Report: Coronavirus Vaccine Could Be Approved Later in 2020

An analyst at Goldman Sachs thinks a coronavirus vaccine could be approved before year-end by the U.S. as the country tries to stem a massive uptick in cases.

Data compiled by Johns Hopkins University showed U.S. cases grew by a staggering 77,200 — shattering a one-day record. Cases are rising in nearly every state as authorities roll back social distancing measures. California, Florida and Texas are some of the hardest-hit states recently. On Thursday alone, they combined for more than 38,000 cases.

The virus’ rapid spread has led the U.S. government to fast track the development of a potential vaccine, leading Goldman analyst Salveen Richter to believe “a vaccine may gain US approval in 2H20.” (Read more from “Report: Coronavirus Vaccine Could Be Approved Later in 2020” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Who Benefits from Alaskan’s Binding Caucuses?

We’ve had many interesting legislative sessions in Alaska this last decade, but these last two years have really highlighted a unique situation we’re in. When I say unique, I mean that no other state has a binding caucus in their legislature, and in fact, some have laws against the concept. So what is a binding caucus? A caucus is just a group of legislators that agree on one or more issues who want to work together to help advance those issues. There’s certainly nothing wrong with that. The best legislation comes through cooperation. There is usually one large caucus that determines leadership and the direction of each body of the legislature.

However Alaska’s type of binding caucus controls the whole body with a built-in commitment that says every member must vote for the capital and operating budget. They must also vote with leadership on every single technical process motion. The caucus is joined because of ‘quid pro quo’. The legislators joining the caucus get the benefits of powerful committee positions and extra staff. So what does this all mean?

First, the elected official must agree to vote for bills and motions up-front, up to two years in advance. This is before they’ve read the bill or heard the motion. Second, they have to vote that way even if it
hurts their district and constituents. Third, they must vote that way even if it violates their conscience. Finally, there is punishment for those who don’t vote as they are told. They can be thrown out of the
caucus, or as we saw this last session, lose most of their staff and their committee positions, which happened to three different Senators.

The main purpose for the binding caucus is to concentrate power in the hands of the leadership. Those who are accepted into leadership have the power to do anything they want. That’s how they were able to strip out the COVID stimulus that was voted into the budget. It’s how they were able to steal two-thirds of your PFD this year even though the votes were against them. The entire budget in the Senate was determined by the six members of leadership, so most districts had no say in the budget.

Alaska’s binding caucus is so much worse than that. The legislative leaders have decided that statute no longer applies to them. So when the Governor called a session in Wasilla in accordance with Alaska statute and Constitution, the Legislative leadership decided that they were above statute and they refused to meet anywhere but Juneau (where all their perks and lobbyists were). What’s “funny” is that that was the same statute that they had used a few years before to not meet in Juneau when Governor Walker called a special session and they voted to meet in Anchorage. So yeah, they obey the law when it works for them. After the governor changed his mind and everyone was in Juneau they punished the Senate Majority Leader for obeying the law and stripped her of her position. Remember, every time they choose to go over a 90-day session they are breaking statute, since the people voted in a 90-day session limit that hasn’t been revoked.

When I was on the Assembly, if we needed to do something different than what was in code; like waiving Title 16, then we brought forth an ordinance that said that, took public testimony on it, and voted on it publicly. In our Legislature, the leadership of the binding caucus just makes up rules as they go along, being completely unaccountable to the people and even breaking their own uniform rules of conduct.

This whole situation these last two years has really brought the integrity issues of the binding caucus to light, and so many of the Republican primaries around the State are happening because of the dissatisfaction with how our Legislators have been acting or how they have been cowed into inaction. For those in districts with these kind of primaries this is the critical issue that you need to ask your candidates about. It’s time to free our legislators to vote with integrity as representatives of the people in their districts. Please hold their feet to the fire.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Health Officer Caught Labeling Motorcycle Accident as COVID-19 Death

An individual who was killed in a fatal motorcycle crash in Florida was recently listed as a COVID-19 death for the Sunshine State, according to a state health official.

The truth about the death was brought to light after FOX 35 News asked Orange County Health Officer Dr. Raul Pino whether the two individuals in their 20s who were listed as coronavirus deaths had any underlying conditions. . .

Pino was then questioned on whether the data from the individual who passed away in the motorcycle crash had been removed from the system, to which Pino said, “I don’t think so. I have to double-check.

In an odd continuation, Pino went on to insist that one could “argue” that COVID-19 may have “caused” the individual to crash. Pino stated:

We were arguing, discussing, or trying to argue with the state. Not because of the numbers…it’s 100…it doesn’t make any difference if it’s 99, but the fact that the individual didn’t die from COVID-19…died in the crash. But you could actually argue that it could have been the COVID-19 that caused him to crash. I don’t know the conclusion of that one.

(Read more from “Health Officer Caught Labeling Motorcycle Accident as COVID-19 Death” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Ghislaine Maxwell Secretly Married to White House Adviser, CFR Member, CEO?; Neighbors of Maxwell Were So Disgusted at Alleged Trafficker They Tried to ‘Ostracize’ Her

Neighbors of Ghislaine Maxwell and Her Tech CEO Lover Were So Disgusted When They Learned an Accused Sex Trafficker Was Living in Their Midst They Tried to ‘Ostracize’ Couple and Compel Them to Leave Quiet Massachusetts Town

By Daily Mail. Ghislaine Maxwell’s neighbors were so disgusted when they discovered an accused sex trafficker was living among them that they tried to harass her into leaving, DailyMail.com has learned exclusively.

It led to a court case where Maxwell’s 14-years-younger lover Scott Borgerson successfully fought the neighbors’ decision to prevent them from using paths and a beach near their Massachusetts oceanfront property, part of the 40-acre estate shared by other owners. . .

But in February 2019 neighbors learned the quiet, well-dressed woman in their midst had been accused of procuring young girls for pedophile Jeffrey Epstein — and they decided to act.

‘They were absolutely appalled to learn who they were allowing to have the run of their property,’ one resident told DailyMail.com.

‘The second they learned she was involved with Epstein they decided to try to limit how much they could use their land.’ (Read more from “Neighbors of Ghislaine Maxwell and Her Tech CEO Lover Were So Disgusted When They Learned an Accused Sex Trafficker Was Living in Their Midst They Tried to ‘Ostracize’ Couple and Compel Them to Leave Quiet Massachusetts Town” HERE)

__________________________________________

Ghislaine Maxwell Is Secretly Married

By New York Post. Ghislaine Maxwell secretly wed to safeguard her fortune amid her legal woes, a friend claims in a new report.

The pal believes the hidden marriage — a bombshell revelation at Maxwell’s court hearing — was likely orchestrated “to protect the money she had,” the Times UK reported.

Prosecutors say the British heiress is linked to 15 different bank accounts, some with balances of more than $20 million, and that she keeps other accounts in foreign countries containing more than $1 million. . .

“No one knew she was married,” the ex-chum told the outlet, adding that she had been in a relationship for a while with the tech entrepreneur Scott Borgerson.

“I don’t know of any other guy who she has actually seen.” (Read more from “Ghislaine Maxwell Is Secretly Married” HERE)

__________________________________________

Maxwell’s secretly married husband may be CEO Scott Borgerson, member of CFR

By Lia Eustachewich. Though the British heiress — who is accused of helping the late billionaire perv Jeffrey Epstein target underage girls — didn’t say the name of her mystery spouse, reports suggest it could be British tech CEO Scott Borgerson.

Maxwell was linked to the divorced dad last year when the Daily Mail said she was living at his oceanfront mansion in Manchester-by-the-Sea, Mass. . .

He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the co-founder and CEO of CargoMetrics Technologies, which specializes in analyzing data on global shipping, according to his LinkedIn page.

His online résumé also says he spent four years in the US Coast Guard, as both a commanding officer and navigator, and worked as an assistant professor at the US Coast Guard Academy.

Borgerson earned a Ph.D. from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and “has advised the White House on maritime policy,” per LinkedIn. (Read more about Maxwell’s secretly married status HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Humanity Is Going Into a Massive Decline. That’s a Problem.

People around the globe are having way fewer babies. By the year 2100, that might turn into a pretty big problem for humanity — rather than the relief one might expect.

If they aren’t already, dozens of countries’ populations will be going into decline in this century, according to a new study published in the Lancet this week. 23 countries are expected to feel this effect intensify, with their populations dropping to half of what they are now by the year 2100.

The global population will peak at 9.7 billion around 2064, according to the new projection, and then drop off to 8.8 billion towards the end of the century.

“That’s a pretty big thing; most of the world is transitioning into natural population decline,” Christopher Murray, co-author and researcher at the University of Washington, Seattle, told the BBC. “I think it’s incredibly hard to think this through and recognize how big a thing this is; it’s extraordinary, we’ll have to reorganize societies.”

The reality is that with more women receiving an education and entering the work force, combined with the wide availability of contraception, fertility rates are dropping, sometimes precipitously, around the world — a stark reversal of the baby boom following the Second World War. (Read more from “Humanity Is Going Into a Massive Decline. That’s a Problem.” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

If the Panicmongers Were Consistent, We’d Close the Schools Every Flu Season

On December 17, 2014, Rebecca Taylor received a call from the school nurse in her daughter Scarlet’s Tacoma, Washington, school saying that Scarlet had a fever and Rebecca should pick her up. Two days later, and after just four hours of being in the hospital from what should have been a routine flu in an otherwise healthy child, Scarlet was dead.

While this was a rare tragic story, it’s less rare than parallel stories of COVID-19, yet nobody ever thought to shut schools during the flu season.

Adam Ratner, an NYU physician of pediatric infectious disease, noted that so far this season he has had young patients who have developed life-threatening pneumonias and needed surgeries to drain abscesses in their chests — and most of these children were perfectly healthy before they got the flu.

That is a quote from a CNN article on January 7 about the deadliness of the flu season to children in a year when the seasonal flu killed 174 school-age children. Yet, like most facts that can be gleaned through extensive research online, if it’s not published incessantly in daily headline news and obsessed about by the media-political complex, people don’t know about it. And if they don’t know about it, they are not scared of it.

The reality is that every flu season, many more children die from this common ailment than have from COVID-19. And unlike with COVID-19, where the rare pediatric deaths are among those who have serious conditions, many of the flu deaths occur in perfectly healthy children. According to the CDC, “influenza is dangerous to children,” and during the 2017-2018 flu season, which everyone forgets was considered a pandemic, the federal agency estimates that the actual number of pediatric deaths was closer to 600.

A 2018 CDC study of six flu seasons concluded that half of flu-related deaths occurred in otherwise healthy children, 22% of whom were fully vaccinated. Thus, even with a vaccine, the flu is still much more deadly for children, especially perfectly healthy children.

Just how scary is the flu to children, if we were to apply the same lack of context and perspective as we do with this virus? Perfectly healthy children could die so quickly, the parents don’t even see it coming. From the 2018 CDC study:

Nearly two-thirds of children died within seven days of developing symptoms. Over one-third died at home or in the emergency department prior to hospital admission. In fact, children without other medical conditions that would predispose them to serious flu complications were more likely to die before hospital admission.

Moreover, other kids get seriously ill and develop side effects, such as blindness. One four-year -old girl in Iowa was left blind by the flu this past season. Even those who suffer no serious consequences are often bedridden for a week or longer with high fever, muscle ache, and incessant coughing, unlike with COVID-19, where almost every child who develops it is asymptomatic or very mildly symptomatic.

Thus, if we are going to limit or modify or schooling and mandate that kids wear suffocating masks all day, shouldn’t this be done every year from November to April – by a factor of 10? And given that the flu does linger for all months of the year at least at the threat level of COVID-19 to children during the off months, if schools are closed for COVID-19, shouldn’t they always be closed because of the flu?

In other words, if you give me control of the media and medical academia for a month, I will have every parent in America easily convinced that children must be locked down forever. If the threat level of COVID-19 to children is the new threshold for shutdown, we are done as a civilization, even if this particular virus becomes extinct tomorrow. Remember, unlike with this virus, where children barely contribute to community spread, with the flu, children contribute substantially to the spread and pick it up most often from other kids in school.

This is a glimpse into the context and perspective that is lacking in the hyper-focus on the worst outcomes in any group of people in a country this size.

Just consider the statement from California Superintendent of Instruction Tony Thurmond. “I do think that, if school had to open tomorrow, most of our districts would open in distance learning,” he said during a briefing earlier this week as county governments in L.A. and San Diego closed schools in September. “And that is a decision that I think is a good decision if conditions don’t change.”

If conditions don’t change? Not a single child has died of COVID-19 in the state of California. Not one in this state of 40 million people. Kids are not only more likely to die of the flu, but are more likely to die in a car crash on the way to school or in a playground accident at school.

Also, consider the fact that they are insinuating that schools can’t return to normal until there is a vaccine. Well, when was the last time we had a foolproof vaccine for a respiratory virus? Notice how the flu is much more dangerous for children than COVID-19, even though there already is a vaccine. According to the California Department of Public Health’s Influenza Surveillance Report, there were 187 reported ICU and fatal cases of the flu among children during the 2017-2018 season. Among those cases with available influenza vaccination information (120 cases), 61 (50.8%) received the 2017–2018 influenza vaccine.

Not only does that show the flu is more deadly, but it also demonstrates that even once we get a vaccine for a respiratory virus, they are often not nearly as foolproof as other vaccines. Thus, if zero pediatric deaths in California is too much of a risk to assume, then a half-baked vaccine won’t exactly matter.

Finally, we already know that children almost always get the virus from adults and that the primary location for transmission is at home. So, if we are really concerned about an infinitesimal degree of risk to children, who’s to say that school closures would mitigate that degree of risk? As a Johns Hopkins analysis of mass quarantine in 2006, which was co-authored by famed smallpox eradicator D.A. Henderson, noted, “When schools closed for a winter holiday during the 1918 pandemic in Chicago, ‘more influenza cases developed among pupils . . . than when schools were in session.’”

What is truly driving the agenda to close schools? (For more from the author of “If the Panicmongers Were Consistent, We’d Close the Schools Every Flu Season” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

New Study Shows 17 Years of Potential T Cell Immunity in SARS-Infected Patients

God has a way of prepping the human body for potentially deadly viruses to somewhat mitigate the amount of death we’d otherwise suffer every year from all sorts of microbiological threats. COVID-19 is not different.

The latest research on T cells, white blood cells produced by the immune system to ward off infections through memory of past pathogens, show that even those patients who never develop antibodies or have lost them over time will retain T cell immunity that remembers to fight off coronaviruses in the future. Moreover, the study provides new evidence for the theory that herd immunity could be achieved at an approximately 20% infection rate for most cities, thanks to T cell cross-immunity from other coronaviruses.

The latest version of panic porn being propagated by the media is that many people don’t produce antibodies and that even more of those infected will lose them over time, potentially opening them up to reinfection.

Why we automatically assume the worst of this virus and base our response on the idea of this virus defying all known patterns remains a mystery, but this study from Singapore should place the onus on naysayers to show why this form of coronavirus would be different from others.

Researchers in Singapore conducted a study, first out in preprint in May and now peer-reviewed and published at Nature, of 23 patients who recovered from SARS in 2003 and found that all 23 retained memory T cells induced by that original pathogen still in their systems. That in itself is terrific news to find this immunity after 17 years. Then they studied 36 convalescent SARS-CoV-2 patients and found that they had also produced similar T cells. While SARS-CoV-2 is a new virus and distinct from SARS-CoV-1, there is strong reason to believe that T cell memory produced by the body to protect from future relapses of this virus would not be weaker or more short-lived than T cell memory from SARS-1.

If the implications of this research turn out to be true, it would mean that all those infected with SARS-Cov-2 will retain at least partial immunity to the virus. This doesn’t necessarily mean they will be fully immune. This would likely mean, for many previously infected patients, that they could theoretically test positive again with a PCR test, but the T cells would ward off the symptoms and reduce their infective capabilities to transmit to others.

But there’s more good news, not just for those who have already gotten the virus but for many who may get it. Very few people in America have been exposed to SARS and would therefore not have that immunity. However, researchers have long suspected that there is cross-immunity from other coronaviruses – four of which are forms of the common cold that could account for anywhere between 15% and 30% of colds on a given year. The cross-immunity theory has been proven across other pathogens and was established during the H1N1 outbreak in 2009 when many people appeared to be immune, presumably, to similar prior outbreaks of seasonal H1N1 flues.

Cross-immunity with other coronaviruses was at least partially confirmed when the researchers in the Singapore study found the samples of T cells from convalescent SARS-1 patients to have cross-reactive potential against SARS-CoV-2 during lab simulations. To test this out further on more common forms of coronavirus – OC43, HKU1, NL63, and 229E – they took samples from 37 random blood donors who had no history of SARS, COVID-19, or contact with SARS/COVID-19 patients. They found that 19 of the 37 had T cells that were reactive to SARS-CoV-2, even though they had no known exposure to this virus.

How can that be? A large portion of the population likely has at least partial cross-immunity through T cell memory cells induced by contracting one of those four common cold coronaviruses. This would explain why so many places seem to experience a burnout of the virus after it reaches only 15%-20% prevalence, according to serology tests. Yes, only 15%-20% have antibodies, but many more likely have cross-immunity through T cells, as Nobel laureate Michael Levitt, Oxford epidemiologist Sunetra Gupta, and Stanford Professor John Ioannidis predicted.

This harmonizes with a previous study from the La Joya Institute of Immunology in California that showed such cross-reactive responses in 40%-60% of random blood donors

This might also explain why so many people are found to be asymptomatic and possibly many more have had the virus asymptomatically but never tested positive for antibodies. Studies have found as many as 40% of asymptomatic patients lose antibodies after the early convalescent period. Thus, just because you find an antibody serology test implying only 5%-15% of the population has antibodies doesn’t mean that an even greater portion has not already been exposed to the virus but only produced T cells to ward it off, and a certain greater percentage never even became infected with the virus because they had full immunity. A study of 200 blood donors in Sweden found twice as many samples with T cells as samples with antibodies.

Also, the same reason why someone initially got the virus asymptomatically, likely because of T cell memory produced by cross-immunity, is the same reason they will continue to be free of symptoms in the future, even if they don’t possesses antibodies.

The number of people who have this cross-immunity is likely different throughout the world. One recent preprint study analyzing T cell immunity in blood donors in Germany detected “Cross-reactive SARS-CoV-2 T-cell epitopes revealed preexisting T-cell responses in 81% of unexposed individuals.” Accordingly, many people might stop making the antibodies after a few months or years, especially following a mild infection, but their immune system produces the cells that remember the recipe for defeating the virus if it returns.

While we are still learning more about this virus and the human immune system response to it every day, these findings should make us optimistic in the long run, unless the media has made us immune to any good news. (For more from the author of “New Study Shows 17 Years of Potential T Cell Immunity in SARS-Infected Patients” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Trump Vows to Make Sweeping Cuts to Federal Regulations

President Trump shared powerful remarks from the Rose Garden on Thursday afternoon, calling for an end to suffocating federal regulations that keep Americans from achieving their dreams.

The president took specific aim at Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, lampooning his time as vice president in the Obama White House.

“Our entire economy and our very way of life are threatened by Biden’s plans,” Trump said, flanked by a blue truck and a red truck, symbolizing the heavy load of regulations associated with the Democrat’s plan. Trump said the energy industry and the millions of jobs that came with it would suffer greatly under a Joe Biden presidency. . .

“Thousand of companies, plants, factories would be closed,” Trump said about the Democrats’ plans to further impose “green,” stifling regulations on American industry. “Under this dismal future, energy would be unaffordable for the vast majority of Americans. The American dream would be sniffed out so quickly and replaced with a socialist disaster.”

The president also took specific aim at plans that the left has to impose housing regulations on communities in suburban areas, which could give preference to potential buyers and renters based solely on skin color. Advocates for these housing regulations argue that minority Americans are given less opportunity to live in the suburbs. However, the Fair Housing Act of 1968 specifically forbids “discrimination concerning the sale, rental and financing of housing based on race, religion, national origin or sex.” (Read more from “Trump Vows to Make Sweeping Cuts to Federal Regulations” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

WATCH: Biden Advisor Admits They Handled Swine Flu Horribly

During an event at the National Press Club in Washington D.C., Biden campaign advisor Ron Klein, who also worked for Vice President Biden in the White House and led the response to the Ebola outbreak, explained how the Obama administration did “everything wrong” in response to the 2009 swine flu crisis.

“I wasn’t involved directly in the H1N1 response but I lived through it as a White House staffer and what I would say about it is a bunch of really talented, really great people were working on it and we did every possible thing wrong. Sixty million Americans got H1N1 during that period of time. It is purely a fortuity that this isn’t one of the great mass casualty events in American history. It had nothing to do with us doing anything right. It was just luck.

(Read more from “WATCH: Biden Advisor Admits They Handled Swine Flu Horribly” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Locking America Down Again Is Exactly What China Wants

. . .Lockdowns are not necessary to prevent coronavirus deaths, since the current capacity for treating cases is far above what is needed and people are going to get this disease until there’s a cure. Further, lockdowns accelerate systemic weaknesses such as our national debt, poor education, large numbers of working-age men who do not work, failure to pay for decades of overspending at both the national and state levels, tendency to bail out corrupt institutions such as schools, big business, and hospitals, and bloated health care system.

The Chinese Communist Party knows of all this. That is why it has expertly manipulated American corporate media’s anti-American biases to undermine their biggest competitor for control of the world.

Lockdowns of Western nations, and chiefly of the United States, are China’s only hope for achieving this long-term plan in its coronavirus-weakened state. Thus, continuing to play into this mass-murdering regime’s hands through cuckolded American leadership will have far more deadly consequences than coronavirus. This is why the lockdowns need to end now, and never come back again.

. . .In urging lockdowns, therefore, U.S. media has amplified and helped implement Communist goals. The Chinese Communist Party endorsed, promulgated, and lobbied for strict lockdowns with the goal of kneecapping foreign competitors, including the United States. As Michael P. Senger pointed out on Twitter based on a June New York Times article, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) “launched a massive social media campaign in Italy to advertise its coronavirus lockdown measures in early March.”

. . .It is no exaggeration to say that the world’s future depends on the United States acting strategically to counter Chinese propaganda and aims rather than strangling ourselves on lies. Our economy and military sustain the world. China is the number one beneficiary if we choke, and it has been wanting to challenge the United States for dominant global power for decades. They needed another generation or two to be able to get there. (Read more from “Locking America Down Again Is Exactly What China Wants” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE