In his recent speech on his six-step COVID plan, Joe Biden spoke like a dictator, not like a supposedly elected president.  What should be our response?  First, let us examine the facts before us with respect to COVID-19 and the vaccines.

Can we eliminate SARS-CoV-2?  No vaccine has ever stopped a coronavirus, despite various efforts to do so over the past several decades, and this one will not be stopped, either.  Several coronaviruses are endemic in the human population, and it is virtually certain that SARS-CoV-2 has now joined that number.

It also appears from published studies that SARS-CoV-2 can infect many types of animals, including non-human primates (gorillas, macaques), dogs (domestic and wild types), cats (including lions, tigers, leopards, and pumas), rabbits, mink, deer, ferrets, hamsters, and presumably bats and pangolins.  It is impossible to eradicate such a widespread pathogen by any feasible methods, even if the entire human population could be vaccinated.

Only one human virus (smallpox) has ever been eliminated by a vaccination program (and it could easily be reintroduced by government carelessness or malice).  All other known viruses are still in the human population in some form and can continue to cause infections and disease, at least in local outbreaks from time to time.

What about the vaccines?  What should we call an immunization that does not make anyone immune?  The so-called vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission, and it is increasingly becoming obvious that they do not completely prevent hospitalization or death.  An injection that does not prevent infection but only limits the severity of symptoms is a treatment, not a vaccine, and it is now known that this type of treatment has, at best, only a temporary effect measured in months.  Perhaps it can be called a transfection or could be given another name, but it is neither an immunization nor a vaccine in the traditional and scientific senses of those terms.

What about non-medical interventions?  Masks do not prevent the spreading of infectious aerosols.  Ask any industrial hygienist whether a cloth or surgical mask would be sufficient to wear for respiratory protection in an area in which asbestos is being handled and removed.  The smaller asbestos particles and fibers are larger than the typical respiratory aerosols (submicroscopic droplets), yet cloth or surgical masks are never allowed because they are considered completely inadequate.  Scientific studies have not shown that masks are effective against respiratory viruses.  The six-foot separation rule is arbitrary and is only potentially helpful in that it may allow some dilution of the concentration of respiratory aerosols, but larger distances would be even better.  Lockdowns have substantial negative consequences of various kinds and are unsustainable.

A person without symptoms is not sick. Imposing restrictions and mandates on asymptomatic persons who are healthy, rather than limiting them to sick or immunocompromised people, stands the entire field of medicine on its head.

Imposing a federal vaccine mandate is an arbitrary exercise of power with no possibility of a successful outcome.  We are (supposedly) waging a war against a microscopic, invisible enemy, and we are trying to do it with completely ineffective weapons.

What are the long-term effects of the vaccines?  There has been no study of long-term effects because there has not been a long term yet.  Vaccines normally require years of investigation and comparison between treatment and control groups to identify possible long-term effects but the FDA has skipped this requirement.  Instead, if there are negative long-term effects, they'll be discovered after mass experimentation on the entire human population and after the damage is widespread and irreversible.

What are the vaccines' effects on pregnancy?  We don't know because the so-called vaccines were developed in less than nine months.  Nevertheless, the vaccines have officially been declared "safe and effective" even during pregnancy, which is irresponsible and a dereliction of duty on the part of the government agencies involved.  Such studies are supposedly now just beginning.

What is all of this really about?  Accepting the mandate would set a new precedent: the government will have the authority to require injections of whatever substances it decides into people under its jurisdiction as often and as many times as it wants to, without the possibility of refusal, for any supposed health-related reason, throughout people's lives.  This new authority would be independent of genuine science and is subject only to the whims of the president and agencies of the executive branch of the federal government.

The precautionary principle is needed now more than ever.  Free people clearly must act accordingly and refuse to comply.  This is where "Never Again" requires active resistance to tyranny.  Threats to deprive citizens of their livelihood for noncompliance to an arbitrary mandate are totalitarian.

The president must decide whether his real last name is Biden or Stalin.

Image by Ned Cosby.

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.