This is the most important part. It is a specific cohort driving this phenomenon we are seeing. The under-4’s mostly were protected from the usual snotoses for 2 1/2 years or so, and upon exposure, they all got sick pretty much simultaneously, bringing them home to sibs and parents who had had pre-covid exposures, but no booster in 2 1/2 years, some of whom got sick as well, repeat ad nauseum. Thing is, this was expected, predicted, and acting as though it is a huge surprise in totally disingenuous. We knew this was going to happen if the precautions all went away at once, like they did. Our only error was underestimating how quickly those precautions would collapse. But here we are…
Are they trying to justify policy?
Sure as heck seems like it. But this story cuts both ways. If the virus was so mind-blowingly transmissible that one infected person on an outdoor jog could infect dozens of people in the general vicinity with such a fleeting exposure then there’s clearly no hope of ever containing it with even the most draconian of lockdowns.
I think I’ll cross post this in that masking topic.
I can not believe this is where we are as a country, this person was re elected.
moral of the story, if you need to poop just go where you are. germs are just big hygiene, always looking for you to buy soap. and toilet paper. and pants.
hmmm… maybe we can all chip in and gift her a christmas cruise
I have no words…
“We don’t want blood that is tainted by vaccination,” the father said. “That’s the end of the deal – we are fine with anything else these doctors want to do.”
“We would rather our child die than get blood from people who have been vaccinated.” Seems logical…
The statement in bold is demonstrably false
A lecturer in bioethics at the University of Otago, Josephine Johnston, told RNZ it was very rare for a case to get this far. It was a distressing case for everyone involved, she added, because there was significant disagreement between the parents and the healthcare teams, both of whom were trying to act in the best interests of the child.
When the choice is (a) do this normal thing all the doctors say is safe in order to save a child’s life or (b) refuse to do this normal thing and let the child die from a treatable condition and the parents choose option (b), the best interests of the child are not what is motivating that choice.
Or, at least get a second opinion from an independent expert. If that expert comes back with, “you people are fucking nuts; this kid needs surgery and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with blood donated by a vaccinated person” (or something to that effect), then the only parents who wouldn’t consent to the child’s surgery are abusive ones and should lose custody immediately.
True- but in this story it sounds like multiple doctors have already been consulted. The parents are refusing to listen.
That poor kid
Yup, the parents might imagine they’re acting in the best interests of the child, but they are flat-out, objectively wrong.
She said her clients had been labelled “conspiracy theorists”.
“There is compelling international evidence justifying the concern my clients have got.”
“some crazy people who are wrong live overseas”
Finally somebody is facing consequences for this kind of shit. May there be many more!
Dr. Bettina Hohberger and the University Clinic at Erlangen opened their new Post-COVID Center today. They are consolidating their research and focusing on new science, and the new center will also focus on diagnosis and therapies.
From today, an update on the research, with English subtitles.