I don't understand public health either. Being a cretin I assumed it might involve early treatment protocols, helping people address risk factors like Vitamin D deficiency or obesity. I also thought it might involve keeping a population calm and well informed rather than terrorised and misled. At the very least I thought it would make use of the insights and experience of medical practitioners on the ground.
Strictly speaking, the things you mention are all in the realm of personal health.
As traditionally apprehended, public health involves those health matters which touch upon public spaces. Thus, apprising the public of hospitalization rates and capacities is a public health function. Establishing protocols to mitigate the community spread of disease in and through public spaces and infrastructures is a public health function.
The limitations on what may be legally done in furtherance of the public health are the constitutional limitations on government authority. Even if things like mask mandates were scientifically supported, the legal foundation for a coercive mandate is limited at best even under a state's general police power.
Remember, the limits of what may be done in furtherance of the public health are defined by the constitutional limits on government authority.
Which means NO ONE has lawful constitutional authority to override personal health choices in furtherance of the public health. To do violates at a minimum the first, fourth, and fourteenth amendments to the constitution.
Schadenfreude. I used to think it was such a petty concept, but now, I am not sure this isn't all I will have left as society devolves into techno feudalism.
I've watch in horror as.my family and friends took their clot-shot poison, and now, one of my best friends is dead, another good friend is dead, lots of people I know can't seem not to get sick over and over.
What I am looking forward is the joy I will feel as all of the wokesters have to explain to their sons and daughters that they are sterile because mom/dad had to stand by all of the vaxx tweets they sent out in 2021. No little kiddos in the wokesters houses. So sad.
Well, that's a rather interesting turn of events. Quite surprising how people believe they have the authority to state what us as individuals should do with our bodies as it pertains to others. Especially considering what we know about the vaccines now, I'm surprised so many people can be steadfast (i.e. arrogant) in their convictions. Apparently questioning what's going on means we don't understand COVID enough to speak on the matter. It really is just a form of gatekeeping and nothing less.
But I have come to realize than when someone trundles out Dunning-Krueger, they're running on empty.
Not to brag (well, not much), but I've designed international Virtual Private Networks, Enterprise class Voice Over IP platforms, deployed nationwide data networks, done cost accounting for service industries attached to oil and gas, worked on international taxation issues, while writing programs and middleware shims in ten different computer programming languages.
Oh, and I've developed Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity plans for Fortune-1000 companies (which is how I just happen to know a wee bit about risk assessments!).
When someone leads by insulting my intelligence...frankly it's rather comical. I don't pretend to know everything, but I'm far from the dullest knife in the drawer.
This conversation you had was brought to you by Pfizer and vaccine-induced psychosis and probably $kick-back......that's what COVID health is about...no debate....no conversations of any kind....no treatments of any kind....just vaccines and propaganda....you can't argue with propaganda because it's not based on truth....indoctrination of the highest sort in a field where there is already so much arrogance......the gaslight torch is burning 24.7......
Absolutely......thanks for being here for the long-haul.....we need your heart and mind....It's a tough job....I try and do it with kids and adults at school everyday....this fight is not for the fainthearted, that's for sure.....🙏
Even before they were "woke," they were like that. They seem to be more open about it now. Could be because they've gotten their way for so many years.
Throughout human history, there has been a persistent mindset that makes a virtue out of simple obedience. If one is following the king, one's actions are immediately cleansed of sin. Obedience becomes a form of sanctification.
The flip side of that thought pattern can be found in the closing verse of Judges.
"In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in his own eyes."
Regardless of how one frames one's beliefs, moral choices are invariably individual and personal choices--outsourcing those choices can never be a moral act. Judges and also the opening passages of 1 Kings teaches this.
The scary part is we've ALREADY given them every person you mention, and more besides.
We've given them the data.
They are choosing to avoid interrogating the data for themselves, and rely solely on what the "authorities" have said.
I cannot say this enough: do not agree with something just because an "expert" said so. Look at the facts, weigh the evidence, and make your own conclusions.
If you think I'm wrong, say so. Tell me your logic, show me your evidence, and let's learn something together.
Maybe an embalmer will be fishing a three foot long blood clot out of her femoral artery soon.
I don't understand public health either. Being a cretin I assumed it might involve early treatment protocols, helping people address risk factors like Vitamin D deficiency or obesity. I also thought it might involve keeping a population calm and well informed rather than terrorised and misled. At the very least I thought it would make use of the insights and experience of medical practitioners on the ground.
More fool me.
Strictly speaking, the things you mention are all in the realm of personal health.
As traditionally apprehended, public health involves those health matters which touch upon public spaces. Thus, apprising the public of hospitalization rates and capacities is a public health function. Establishing protocols to mitigate the community spread of disease in and through public spaces and infrastructures is a public health function.
The limitations on what may be legally done in furtherance of the public health are the constitutional limitations on government authority. Even if things like mask mandates were scientifically supported, the legal foundation for a coercive mandate is limited at best even under a state's general police power.
True enough, thanks for explaining the distinction. That leaves me with two points:
1. Who decides how much the sphere of public health gets to overrule personal health and how can we remove them?
2. To my mind public health is a nonsense if its overriding personal health rather than working in harmony with it.
Remember, the limits of what may be done in furtherance of the public health are defined by the constitutional limits on government authority.
Which means NO ONE has lawful constitutional authority to override personal health choices in furtherance of the public health. To do violates at a minimum the first, fourth, and fourteenth amendments to the constitution.
Schadenfreude. I used to think it was such a petty concept, but now, I am not sure this isn't all I will have left as society devolves into techno feudalism.
I've watch in horror as.my family and friends took their clot-shot poison, and now, one of my best friends is dead, another good friend is dead, lots of people I know can't seem not to get sick over and over.
What I am looking forward is the joy I will feel as all of the wokesters have to explain to their sons and daughters that they are sterile because mom/dad had to stand by all of the vaxx tweets they sent out in 2021. No little kiddos in the wokesters houses. So sad.
My condolences for your losses.
Sad. Horrific. And getting sadder and more horrible.
Well, that's a rather interesting turn of events. Quite surprising how people believe they have the authority to state what us as individuals should do with our bodies as it pertains to others. Especially considering what we know about the vaccines now, I'm surprised so many people can be steadfast (i.e. arrogant) in their convictions. Apparently questioning what's going on means we don't understand COVID enough to speak on the matter. It really is just a form of gatekeeping and nothing less.
It's why I did an historical perspective on the scientific bastardy of Faucism.
https://allfactsmatter.substack.com/p/before-faucism-science-endured-lysenkoism
The willingness of people to pervert science in the name of power is an evil all to itself.
Ideology should never be a part of scientific inquiry.
Why do these ephithet-lobbing goofballs not realize that Dunning-Krueger can work both ways?
The child in me wants to say "Oooh! Somebody learned a BIG WORD today!"
Believe me, THAT temptation was quite strong!
But I have come to realize than when someone trundles out Dunning-Krueger, they're running on empty.
Not to brag (well, not much), but I've designed international Virtual Private Networks, Enterprise class Voice Over IP platforms, deployed nationwide data networks, done cost accounting for service industries attached to oil and gas, worked on international taxation issues, while writing programs and middleware shims in ten different computer programming languages.
Oh, and I've developed Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity plans for Fortune-1000 companies (which is how I just happen to know a wee bit about risk assessments!).
When someone leads by insulting my intelligence...frankly it's rather comical. I don't pretend to know everything, but I'm far from the dullest knife in the drawer.
This conversation you had was brought to you by Pfizer and vaccine-induced psychosis and probably $kick-back......that's what COVID health is about...no debate....no conversations of any kind....no treatments of any kind....just vaccines and propaganda....you can't argue with propaganda because it's not based on truth....indoctrination of the highest sort in a field where there is already so much arrogance......the gaslight torch is burning 24.7......
I rarely hold out much hope for converting the blue pilled.
I do hope that someone who sees those tweets is inspired to start asking questions. Ultimately, those are the hearts and minds we can win.
Absolutely......thanks for being here for the long-haul.....we need your heart and mind....It's a tough job....I try and do it with kids and adults at school everyday....this fight is not for the fainthearted, that's for sure.....🙏
No worthwhile fight ever is.
But when at last I am called to account for my time on Earth, I will at least have this much to say to my credit: I was a witness for truth.
That may sound sanctimonious or self-righteous, but that's just where I am these days. Stand for the truth and take whatever comes, good or bad.
We are lucky to have you, brother!!!!! ❤
You are most kind. Thank you!
Risk assessment in 2022:
1. Here is a threat. Trust us.
2. Do these things to avoid the threat, or else.
Irony abounds....
Scary, huh?
Very.
The wokesters want your freedom, and mine. And they are not shy about saying so!
Even before they were "woke," they were like that. They seem to be more open about it now. Could be because they've gotten their way for so many years.
There's never a good empirical explanation for why people choose to follow thus--it just is human nature.
There's a bit of Shakespeare's Henry V (Act IV, scene 1) that somewhat illuminates the logic involved:
" Henry V. I dare say you love him not so ill, to wish him here
alone, howsoever you speak this to feel other men's
minds: methinks I could not die any where so
contented as in the king's company; his cause being
just and his quarrel honourable.
Williams. That's more than we know.
Bates. Ay, or more than we should seek after; for we know
enough, if we know we are the kings subjects: if
his cause be wrong, our obedience to the king wipes
the crime of it out of us."
https://www.opensourceshakespeare.org/views/plays/play_view.php?WorkID=henry5&Act=4&Scene=1&Scope=scene
Throughout human history, there has been a persistent mindset that makes a virtue out of simple obedience. If one is following the king, one's actions are immediately cleansed of sin. Obedience becomes a form of sanctification.
The flip side of that thought pattern can be found in the closing verse of Judges.
"In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in his own eyes."
Regardless of how one frames one's beliefs, moral choices are invariably individual and personal choices--outsourcing those choices can never be a moral act. Judges and also the opening passages of 1 Kings teaches this.
https://blog.petersproverbs.us/2021/11/no-king-in-israel-no-king-required-then.html
The scary part is we've ALREADY given them every person you mention, and more besides.
We've given them the data.
They are choosing to avoid interrogating the data for themselves, and rely solely on what the "authorities" have said.
I cannot say this enough: do not agree with something just because an "expert" said so. Look at the facts, weigh the evidence, and make your own conclusions.
If you think I'm wrong, say so. Tell me your logic, show me your evidence, and let's learn something together.
You do have a point there.