Russia has registered the world’s first COVID-19 vaccine, President Vladimir Putin announced, adding that it had already been tested on one of his daughters.
Following less than two months of human testing, Putin said that his health ministry had approved the vaccine developed by the Gamaleya Institute, which last week launched Phase Three trials involving thousands of volunteers.
“This morning, for the first time in the world, a vaccine against the new coronavirus was registered,” Putin said in a televised cabinet session broadcast. “I know that it’s effective and forms sustainable immunity.”
Putin said one of his daughters, whom he did not name, had been administered with the vaccine after falling ill. Her temperature then fell from 38 degrees to 37 degrees.
“And that was it. After the second injection, the second vaccination, her temperature also rose a little, but it all turned out OK and she feels well,” Putin said, according to Meduza.
Russian Deputy Prime Minister Tatyana Golikova said doctors would be vaccinated against the coronavirus from late August and early September and the vaccine would be rolled out nationally from January 1, state-run news agency Tass reported.Read more
Russia had viewed becoming the first country to develop the vaccine as a matter of national pride and prestige, although there have been concerns voiced by experts that the speed of its development came at the cost of safety and efficacy.
The top U.S. infectious diseases expert, Dr Anthony Fauci, has expressed concerns about whether fast-track vaccine efforts in Russia—as well as China—would be safe.
Earlier this month, Fauci said in an interview: “Anybody could say they have a vaccine and make it, but you have to prove that it’s safe and effective. Which I doubt that they’ve shown that but you know we’ll see.”
WHO spokesman Christian Lindmeier said earlier this month that “between finding or having a clue of maybe having a vaccine that works, and having gone through all the stages, is a big difference.”
Other experts noted that the Russian announcement on Tuesday was lacking in detail.
“At this point in time, there is no data on the Russian-led vaccine for the global health community to scrutinize.”
As of Tuesday, more than 895,000 people in Russia had tested positive for the coronavirus, the fourth highest in the world, according to data from Johns Hopkins University.
August 11, 2020 Vaccine Impact
Comments by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News
The NY Post published an article recently interviewing dentists who are claiming:
“We’re seeing inflammation in people’s gums that have been healthy forever, and cavities in people who have never had them before,” says Dr. Rob Ramondi, a dentist and co-founder of One Manhattan Dental. “About 50% of our patients are being impacted by this, [so] we decided to name it ‘mask mouth’ — after ‘meth mouth.’ ”
There is so much news on the topic of mandatory masks, that it is hard to keep up with it all. Countries and other large areas that do NOT mandate face masks are actually seeing FEWER new cases of COVID. (See the Liberty Report show video below.)
In Nashville, a Council Member has publicly stated that people who refuse to comply with government edicts to wear masks should be charged with murder or attempted murder. (Source.)
When are people going to wake up to the face mask scam?
Tyrants dictate their use, mainly for motives of profit (see: Booming Face Mask Business in U.S. Creating Instant Millionaires Using Government Funds to Buy Masks from China) or social engineering, and people don’t seem to be intelligent enough to ask basic questions about these mask mandates, such as, if they are actually effective, then what type of mask? How does one dispose of them as bio-hazard waste? How often should one be worn before discarded?, etc.
The evidence is overwhelming now: face masks are harming people and protecting nobody.
Dr. Ron Paul covers these issues, and he has also written a new article about the rapid loss of civil rights as the police state tightens it grip on the public.
Coronavirus is the New ‘Terrorism’
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has proposed the next multi-trillion dollar “coronavirus relief” spending bill that will support testing, tracing, treatment, isolation, and mask policies that have been part of a “national strategic plan” she has been advocating.
The Trump administration is not opposing Pelosi’s plan on principle. Instead, it is haggling over the price.
But, even if the strategic plan could be implemented at little or no monetary cost, it would still impose an unacceptable cost in lost liberty.
Pelosi’s plan will lead to either a federal mask mandate or federal funding of state and local mask mandate enforcement. Those who resist wearing masks could likely be reported to the authorities by government-funded mask monitors.
We can label this the “Stasi” approach to health policy, after the infamous East German secret police force.
Contact tracing could lead to forcing individuals to download a tracing app. The app would record where an individual goes and alert authorities that an individual has been near someone who has tested positive for coronavirus.
The strategic plan could eventually include Bill Gates’ and Anthony Fauci’s suggestion that individuals receive “digital certificates” indicating they are vaccinated for or immune to coronavirus.
A certificate would be required before an individual can go to work, to school, or even to the grocery store.
The need to demonstrate vaccination for or immunity to coronavirus in order to resume normal life would cause many people to “voluntarily” receive a potentially dangerous coronavirus vaccine.
The Trump administration has already spent billions of dollars to support efforts of companies to develop a coronavirus vaccine. Policymakers have stated that once a vaccine is developed it will be rushed into production and onto the market.
Supporters of expediting production and use of a vaccine should remember the 1976 swine flu vaccine debacle. The swine flu vaccine was rushed into production in response to political pressure to “do something.”
The result was a vaccine that was more of a danger than the flu.
Unfortunately, those who raise legitimate concerns regarding the safety of vaccines are smeared as “conspiracy theorists.” This is the equivalent of stating that anyone who dares criticize our interventionist foreign policy “hates freedom” and is probably a “terrorist sympathizer.”
Unique Patient Identifier
The coronavirus panic has given new life to the push for a unique patient identifier. The unique patient identifier was authorized in 1996, but appropriations bills since 1998 have contained a provision forbidding the federal government from developing and implementing the identifier.
Unfortunately, two weeks ago, the House of Representatives voted to repeal the ban. The unique patient identifier would aid government efforts to track and vaccinate every American, as well as to infringe in other ways on liberty in the name of “health.”
Politicians and bureaucrats cannot eliminate a virus any more than they can eliminate terrorism. What they can do is use terrorism, a virus, and other real, exaggerated, or manufactured crises to expand their power at the expense of our liberty.
Politicians will never resist the temptation to use crises as excuses to gain more power. Therefore, it is up to those of us who know the truth to spread the message of liberty and grow the liberty movement.
A strong liberty movement is the only thing that can force the politicians to stop stealing our liberty while promising phantom security from terrorists and viruses.
The following is a guest post from one of our subscribers.
I had a part-time job at a nursing home. It was not a place I expected evil to grab me, but it did. One of the male employees raped me. Later, adding to that trauma, I found out I was pregnant. My future plans came crashing down as I faced the need to make a decision with far-reaching consequences. Because I knew God values each and every life, I did not consider abortion, even for a moment.
My family surrounded me with love and support. Although it was very difficult, I decided to choose adoption for my child so that they would have a stable home with two parents.
I’d spent my previous two summers as a live-in nanny for three lively children. They were delighted to have me back and I was glad to be busy and mostly out of the public eye during my pregnancy. Meanwhile, my parents contacted a Christian couple—friends in another state who weren’t able to have children. Millie and Dan were excited to have this opportunity to become a family. When I went into labor, the adoptive parents drove all night to be at the hospital soon after my baby was born.
I knew that his new parents would be the ones to name him, but he looked like a Jonathan Asher to me. He was precious and I spent time cuddling him. I never knew how quickly God could fill a new mother’s heart with love. The next day, the thought of giving him away forever brought a flood of tears. My parents, by reading Scripture and praying with me, gave me the courage to face the decision I had already made.
When Millie and Dan came, they bonded with their little boy. Instead of using the name they’d chosen, they agreed with me that his name should be Jonathan Asher. Millie got in practice changing and feeding him and I prepared to go before the judge to complete the adoption papers.
There I stood before the judge, feeling very alone as he grilled me. When my mother slipped into the courtroom, he asked, “Do you want your mother here?” My knees stopped shaking as I nodded yes. Most of his questions weren’t hard to answer, but one stopped my heart. “If a doctor told you couldn’t have any more children, would you still place him for adoption?” Never to hold another baby in my arms! What an awful thought. I couldn’t sign the papers.
Later, in the attorney’s office, I again reflected on my decision. The best decision for Jonathan was the one I had already planned. I couldn’t back out now; I signed the paper to give my baby to Millie and Dan. My mother consoled me by saying we weren’t losing a child, we were gaining a family.
We saw Jonathan grow up from a distance, through photos and annual calls. His parents shared important milestones with us, including when he trusted in Christ.
When he was sixteen, my mother wrote Millie and Dan a letter telling them how God had chosen them to be Jonathan’s parents. Enclosed was a letter for Jonathan explaining to him why I had placed him for adoption. It wasn’t because I didn’t love him, but because I did and wanted the best for him. Now Jonathan is an adult, a fine young man we’ve re-connected with as a family. He shared what this letter had meant to him, settling in his heart that he was a wanted and loved child. God’s providence works in mysterious ways to accomplish his purposes. In Jonathan’s case, I was a link in his life’s chain, and was blessed because of that.
In my data journalism teaching and training I often talk about common types of stories that can be found in datasets — so I thought I would take 100 pieces of data journalism and analyse them to see if it was possible to identify how often each of those story angles is used.
I found that there are actually broadly seven core data story angles. Many incorporate other angles as secondary dimensions in the storytelling (a change story might go on to talk about the scale of something, for example), but all the data journalism stories I looked at took one of these as its lead.
In the first of a two-part series I walk through how the four most common angles can help you identify story ideas, the variety of their execution, and the considerations to bear in mind.
Data angle 1: Scale — “This is how big a problem is”
Perhaps the most common type of story found in data is the scale story: these are stories that identify a big problem, or the size of an issue which has become topical.
At their most simple scale stories provide an update on new numbers being released: it coud be the latest unemployment figures, the amount of crime, air pollution, money spent on some area, births, deaths or marriages.
During the first months of the pandemic, for example, we had daily scale stories on the numbers of cases, deaths, and tests, among other things.
Examples of scale stories include ‘Death toll in UK care homes from coronavirus may be 6,000, study estimates‘, but also stories like ‘Unduly lenient sentences review scheme ‘inadequate‘ where the lead is based on reaction to the scale of an issue you have identified.
Sometimes scale is provided as backgroud to a single-event story, as in ‘Drone causes Gatwick Airport disruption‘ (how many near misses are there?) or to a policy proposal, such as in ‘New drivers could be banned from driving at night, ministers say‘ (how many new drivers are under 19).
Scale stories are one of the easier genres to write: in many cases no calculation is needed.
Indeed, the main work involved is likely to be in setting context to that scale — at its worst a scale story simply becomes a ‘big number’ story (“A lot of money was spent on stuff” or “Something happens to a lot of people”), and the reader is left unclear whether this is actually newsworthy or just normal.
For that reason it’s important to put scale into context by using percentages or proportions (e.g. “one in five”) or comparisons and analogies (“The money spent on the scheme is the equivalent of the wages of 500 teachers”).
You might also bring in change and/or variation as a secondary angle: establishing historical context to the scale you’ve just outlined, or how that scale varies.
In the New York Times piece above, for example, the “true toll” (scale) of the coronavirus outbreak is immediately contextualised by charts which show how that has changed since the start of the year, in different parts of the country.
Data angle 2: Change and stasis — things are going up, things are going down, things aren’t happening
Change stories are almost as common as scale stories — and probably more straightforward to pitch.
After all, change is inherently newsworthy and gives you the verb (“rises”, “plummets”, “[goes] up”) that you need in a headline.
Once you’ve identified some sort of change in your data it’s likely you will need further reporting to answer the “why?” question. Why are those numbers going up or down?
You might also add a secondary angle to your story which explores variation in that trend – the areas where those numbers have gone up, or dropped, the most and least.
This can help you direct your reporting on ‘Why?’ because chances are that the areas affected most will be those most aware of the issue, and able to comment on it.
When reporting on change it’s important to be aware of two considerations: seasonality and margins of error.
Seasonality is the role that (typically predictable and normal, and therefore non-newsworthy) seasonal factors can play in numbers, such as the end of a financial year or school term, the release of new cars or simply changing temperatures. Year-on-year comparisons (this August compared to last August, for example) or seasonal adjustment is often used to prevent this effect.
The margin of error, meanwhile, is the range within which the real numbers actually lie. Because many datasets are based on samples which are then generalised to the rest of the population being looked at, a margin of error (or confidence intervals) is used to indicate how accurate that generalisation actually is. If any change is within that margin of error then we can’t really report that anything has changed.
A variation of the change story is the lack of change angle. This story on company insolvencies, for example, looks for change where you would expect it, but identifies the absence of any increase in companies going bust during the pandemic and seeks expert comment for this counter-intuitive finding.
Data angle 3: Ranking and outliers — who’s best and who’s worst? Who’s unusual and why?
Ranking stories are all about who or what comes out worst or best in a dataset, or where a particular entity of interest (the local police force, schools or teams, or an industry if it’s the specialist press) sits in comparison to others.
Typical stories in this category might include “Local area one of worst areas for crime” or “Local school among best performers in the country”.
You might focus on the places ‘worst-hit’, as in “The parts of Birmingham in top 10 UK areas worst-hit by Universal Credit advances“, or you might look at where your sector compares to others, as in “Construction is third most dangerous UK industry.”
But ranking stories can also be about the best or worst times, places or categories that a dataset ‘reveals’.
The Economist article above, for example, is about the top-ranked month for listening to gloomy songs. A Birmingham Live story, on the other hand, leads on The most common crimes in Sandwell – and where you’re most likely to be a victim.
Data angle 4: Variation — “postcode lotteries”, maps and distributions
Variation stories work best when we expect equal treatment, or when we seek to hold a mirror up to a part of life.
The classic example uses a choropleth map or heatmap to show how some parts of a country have less access to something, or more demand for something, than other parts.
The phrase “postcode lottery”, for example, reflects the sense that a person’s access to something which is supposed to be equally distributed is actually a game of chance.
The BBC data unit story “IVF: NHS couples ‘face social rationing’“, for example, maps out how where you live in England can mean the difference between being able to access fertility treatment or not.
A variation story may be revealing that the unfairness exists — or, if people are aware of it, precisely how and where it plays out (particularly in their area).
Algorithmic accountability stories such as ProPublica’s Machine Bias series are often about variation and the unfairness that is revealed when an algorithm is unpicked: it may be people being sentenced differently, or given different insurance quotes, despite no meaningful difference between them on the dimensions that matter.
A variation story can equally be used to highlight areas of underserved demand, or lack of supply: one story that I worked on for the BBC Shared Data Unit about electric car charging points involved identifying how much infrastructure existed in the country, and where. The picture that the data painted provided a foundation for case studies and reaction.
President Trump on Monday unloaded on the Obama administration’s “Obamagate,” those actions that included using American intel agencies to spy on his successful 2016 campaign for president.
The musician’s father had disowned him after the controversial song was released.
Teenage and underage girls at IDP camps are daily abused but hardly do the survivors or their families speak out.