lockdown will be instituted, especially if Joe Biden is elected President.

I truly hope if President Trump is reelected he will have learned his lesson and never again accept the advice of the CDC without consulting far less biased medical professionals, who will guide him with a rational response to future viral outbreaks.

Follow on Instagram, @thepoliticsofduh.

President Jair Bolsonaro May Have Saved Thousands of Brazilian Lives

Brazil has been dealing with one of the worst outbreaks of COVID-19 in this hemisphere. As of August 15, there have been more than 107,000 deaths recorded in Brazil. In late April, Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was being promoted by the Brazilian government as a possible treatment for COVID-19 but Brazilians were hesitant.

Despite this official HCQ promotion, there was still much opposition within President Jair Bolsonaro’s government, (mainly from medical doctors and left-wing politicians) and also widespread disapproval of HCQ by organizations such as the World Health Organization and the Pan American Health Organization. In addition, the CDC in the United States also discredited the treatment as being dangerous and ineffective.

By May 20, less than 28% of Brazilians approved of the President’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic so it makes sense they wouldn’t embrace the treatment, though they could have; a huge amount of HCQ was donated to Brazil by the United States.

With all the negative publicity surrounding this controversial treatment, it is no wonder there was minimal use of the drug to combat COVID-19. In May and June, HCQ was purportedly only being given by doctors in hospitals to very ill patients as a last resort, even though advocates for HCQ said it had to be used in the early stages of COVID-19 to be effective.

In early July, President Bolsonaro announced he had tested positive for COVID-19 and would be receiving the controversial HCQ treatment. On July 25, Bolsonaro went on national television to enthusiastically reveal he was Covid-free after taking HCQ. Every major media outlet in Brazil covered the broadcast as Bolsonaro proudly held up an HCQ pill and told Brazilians that this drug saved his life. What better way to convince Brazilians to finally accept HCQ as an effective treatment for COVID-19 than to show the real-life proof it works?

Bolsonaro’s openness was also in stark contrast to UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who after his seven-day stint in intensive care due to Covid, refused to publicly provide details about his treatment.

The picture of President Bolsonaro smiling while holding HCQ is quite extraordinary. President Bolsonaro, like President Trump, is widely hated by the left-wing media of Brazil. When the Brazilian President touted a treatment recommended by President Trump, the left-wing media outlets in Brazil, (and for that matter the media of the world) denounced and ridiculed him.

If we look at the Brazilian cases and death statistics of COVID-19 starting around July 25, we can see that they were both very high. In fact, on July 29, Brazil recorded its highest death toll to date: 1,554. Assuming if one dies from COVID-19 it usually happens 18 to 23 days after symptoms first appear, we can align this assumption with the COVID-19 deaths in Brazil to track the true efficacy of widespread HCQ use. If Brazilians were finally convinced of the drug’s efficacy in late July following Bolsonaro’s television appearance, reductions in deaths due to taking the HCQ regimen should start to appear approximately in mid-August onward.

And what do you know? That’s exactly what seems to be happening. On August 16, 582 deaths were recorded in Brazil, about one third of the peak total on July 29.

As a related aside, the country of Costa Rica in early April decided to use HCQ both prophylactically and symptomatically to treat COVID-19. Costa Rica has done remarkably well, recording only 57 deaths per million, which is one of the lower mortality rates in the world.

It is a shame that the use of HCQ has become so highly politicized. This drug has been safely used for decades to thwart malaria worldwide with very few side effects. It has also been used for lupus and rheumatoid arthritis very successfully. Now, as we can see in the case of Brazil, it’s an effective way to combat COVID-19.

Suppressing a drug because of political considerations is not only immoral but also tantamount to condemning innocent people to a needless death.

Follow @thepoliticsofduh on Instagram.

New CDC Numbers Show Lockdown Was a Disaster

The CDC recently released the total death counts for the time period between March 8 and April 11, and despite what the mainstream media might say, the numbers actually prove the disastrous results of locking down our country.

As published in this report, there was an excess of 9,000 deaths from March 8 to April 11 in seven states that had been hard hit by the coronavirus, when compared with the same period the previous year. (The seven states are New York, New Jersey, Michigan, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland and Colorado.) Immediately, the usual suspects of shoddy journalism – namely The New York Times and Washington Post – jumped on these statistics to claim that COVID-19 deaths were under-reported and the pandemic hit the United States much harder than previously suspected.

Excess death statistics via The New York Times

To be fair, reporters did temper some of their statements. Here’s what The New York Times wrote about the figures:

“It’s difficult to know whether the differences between excess deaths and the official counts of coronavirus deaths reflect an undercounting of coronavirus deaths or a surge in deaths from other causes. It’s likely a mix of both.”

But why a mix of both? A cursory glance at the numbers might make the narrative appear this way but an actual investigative deep-dive into the statistics shows otherwise. The “under-reported” angle simply doesn’t hold water when the real evidence is thoroughly examined; in fact, the exact opposite is true.

Consider our strange method of codifying a COVID-19 death. According to guidelines, a medical professional can label the cause of death as COVID-19 if they simply “suspect” it was a result of COVID-19, without even testing for it. Stories run rampant over the past five or six months of accident victims or cancer patients or those with heart disease whose untimely deaths were classified with COVID-19 as the cause. This odd classification method doesn’t give credence to the idea that COVID-19 was under-reported but rather that it was most likely over-reported.

A much more logical hypothesis for these excess deaths, as reported in this new CDC update, were caused by the fact that hospitals were effectively shut down for admissions other than coronavirus during the lockdowns. This meant screenings for disease were discontinued and lifesaving operations such as heart bypasses, MRIs and biopsies were put on hold. Another point to make here is that people, fearful of contracting the virus, did not go in for their regular doctors appointments and most doctors’ offices were closed and they were not seeing patients, thus fatally exacerbating a health situation that could have otherwise been avoided.

No doubt when we consider the lives lost due to our locked down healthcare system and the fear of leaving our houses, even to seek necessary treatment, we start to see a reason for the excessive deaths in this time period. Add on to this the increase in domestic violence, drug overdoses and depression-related suicide, and you’ll get an even better sense why our country’s death counts were elevated during this time period.

Let’s also examine the case of Sweden, a nation that coincidentally also just released their mortality rate for the first seven months of 2020. Sweden did not have lockdowns. The country’s medical system and economy was fully functioning, so the excess in death counts during this period cannot be attributed to lockdown-related catastrophes like drug overdoses, spousal abuse, suicides or ignored medical treatments.

The average yearly death count in Sweden for the last five years has been about 91,500. For the first seven months of this year, approximately 59,000 people have died in Sweden, a number that includes all the COVID-19 deaths (6,000). Sweden has had basically zero deaths in the last few weeks and an extremely low number of new cases, so for the next five months the mortality rate should return to a rate similar to previous years. This means in the next five months approximately 38,000 Swedes are expected to die based on the average death rates of the five prior years, bringing their total 2020 death count to 98,000. If the 6,000 COVID-19 deaths are subtracted from this total, it almost exactly equals the yearly death toll for the past five years (92,000).

It should be noted it’s very possible COVID-19 arrived in Sweden in January or February, before adequate testing was available or officials even knew the virus existed. This would further elevate COVID-19 death total, though probably only by a slight amount.

So, in a country that did not lock down, we see numbers as expected. No excess, no increase above and beyond the number of reported COVID-19 deaths.

The new figures released by the CDC and interpreted by the completely biased media actually prove how terrible the decision was to lock down the United States. Rather than save lives, this draconian policy to quarantine the healthy destroyed lives. The Swedish example of a country that did not lock down obliterates any argument about the advantages attributed to locking down the United States. Most journalists have no concept of statistics or any basic ability to think logically. It makes no sense to use these statistics as proof that the overall mortality numbers are much higher than previous years for this time period because of COVID-19 under-reporting. Their argument doesn’t take into consideration the negative effects of lockdowns and the very true fact that COVID-19 deaths have been over-counted.

Stats Show Spike in Deaths and Cases Come from Brazil and Mexico

It has now become apparent the spike in cases and certainly in deaths in the border states of Arizona, California and Texas closely parallel the rise in cases in Mexico. In addition, spikes in cases and deaths in Florida closely mimic the curves displayed for Brazil.

The Brazilian population in Florida counts more than 300,000, one of the largest Brazilian communities in the United States. And if you think the travel ban prevents Brazilians from entering the U.S., this document details the many exceptions to the rule.

Daily cases in Brazil via Worldometers.info

It is generally accepted that it takes approximately five days to get infected with coronavirus and for those who tragically succumb to the illness, which is a tiny percentage of all cases, it takes anywhere from 10 to 18 days to die. The peak cases in Mexico occurred in late July (at this point people may have had it for more than 10 days) and the peak of deaths in the U.S. border states of Arizona, California and Texas occurred in early August.

Daily cases in Mexico via Worldometers.info

Undoubtedly, there are delays in reporting due to slow data collection in Brazil and Mexico. In the United States, there are also delays in reporting cases and deaths.

People who cross the border or fly in from Brazil seeking medical attention are most likely already ill and desperate to receive premium U.S. healthcare at our fine hospitals.

When the cases were at a peak in Brazil and Mexico, you can assume those infected had been sick for at least several days or more than a week. If you get tested in Brazil or Mexico and the result is positive, it’s very likely you’ve had COVID-19 for a while. The chances that the very day you get tested align with the exact day you contract the virus are slim.

Now back to the numbers … the peaks of cases in Brazil and Mexico occurred the third week of July, and the peak deaths occurred in early August in Arizona, California and Texas. The curves in these states precisely mirror the curves in Brazil and Mexico, accounting for the lag between cases and deaths. This is not a coincidence, my friends. This is a very real example of The Politics of Duh.

Some people will say the rise in cases and deaths in these border states is due to the fact these states presumably opened up early – in late April and early May. But this isn’t true. Following the trajectory of infection and subsequent deaths, the rise would’ve appeared much sooner than the end of July.

Panic is unwarranted. Recently, cases have started dropping in both Brazil and Mexico, and because the situation is so closely tied to our border states, we’ve also seen significant drops in cases and deaths throughout Arizona, California, Florida and Texas as well.

There is an excellent short book by former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson in which he explains in great detail why lockdowns are ineffective against preventing the spread of COVID-19. Mr. Berenson provides well-researched scientific reasons based on data but he leaves out the 800-pound gorilla in the room: the politics of the coronavirus.

In January 2020, the unemployment rate stood at its lowest number in more than half a century. It would’ve been an extremely difficult feat to win an election against the President who created such a historically strong economy; there’s simply no arguing with numbers.

Let’s admit it, most people are concerned about the economy over almost anything else. Remember that wonderful saying, “It’s the economy stupid” coined in 1992 by Democratic Strategist James Carville? Well, it really is. Or it really was because coronavirus was able to infect and sicken one of the healthiest U.S. economies in our nation’s history.

There’s no doubt ill-advised lockdowns destroyed the economy and created unprecedented levels of unemployment, driving national discontent to soaring heights. This new concern about rising cases and a small amount of rising deaths in border states is another attempt to keep the economy locked down until the elections. There are basically four things Democratic governors can do to defeat Donald Trump in November:

  1. Keep the economy locked down to depress GDP numbers, making unemployment numbers artificially high in their states.
  2. Block schools from re-opening in September, which would inhibit parents from easily working, whether it’s at home or in the office.
  3. Create a situation where unemployment benefits are higher than the salaries of many who lost their jobs thereby providing no incentive for these unemployed workers to return to work.
  4. Encourage mail-in ballots due to the coronavirus, which can be replete with voter fraud and thus fraudulently can swing the election in the Democrats’ favor.

So far the governors of Arizona, Florida and Texas have resisted locking down their states again although California Governor Gavin Newsom has locked down most of his state. Governor Newsom’s actions to successfully shut down businesses once again, thwarting any growth from the semi-recovering economy, is just one more way Democratic politicians are using coronavirus as an effective strategy to defeat President Trump in November.

In his book, Mr. Berenson avoided any discussion about the politics of the coronavirus, which I understand, (keep to the facts) but in this particular situation, a no-politics treatise on the topic of COVID-19 is like corona without the virus – it misses the point. If anything has been proven by this entire coronavirus fiasco, it’s that in the real world, no matter how many times you present the scientific evidence, politics trumps science every time.

Follow on Instagram: @thepoliticsofduh

A Fifty Percent Lockdown Wasn’t Good Enough for Dr. Fauci

It’s common myth that the human brain only uses a small percentage of cells. Actually, in most normal humans all of the brain is used except, of course, in the case of Dr. Fauci, who uses less than 50%. How do I know? Well, just listen to all the absurd things he says.

On Friday, while testifying for a coronavirus House panel, Dr. Fauci claimed that the United States did not have severe enough lockdowns and if we had only locked down more, we could’ve saved more lives. According to a CBS News article, “[Dr. Fauci] explained that most European countries shut their economy by 95%, while functionally the U.S. only shut its economy down by 50%.”

Let’s examine this statement. All non-essential businesses were shut down. Schools were shut down. Places of worship and restaurants were shut down. There really wasn’t much left that we didn’t shut down. Perhaps Dr. Fauci would’ve liked us to shut down all grocery stores? Who needs grocery stores when we could’ve survived on the likes of Amazon Whole Foods delivery or FreshDirect? Dr. Fauci probably doesn’t understand that when things shut down, even getting food deliveries was problematic with few – if any – time slots available due to the fact that so many people were ordering online. If grocery stores shut down, the delivery services would’ve been overwhelmed to the point of collapse.

How about liquor stores? We could’ve done without them, right? A strong argument can be made that Fauci’s insane policies forced many people to take up drinking. Marijuana dispensaries were also essential because Dr. Fauci’s constant flip-flopping contributed to many people turning to marijuana and other drugs to calm fear-mongered nerves.

What if we had more severe stay-at-home orders? He could’ve learned from his Chinese friends and done as they did – nail down the doors and block people from exiting their own apartments or homes.

Masks were necessary whenever he said they were; it really depended on how fully functioning his brain was that day. He probably could have recommended goggles like he does now and while he’s at it, let’s throw in earplugs. Wait, let’s not stop at blocking our eyes and ears, let’s get wetsuits and portable oxygen generators and astronaut suits we can all wear until the election. Would that be considered more locked down to Dr. Fauci?

I haven’t been calculating so I don’t know how much we’ve upped the 50% lockdown figure (maybe with all of the above we’d be at 85%? 90%?) And according to Dr. Fauci, shutting down even more would’ve helped contain the coronavirus spread.

This from the “official” who, when the virus first broke out, only spoke about flattening the curve, flattening the curve to indefinite lockdowns to a vaccine and then a second and third wave coming. Listening to him makes it sound like we have no hope of ever getting past this and resuming normal lives.

In my opinion, I think if Dr. Fauci wasn’t around giving us his “advice,” America would have had 50% less deaths. Maybe we’d have less suicides and less mental health issues and fewer instances of domestic abuse. There might even be less people who died because they skipped cancer, heart and other screenings due to the lockdown. The panic instilled by his doom-and-gloom predictions did far worse than they did good.

Dr. Fauci must be very disappointed the unemployment rate is only at 11% right now; if we would’ve locked down even more, this figure could be much higher, I’d estimate at least 25% of Americans could’ve been unemployed by now if we followed Fauci’s recent statement about locking down even more. One quarter of our country out of jobs? How unfortunate, as Dr. Fauci would say. (Luckily for Dr. Fauci, people like him and other government workers are never unemployed. They get a check no matter what they do … or don’t do.)

Even the glorious Governor of New York Andrew Cuomo said he was baffled because 66% of the deaths occurred among people who stayed at home, compared with essential workers who were forced to go out in order to keep society functioning at a minimal level. Also of note: The four most locked down states – New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Pennsylvania – had 40% of all coronavirus deaths.

Quarantining healthy people had never been tried before and it could have actually made things worse but Dr. Fauci seems to know what’s best for us. Honestly, at this point it would be better for Americans if Dr. Fauci took up tulip gardening in Holland and faded away from American public health policy forever.

Follow on Instagram: @thepoliticsofduh.

Counting Sheep: Millennials, Masks and the Myth of Independent Thinking

For a virus that primarily targets the elderly, logic dictates older Americans would advocate the loudest for stricter coronavirus measures. But as it turns out, COVID-19 and its ensuing non-scientific contagion methods have a surprising cohort: millennials.

A recent poll by Morning Consult and Politico revealed more than 70% of Americans would support mandatory mask-wearing enforceable by fines or jail time. The vast majority of supporters were Generation Z, Baby Boomers (78%) and a majority of Democrats (86%).

Even though mask-wearing is far from proven science and in fact most scientific studies show the typical cloth mask is completely ineffective, there is no questioning authority. These poll results show currently there is just blind obedience to what the media and “medical officials” like Dr. Changes-His-Opinion-All-The-Time-Fauci say. 

Decades ago, it used to be the younger people who were the least supportive of government institutions such as the FBI and the CIA. Today, everything that the FBI and CIA does seems to be accepted by the young people on the left, especially concerning the present administration. Years ago, the model of the younger generation used to be don’t trust anyone over 30. The new motto should be: I implicitly trust the media and government institutions to tell me the truth because I don’t know how to use my own mind and do my own research.

The CDC – with its frontman Dr. Fauci – has become the oracle of truth, especially to young people. It doesn’t matter that he’s been wrong about so many things, like his flip-flop on the use of masks; he can do no wrong. He is the savior of the millennial sheep and like sheep, they count on him.

It’s ironic the people who are the most cautious, the strongest proponents of shutdowns and mandatory mask-wearing are exactly those who are the least likely to be seriously affected by COVID-19.

Statistics via Worldometers.info

All statistics and studies show COVID-19 primarily impacts the very old and those with co-morbidities; to young people, it’s no more deadly than the flu. This strange disconnect between illusion and reality, between reason and a generational inability to think independently of the absurd media narrative has made millennials blind conformists in the face of facts and truth.

It’s doubly ironic millennials are also those most financially constricted by the very lockdowns they so proudly post about on Instagram and dance to in TikTok videos. With a crippled economy, unemployment rates nationwide have skyrocketed and as that sweet $600 per week incentive dwindles to about $200 a week, will millennials finally wake up to the real world? Because as it stands now, they’re probably looking down a dark future of being jobless and broke. (But at least they’ll have their masks to protect them, right?)

The health of our economy is just as important as the health of our people. Without small businesses, without the sectors that have been virtually wiped out by COVID-19 shutdowns (I’m looking at you, hospitality and restaurants) there’s a serious dearth of jobs for the younger generations.

If economies don’t open back up, it’s very possible young people will be totally dependent on government handouts for a long, long time to come. Perhaps this is what the Democrats want, and why they’ve so sharply turned into thinly veiled socialists. Socialism, foolishness, sheepish behavior … call it what you want but the dire situation we’re facing can’t be covered up with a cloth mask.