Connect with us

COVID-19

How to interact with people in an uncertain world

Published

7 minute read

I want to propose three general ground rules for interacting with people right now.

The rules are: (1) When you make plans, make them very specific, and avoid changing them at the last minute. (2) Defer to the most cautious person in your presence. (3) Do not take it personally if someone is more cautious than you.
To elaborate, with examples I made up:
(1) Be very detailed about any plans you make to see other people. If you invite friends over to sit in your driveway and have a drink, don’t suggest as people arrive that you sit on the back deck instead. Among your friends might be someone intending to give herself 10 feet of space instead of 6. She might have been excited about the driveway idea because it’s not only outdoors but effectively unbounded; she knew she’d be able to make as much space for herself as she felt she needed. Then you move to the deck and space is more limited, and she is faced with a really awkward decision.
If you and your co-worker decide to order from Domino’s, don’t switch it up and order from a local place instead. Your co-worker might be reassured by Domino’s no-human-contact-out-of-the-oven policy. That might be the most important thing to him.
So maybe you’re rolling your eyes right now and thinking, “But all the latest research shows that transmission on food surfaces is not something to be concerned about. Domino’s policy is overkill.” Or, “Transmission outdoors is super unlikely. The deck is fine!”
Not the point!
The point is that trying to make decisions on the fly is incredibly stressful. You might be 100% confident that you understand the relative risk of things. But you don’t know what other people’s understanding is. And the split-second after being told that the location or the menu has changed is not a good scenario for evaluating risk, especially with an audience. Don’t put people in that position.
(2) On that note, when you and a person in your presence have different (verbalized or apparent) levels of caution, the obvious and decent thing to do is match the more cautious person’s behaviors. If you don’t wear a mask but you notice one of your co-workers tends to, then put on a mask when you are going to be anywhere near them. Their mask usage is a clear indicator that they think mask usage is important. So match that caution in their presence as a courtesy, whether or not you acknowledge the public health value of wearing one.
If you and a friend want to take a walk, and you weren’t thinking 6 feet of space was essential, but they suggest a route and mention that they like it because there is plenty of space to give each other 6 feet, then be conscientious and pay attention, and give them space. If you get to a narrow area, recognize that you’ll have to go single-file until it widens again.
Look for body language. Get in the habit of noticing whether people are inching away or leaning back. This tells you that they are not comfortable. They are more cautious than your instincts. That doesn’t mean your instincts are wrong. But in the presence of this person, you need to defer to theirs.
(3) This also doesn’t mean that this person has an issue with you in particular. Do not take it personally.
Some people are approaching the world with an understanding that there are essentially two groups of people: the ones I live with, and everyone else. From a public health perspective, the standards I apply to interacting with anyone in the latter group should be consistent, whether you are someone I work with, a friend, a relative, or a stranger. I do not and cannot know whether you are carrying a potentially deadly, poorly understood, highly contagious virus, so to the greatest extent possible, I’m going to behave like you are carrying it, no matter who you are. It is more nuanced than that, of course, but not much. The point is, even if you’re not careless, the relative you just met for lunch yesterday might have been careless over the weekend. I do not, and cannot know.
So if someone says no thanks to your back deck or favorite pizza, or they wear a mask in a situation you find unnecessary, or they give you a wide berth around the corner of the trail, it’s really, truly, not about you. People want to interact with the world, and some of us never stop thinking about how to do it right in this not-at-all right world we find ourselves in.
I hope these are ideas people can agree to. I hope that, even if you are tired of modifying your behavior, or skeptical about the seriousness of this virus, you will consider these thoughts with a spirit of kindness. I hope, if you have kids, you will talk to them about how their behavior can not only affect other people’s physical health, but also their emotional well-being while trying to navigate many decisions.
Thanks for reading. Be good to each other. Stay safe. Deep breaths.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Brownstone Institute

The Trump Administration Must Bring Moderna to Heel

Published on

From the Brownstone Institute

Moderna’s European filing also revealed that the company withheld trial results demonstrating that children under 12 who received the vaccine were ten times more likely than those who received the placebo to suffer “serious side effects.”

Last week, independent journalist Alex Berenson reported that a preschool-aged child died of “cardio-respiratory arrest” after taking a dose of Moderna’s Covid mRNA vaccine during its clinical trials. Despite federal requirements to report all trial information, the company withheld the truth for years as it raked in billions from its Covid shots.

The extent of the cover-up remains unknown, but Moderna, headed by CEO Stéphane Bancel, disregarded federal law requiring companies to report “summary results information, including adverse event information, for specified clinical trials of drug products” to clinicaltrials.gov. The company, not the government, is responsible for posting all results, and failure to report the death of a child constitutes a clear breach of US law, which threatens civil action against any party that “falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact.”

To this point, pharmaceutical companies have remained largely immune for their role in perpetrating globally-scaled deception resulting in thousands of vaccine injuries and billions in profits. They have enjoyed a liability shield courtesy of the PREP Act, which offers protections for injuries resulting from vaccines; that indemnity, however, does not extend to non-compliance with federal regulations, material misstatements or omissions of fact, or other offenses.

The death of the child only became known because of an obscure European report released last year, which revealed that Moderna has known about the death for over two years while it continues to advertize Covid shots to children as young as six months old.

Moderna’s European filing also revealed that the company withheld trial results demonstrating that children under 12 who received the vaccine were ten times more likely than those who received the placebo to suffer “serious side effects.” Without any evidence, Moderna claimed that the side effects, including the death of a child, were unrelated to the shots. 

The incoming Trump administration offers a rare opportunity to hold pharmaceutical companies accountable and to investigate the depth of the cover-up.

The FDA is responsible for enforcing the reporting of vaccine trial results, but recent heads of the agency such as Scott Gottlieb and Robert Califf have been fanatical supporters of Big Pharma. Trump’s choice for FDA, Dr. Marty Makary, presents a stark contrast to his predecessors. Makary has criticized the US Government’s reluctance to acknowledge the role of natural immunity in preventing Covid infection, and he opposed the widespread vaccination of children. He testified to Congress, “In the U.S. we gave thousands of healthy kids myocarditis for no good reason, they were already immune. This was avoidable.”

President-elect Trump has tapped Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., perhaps the most well-known critic of the Covid vaccines, to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the FDA. He has named Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, an author of the Great Barrington Declaration, as his choice to head the National Institutes of Health. Further, Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) told Berenson that he plans to subpoena the FDA once Republicans become the majority party in the Senate this month.

President Trump’s first term was ultimately defined by his failure to fulfill his pledge to “drain the swamp.” A corrupt bureaucracy, personified in many ways by Dr. Anthony Fauci, aided and abetted by advisors like his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, hijacked the president’s agenda. Now, the Trump administration has an unlikely yet monumental opportunity for health reform, which can start on January 20 with an investigation into Moderna’s cover-up.

The Covid response doomed Trump 1.0. Whether one regards this as a monumental error, the betrayal of a president by his advisors, an event beyond the president’s control, or a deeper and more complex plot involving everything and everyone associated with the government, both in the US and around the world, there is no question of the scale of the calamity for the public. The shots are part of that, the capstone failure of a long line of foreshadowing with lockdowns and all that was associated with pre-pharmaceutical interventions. The antidote came not as a cure but, for many, the disease itself.

There must be truth if not justice.


Brownstone Institute

Articles by Brownstone Institute, a nonprofit organization founded in May of 2021 in support of a society that minimizes the role of violence in public life.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Calls for COVID-19 vaccine recall – FDA’s own study finds DNA contamination in Pfizer vaccines

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Dr. Michael Nevradakis for The Defender

“It is alarming that the public is made aware of this contamination in an obscure journal that features high school science research. One has to ask, ‘Where is the FDA now?’ and ‘Why hasn’t the public been alerted of this?’”

The peer-reviewed study in the Journal of High School Science was authored by three high school students and performed at an FDA lab under the supervision of FDA scientists. The findings prompted renewed calls for a moratorium on COVID-19 vaccines.

peer-reviewed study performed at a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) laboratory by high school students has confirmed the presence of a high level of DNA contamination in Pfizer’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.

The study, published December 29, 2024, in the Journal of High School Science, was authored by three students at Centreville High School in Clifton, Virginia, and performed under the supervision of FDA scientists.

Maryanne Demasi, Ph.D., an investigative medical reporter, was the first to report on the study.

READ: British doctor has medical license revoked over warning of COVID shot dangers

The research, performed at the FDA’s White Oak Campus in Maryland, found that levels of residual DNA in the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine were 6 to 470 times higher than regulatory safety limits. The students tested two lots of the vaccine, finding they contained “residual DNA to a level that exceeds 10 ng [nanograms] per dose.”

“The potential health risk posed by residual small DNA fragments is currently unknown,” the study stated. However, the authors also said that DNA contamination may result in insertional mutagenesis –  or DNA mutations – that can cause cancer.

Speaking last month on “The Defender In-Depth,” Kevin McKernan, who first identified DNA contamination in the shots in 2023, said DNA in vaccines can pose health risks because the DNA “could integrate into the genome and cause disruption of the genome … or it could disrupt other genes that are related to cancer.”

The FDA did not respond to multiple requests for comment on the study.

COVID vaccines ‘must be immediately recalled’

The new findings challenge “years of dismissals by regulatory authorities, who had previously labelled concerns about excessive DNA contamination as baseless,” Demasi wrote on Substack.

The findings also align with earlier reports from independent laboratories in the U.S.Canada, Australia, Germany, and France, she said.

McKernan, founder of Medicinal Genomics, told The Defender that eight studies have found DNA over the limit. “Very few studies are surveying a large number of lots, so each study is additive,” he said.

Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher said that in “light of this evidence, the COVID-19 genetic injections must be immediately recalled, to protect the public from further harm.”

Nikolai Petrovsky, Ph.D., director of biotechnology company Vaxine Pty Ltd., told Demasi that the findings are a “smoking gun” and that the new study “clearly shows the FDA was aware of these data.”

Christof Plothe, D.O., a member of the World Council for Health steering committee, agreed. He said:

So far, the European, Australian, and American health regulatory boards have denied any risks from plasmid DNA contamination in the COVID-19 injections despite nine studies by internationally known research teams.

All teams concluded that this contamination poses an unacceptable risk to three-quarters of the world’s population.… Three teams so far have demonstrated the integration into human cells. To what extent this is happening to everybody who was injected needs to be investigated.

McKernan said that the FDA has long ignored evidence of the dangers posed by mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

“The criteria for pulling these shots was established long before DNA contamination was first discovered,” he said. “I would hope that evidence of highly variable manufacturing would be grounds for immediate class 1 recall from the FDA. They are currently distracted with performing class 1 recalls on non-lethal hairspray.”

Class 1 recall involves “a situation in which there is a reasonable probability that the use of, or exposure to, a violative product will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.”

According to Demasi, “The FDA is expected to comment on the findings this week. However, the agency has yet to issue a public alert, recall the affected batches, or explain how vials exceeding safety standards were allowed to reach the market.”

Plothe noted that Demasi presented evidence of DNA contamination to the FDA in September 2024, asking if the agency had launched an investigation or requested further testing of the mRNA vaccines by their manufacturers.

“Nothing resulted from this request,” Plothe said. “As nine studies have proven this severe contamination and repeated requests to health regulatory boards have not led to any consequence, we must ask about the motive.”

Brian Hooker, Ph.D., chief scientific officer for Children’s Health Defense (CHD), noted the irony of high school students discovering what the FDA has seemingly missed in the four-plus years since the vaccines’ introduction.

“It is ironic that it takes student researchers at the FDA to do the work of the FDA regulators,” Hooker said. “It is alarming that the public is made aware of this contamination in an obscure journal that features high school science research. One has to ask, ‘Where is the FDA now?’ and ‘Why hasn’t the public been alerted of this?’”

Demasi said that the significance of the new study’s findings is that they came from research performed at an FDA facility.

“Now that DNA contamination of the mRNA vaccines has been verified in the laboratory of an official agency and published in a peer-reviewed journal, it becomes difficult to ignore,” Demasi wrote. “It also places vaccine manufacturers and regulators in a precarious position.”

This article was originally published by The Defender – Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

Continue Reading

Trending

X