October 23rd, 2020 3-5PM ET
Friday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:
COVID-19 is pushing Americans to want more government involvement in their lives As millions of Americans deal with coronavirus infections, millions more struggle through the pandemic’s economic impact. A survey taken during the height of the health crisis finds COVID-19 may have pushed more people to want government to play a bigger role in their lives. Researchers in Maryland say the number of people wanting sweeping changes in government policy skyrocketed as the virus spread. A team from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and the Johns Hopkins University SNF Agora Institute say support for an active government role in society jumped over 40 percent between September 2019 and April 2020. The World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a global pandemic in March. While some policies are still not very popular, a majority of respondents have gotten behind creating more government safety nets for healthcare, unemployment, and income. Nearly 1,500 adults were polled in mid-April regarding 11 government policies including paid sick leave, universal health insurance, income support, business tax credits, and employment education.
Mask Use by Americans Now Tops 90%, Poll Finds Here’s good news for public health officials who’ve been hammering home the need to wear face masks: Your messages have been getting through. A new HealthDay/Harris Poll shows that more Americans than ever are donning face masks to protect against COVID-19 infection. More than nine in 10 U.S. adults (93%) said they sometimes, often or always wear a mask or face covering when they leave their home and are unable to socially distance, including more than seven in 10 (72%) who said they always do so, the poll revealed. “Compared to when we first asked this question in late August, our latest survey with HealthDay finds that more Americans are now consistently wearing a mask or face covering outside the home,” said Kathy Steinberg, vice president of research for public release at The Harris Poll. Back in August, just 61% of U.S. adults said they always wear a mask, while 90% said they sometimes, often or always wear one. “While differences in usage do persist — for example, women, older adults and Democrats are more likely than their respective counterparts to wear a mask more frequently — it’s promising to see that the proportion who said they ‘always’ wear a mask has increased since August across the board,” Steinberg said.
Kids as young as 11 years old would be able to consent to vaccinations under a new bill proposed in Washington, DC A bill passed in Washington, DC, could allow children as young as 11 years old to get recommended vaccinations without permission from their parents or legal guardians. The “Minor Consent for Vaccinations Amendment Act” bill passed in the DC Council by a 12-to-1 vote. It says if a doctor determines that a minor is “capable of meeting the informed consent standard,” then they could get government-recommended inoculations, like the HPV vaccine, even if their parents object to it for religious reasons. “A child needs to be protected against the dangers of things like measles, other diseases that cause death, and the community needs to be protected so that diseases that were once thought to be eliminated are not coming back,” Council member Mary Cheh said in an online press conference Tuesday, according to the DC Post. Cheh introduced the bill in March 2019. The bill requires the Department of Health to produce information about vaccines that are age-appropriate. And, if it becomes law, the bill stipulates that doctors would be required to bill insurers directly, and send the vaccination records to the kid’s school “if the parent is utilizing a religious exemption.”
Comment of The Day!
Hi robert. I just wanted to let you know, there are some flight attendants and pilots who 100% agree with what you’re saying. I wont say which airline I work for, but, there are a few of us who get it. I personally do not enforce masks onboard, and most pilots dont wear their mask in the flight deck. The airlines are pushing covid testing for employees, I still havent gotten one, and now I’m getting phone calls from managers reminding me how important it is. Nonsense. We also got an emailed survey and the last question was “will you get a covid vaccine when its available?” Ugh. I love my job, and love traveling, and I’m afraid mandatory vaccines are coming for my profession. Which means the end of the line for me. Sadly. This isn’t much of a comment, more of a venting session, ha, but if you’d like to know more about what’s happening with the airlines I’d be happy to share that.
Thank you for sharing your light and encouraging everyone to do the same. I dont have many people to discuss this with , so I appreciate being able to leave this comment.
Question of The Day!
This is Murdock.
I received an email from I know someone who had received a “positive” quick test from a “Convid” Test. She will have to call her PA to ask how accurate the quick test is. Urgent care said very accurate, but she rather have a second opinion. She has heard of folks testing positive then almost immediately testing negative. A family doctor (who was also included in this email) stated the following:
“With medical tests, we judge how good they are based on how sensitive they are and how specific they are. A highly sensitive test will have very few false negatives. A highly specific test will give very few false positives. The rapid COVID tests are highly specific (very few false positives) but not always very sensitive (they do give false negatives). The PCR tests for COVID take longer to get results but they are both sensitive and specific meaning there are few false positives and few false negatives. Like you mentioned, someone can get tested and be positive and then get retested and have a negative result. This can happen for a couple different reasons. 1st, the tests are not 100% accurate of course so either the positive or negative could be wrong. 2nd (and more commonly), the first positive is correct. The rapid tests cannot detect small amounts of virus so after 7 days, the virus level may be too low to be detected with the rapid test and therefore the second test comes back negative. This leads to a lot of confusion but it does make sense scientifically. Bottom line: the tests are pretty accurate as far as positive results go. If you get a positive result it is best to follow guidelines and assume you are contagious. Timing does make a difference with testing so just because someone is negative after being exposed does NOT mean that he or she does not have the virus )it may just be too early to be detected)”
Have you covered anything about these “quick” tests? I am also considering there is no virus that has been isolated at all so how could the quick tests be…”accurate.”
I value your insights.
Fast coronavirus tests: what they can and can’t do The United States leads the world in COVID-19 deaths but lags behind many countries — both large and small — in testing capacity. That could soon change. At the end of August, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted emergency-use approval to a new credit-card-sized testing device for the coronavirus that costs US$5, gives results in 15 minutes and doesn’t require a laboratory or a machine for processing. The United States is spending $760 million on 150 million of these tests from health-care company Abbott Laboratories, headquartered in Abbott Park, Illinois, which plans to ramp up production to 50 million per month in October. The tests detect specific proteins — known as antigens — on the surface of the virus, and can identify people who are at the peak of infection, when virus levels in the body are likely to be high. Proponents argue that this could be a game changer. Antigen tests could help to keep the pandemic at bay, because they can be rolled out in vast numbers and can spot those who are at greatest risk of spreading the disease. These tests are also a key element in the testing strategies of other countries, such as India and Italy.
Richard Jaffe is a health care litigator, counselor and crisis manager, focusing on cutting-edge medical/legal issues. He represents practitioners, clinics, companies and health related organizations in complex health care regulatory matters throughout the United States, especially legal cases and investigations brought by federal and state government agencies. He has extensive experience in FDA matters, including clinical trials and new drug issues, Medicare and insurance fraud, professional licensure and criminal and civil scheduled drug prescribing problems. He has extensive experience in the stem cell field, both in the criminal and civil sides, and also works on matters involving dietary supplements.
Super Breaking News on the UC Flu Mandate: Hearing Continued until November 4th and the UC is barred from taking any action against any employee or student for not getting the shot until the Hearing Date! Because of all the paperwork flying back and forth, the Hayward Superior Court judge has rescheduled the hearing to November 4, 2020, at 1:30 PM You might recall from a previous post that the case was previously set for November 12th. We filed a so-called “ex parte application” to move the hearing back to October (it had originally been set to be heard on October 14th by another judge). The UC attorneys objected to the reset request in large part because the UC was not going to take any action against any student or employee until the injunction hearing took place. Nonetheless, the judge reset the motion for tomorrow, October 22nd. This is a very big deal of a case and there has been much paper flying back and forth, including many back and forths this week. Even today, the UC filed papers objecting to papers I filed on Monday which contained an email from a high UC Davis employee incorrectly telling staff that the flu mandate applied to remote workers. The judge is obviously taking this motion very seriously, and that is a very good thing. He wanted more time to consider all the papers and write an opinion that will have enormous implications. Judge Seabolt gets to be the first judge in the country to weigh in on whether the state can mandate a vaccine during a pandemic where the vaccine doesn’t treat the pandemic disease and where there is reason to believe that the flu shot could actually increase COVID cases, hospitalizations and deaths. That’s alot to think about. It seems like he’s trying to get it right, and that is certainly extremely encouraging, since in my view, the more anyone reasonable thinks about it, the worse the mandate looks because of the lack of proper procedure in its issuance, and the lack of proof that the vaccine won’t cause much more harm than good. So I am all for the judge taking all the time he needs on this.
Special Guest – KC Craichy!
KC is Founder and CEO of LivingFuel, Inc., a leading distributor of superfood nutrition, and author of the best-selling book SuperHealth – 7 Golden Keys to Unlock Lifelong Vitality and his most recent book The Super Health Diet: The Last Diet You Will Ever Need!. Through his work, products and teaching, KC is on a mission to change lives.
The inspiration for success began with past health challenges of KC’s wife, Monica, former Miss Florida and Miss Florida USA, who looked like the model of health on the outside but on the inside it was a different story. KC also had early struggles of being overweight and out of shape. Monica’s experiences of anxiety, fear, panic and depression more than 14 years ago and the futility of conventional medical approaches (drugs, psychotherapy) led KC to vow to find an answer. Through years of research and trial and error, Monica has gained back complete health and her vibrancy. Monica has not taken any medication since deciding to find the answer and today she and KC have five wonderful children.
KC wrestled with a challenge of his own: he was overweight. In high school, he discovered the power of proper nutrition which led to a life of research and understanding. He began to unlock the keys to maximum performance and metabolism and since has spent his adult life as a health-conscious athlete, forging a vision to develop a new approach to healthy living. It’s a simple, no-nonsense strategy that aims to help people of any age look, feel and live better.
Report: 45% of Florida ‘COVID-19 deaths’ misclassified Up to 45% of the deaths attributed to COVID-19 in Florida may have been wrongly classified, according to a researcher who has analyzed a report by the state House of Representatives. Dr. Andrew Bostom noted the lawmakers found that nearly 60% — 8,058 of 13,920 deaths — classified by the Department of Health as due to COVID-19 had “errors” or were “recorded in a manner inconsistent with state and national guidance.” The Florida legislators further concluded that about 10% were completely misclassified as COVID deaths. But Bostom offered evidence to support his claim that 10% is far too conservative. He pointed out that the conclusion reflects compliance with the Centers for Disease Control’s April 2020 COVID-19 death certificate coding guidelines, which, he said, “destroyed the logical firewall” between “specific cause” of death and “contribution(s)” to individual deaths. In addition to the 1,256 records discovered by lawmakers that did not even list COVID-19 as the final cause of death, several other categories could be added, maintains Bostom, an associate professor of medicine at Brown University. Among them were 3,451 that classified COVID alone, as both the immediate and underlying cause of death, despite acknowledging contributing co-morbidities or conditions.
Remember Friends, The Power to Heal is Yours!
More upcoming RSB events:
Trinity Health Freedom Virtual Expo – October 24-25