Twitter's current "COVID misinformation policy," under which Marjorie Taylor Greene was just banned, effectively prohibits criticism of "official regulations" and "restrictions" -- even on the grounds of "efficacy." And then they wonder why people are cynical
The terms of the policy could of course just as easily apply to COVID-fanatical users: what about the "harm" caused by generating the "misleading" impression that children are at extreme risk? To take just one example of countless. But of course it's never enforced that way
As usual, Tech Officials have made themselves into unilateral arbiters of complex public debates -- like they're Philosopher Kings. But the one-sidedness of "COVID misinformation" rules, combined with the inherent ambiguity of the "harm" principle, takes it to a whole other level
There was a gigantic explosion of criticism on Twitter this week from COVID hawks and assorted "public health" types about the CDC reducing its isolation time recommendation to 5 days -- an "official regulation." Is Twitter banning critics of this regulation's "efficacy"? 🤔
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
If her shockingly dire predictions fizzle out, will this woman face any "accountability" for such extreme doom-saying? Professor at Johns Hopkins
This woman also works at the FDA. If you're using your governmental and university affiliations to give weight to such dire predictions, and they turn out to be bogus, should there not be some penalty incurred -- at least reputationally -- for doing a major public disservice...?
Would also note that the "disruptions" she's warning about seem not especially connected to the level of actual illness that is allegedly forthcoming, but rather the policies that cause things like staffing shortages for "testing positive"
Emerson College in Boston has issued a "stay in room directive" for returning students next month -- the same students already required to get "boosted" and tested twice a week. Sounds like fun
The individual issuing these "directives" is a "Vice President & Dean for Campus Life" who now gets to masquerade as some profound epidemiological authority thanks to his role in the COVID bureaucracy. Imagine being confined to your room on the orders of such an individual
This is why I keep banging on about the COVID bureaucracies, because they tend to be comprised of the last people on Earth that you'd ever voluntarily take direction from mtracey.substack.com/p/covid-bullsh…
As expected, Chicago's just-announced vaccine passport scheme -- supposedly prompted by "Omicron" -- also rests on claims of "emergency" authority. Nearly two years later, just constant circumvention of "normal" governance procedures all around the country
Is there any evidence whatsoever that vaccine passports "stop the spread" of "Omicron"? All evidence points to the contrary. But sorry -- no debate permitted, because these municipal officials continue to assert "emergency" powers to do whatever they like
And as usual, hardly a peep about any of this from the ACLU and like-minded organizations
In Boston, like many jurisdictions, officials continue to invoke the same "Emergency" powers first decreed in March 2020 to institute whatever measures they like. The Mayor's order this week imposing vaccine passports expressly cites her seemingly permanent "Emergency" authority
Boston "health" officials have declared that they reserve the right to modify the definition of "fully vaccinated" at any time, and thereby mandate additional injections. Even if you somehow support this, should such a sweeping measure really be instituted by "Emergency" decree?
Why I keep calling attention to COVID bureaucracies and the bullshit jobs they produce
If you read the article you'll discover that a few years ago, a particular "COVID Logistics" official I've interacted with was making Rap Battle videos on YouTube. That was their main professional output. Now they're implementing extremely serious "public health" regulations 🙄