Los Angeles Superior Court Victory Against Lockdowns

Los Angeles Superior Court struck a blow against medical cartel's ongoing coup d'état against democracy.  The Court granted a preliminary injunction barring the LA County Department of Public Health Department (LADPH) from enforcing its ban on outdoor dining. 

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. posted this on his Instagram account today:

Today the Los Angeles Superior Court struck a blow against the global medical cartel’s ongoing coup d’etat against democracy. The Court granted a preliminary injunction to the California Restaurant Association Inc (“CRA”) and Mark’s Engine Company No 28 Restaurant barring the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health Department (LADPH) from enforcing its ban on outdoor dining. The CRA argued that LACDPH’s own data provide no support for the shutdown; the County’s own testing shows that only 3.1% of COVID cases originate in public restaurants. The Court agreed that the closure is not realistically designed to halt of COVID’s spread and that Health officials failed to give CRA a fair hearing. A June order allowed restaurants to provide outdoor dining if they cut seating in half, and separated tables by 8 feet. On Nov 20, the LACDPH revised its order to prohibit all outdoor dining.

The Court held that LA officials they had no concrete data to justify the rule. CRA’s expert witnesses challenged the county’s use of PCR tests accusing LACDPH of using “false positives” to fraudulently exaggerate both COVID cases and deaths. They charged that the county was using “diagnostic substitution” to blame COVID for deaths actually caused by influenza, viral pneumonia, bacterial pneumonia, and pneumonia from other strains of coronavirus and other diverse pulmonary diseases and heart attacks. To preserve its deception, the County refused to provide data that would allow the restaurant association experts to compare hospitalization rates from respiratory infections for the same dates in prior years. That maneuver made it impossible to accurately attribute what percentage of the rise in hospitalization is due to COVID-19.

LACDPH experts also reached their highly speculative and questionable predictions by feeding false assumptions to defective and unreliable mathematical models.

This Court decision is one small but heartening victory against the tyrannical medical forces that are destroying America’s economy and obliterating its the middle class with arbitrary fiats that are not science based.

Thank you to Lew Rockwell.  

"If the antibodies are falling . . . the prevalence of the virus in the population is falling"

SAGE, the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, took the view that because SARS COV2 was a new virus that they believed that there wouldn't be any immunity at all in the population  SARS 2 is 80% similar to another virus you may have heard of--SARS that moved around the world a bit in 2003.  There are four (4) common cold-causing coronaviruses, and that I think that quite a lot of the population had been exposed to one of those viruses and probably have substantial protective immunity.  To explain why I was so confident, everybody knows the story of Edward Jenner, vaccination, and the story of cowpox and smallpox.  Milkmaids were exposed to a more benign form of smallpox called cowpox, which did not leave their skin scarred.  "If it's cowpox that saves the fair maid, he reasoned that giving a healthy person a vaccination, he would be able to protect them against smallpox.  Vaccination comes from vacca, the Latin name for cow.  So we are really familiar with the principle of cross immunization.  The vulnerable people in care homes, there's an awareness that caregivers are really careful and using PPE and so on.  But that's only going to go so far in a hothouse environment where people are pretty close together in a care home.  So they questioned Once one or two people got the coronavirus in a care home, why wouldn't almost everyone get infected?  And, of course, the truth is they didn't.  One interpretation of that distinction is that a large proportion of the people in the care homes had pro-apt immunity.  

Big story in the media recently (September 2020) was that a percentage of the population with antibodies against the virus, 4.4%, was falling.  This was cast as a concern that immunity to SARS CO2 doesn't last very long.  Anyone with knowledge of immunity would simply reject that.  That's not the way that immunity to the virus works: that would be T-cells.  So if the antibodies 

Immunity to the virus is created by T-cells, not by antibodies.  If the antibodies are falling, gradually over time which they have from spring to present, the only plausive explanation is that the prevalence of the virus in the population is falling and that's why the production of antibodies in the body gradually subsides.   

Less than 40% of the population was susceptible.  Even theoretical, epidemiologists will tell you that that's too small a number to support and consolidate a growing outbreak.  Community immunity: herd immunity.  So when SAGE says that 

Resounding, Worldwide Renunciation of a COVID Vaccine

https://t.co/YFroz6NJfr

— Mike Walgenbach (@mwalgen44) December 11, 2020

Thank you, Robert Wenzel.  

"When you exhale the carbon dioxide you're not able to get it out or past the mask. This condition created by the masks is giving people heart attacks."

Not only is it not effective in disease transmission, [the mask] is hurting you because no one has done a risk analysis or risk assessment on you.  We don't know your airflow, your air intake, your CO2 output, yet I am telling you to cover your mouth and nose all day and then go do your work.  Think about kids who are running around, and their hearts are beating hard, and then we cover their mouth and their nose.  That is very dangerous.  In fact, this is the reason why OSHA instituted the respirator standard in the first place because we have killed people by putting them in face coverings--covering the mouth and nose--and telling them to work all day.  We've killed people because of that.  We've given them heart attacks.  OSHA actually created a respirator standard, that if you're going to cover somebody's mouth and nose and require them to work all day that way, then you have to do a medical evaluation first.  You have to do a fit test.  You have to make sure there is no breakthrough.  So this is an actual OSHA standard.  The intent of the law, the intent behind the law is that we don't cover the mouth and the nose.  It's not healthy: one, you're not able to get in enough oxygen, and when you exhale the carbon dioxide you're not able to get it out or past the mask.  So you're just breathing in and you're keeping too much CO2 in the body, which causes hypercapnia, which is the build-up of CO2 in the blood.  And that causes other issues.  So, hypercapnia, when you have a toxic build-up of CO2 in your blood, it actually causes your blood to become very toxic and acidic, and that causes your immune system to be suppressed.  So it's important that we have good oxygen intake and CO2 expelled.  Those two things are very important for us.  If God wanted our mouth and nose to be covered, we wouldn't have been born with a nose that can breathe air in and a mouth that can exhale air out, right?  OSHA has cited clients of hers for putting people in an N95 respirator

 

OSHA has cited clients of hers for putting people in an N95 respirator

Why is OSHA turning a blind eye to the mask-wearing?  Finally, a good question.  OSHA used to cite people for violating the respiratory standard for putting people in an N95 mask without doing the whole respirator program requirements and meeting all the elements of a respirator program: 1) medical evaluation; 2) the fit test; 3) the documentation, and 4) the annual evaluation.  It's a lot to follow a respirator program and people have a tough time meeting all of those requirements. 

OSHA, at least in Michigan, is adopting the government's policy and violating its own standards.  She simply calls it crazy, but tell us something we don't already know.  Tell us how to stop the enforcement and stop the law. 

Finally, at the 19:15 mark, she makes a good point.  When people argue that doctors who work in an operating room all day with the masks on, the reason they don't get the same symptoms from someone working with one on for 15 to 30 minutes is that the doctors work in operating rooms that have additional airflow to make up for the fact that they're wearing masks, and most doctors don't even know it or realize it.  

Air change rates, ventilation rates for infectious disease control, room pressure control [the room has to be either positive or negative pressure depending on whether she's trying to keep the pathogen in or out].  This is what she deals with on construction projects.  She has to have a very precise temperature and humidity controlled room.  To keep that microenvironment precisely controlled.  So she keeps the oxygen rates up for the doctors and nurses who are wearing surgical masks; they need additional oxygen in that room.  She keeps the pathogen and diseases at bay, so it's a sterile environment.  So the surgical masks that doctors and nurses are wearing prevent transmission if somebody coughs or sneezes--those large droplets of water or mucous that could be carrying a pathogen, right?  But the operating room already is a sterile environment and they're being given additional oxygen so that they're safe.  The mask that they're wearing just protects the patients from coughing or sputtering, whatever, sneezing, anything like that.  So when nurses get online and say that it is BS that masks are harmful, citing how they wear masks all day, and how they do their own oxygen testing, and it's perfect and that they have "no oxygen decrease level," that's because they're working in a room of very precisely controlled O2 level, additional O2, and higher airflow levels to make up for the fact that they're working in a mask.  

Switzerland cuts new COVID-19 infections in half without national lockdown

Switzerland cuts new COVID-19 infections in half without national lockdown https://t.co/W1qoTm0Vch pic.twitter.com/mtXPKjEvaA

— New York Post (@nypost) December 2, 2020