90 Miles From Tyranny

Sunday, December 19, 2021

The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #1572

You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside?

It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific,

from the beautiful to the repugnant,

from the mysterious to the familiar.

If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed,

you could be inspired, you could be appalled.

This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended.

You have been warned.

THE JAB IS USELESS AGAINST OMICRON..

So I Am Basically Not Posting To My YouTube Channel Any More Where I Have Over 1200 Subscribers.

Do Me A Solid And Help Me Get My Pathetic, Meager Bitchute Channel Over 100 Subscribers.

My Bitchute Channel Is HERE

Girls With Guns

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #126

It Is Joe Biden's Winter Of Discontent...And He's Taking It Out On You.....

You start a conversation you can't even finish it

You're talking a lot, but you're not saying anything

When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed

Say something once, why say it again?

Psycho Killer

Qu'est-ce que c'est

Fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-far better

Run run run run run run run away oh oh oh

Psycho Killer

Latest VAERS estimate: 388,000 Americans killed by the COVID vaccines

An independent derivation of the VAERS URF using the CMS death data leads to a URF of 44.64 which then leads to a 388K excess death estimate.

My estimate of the VAERS under-reporting factor (URF) at 41 was based on anaphylaxis rates reported in the Blumenthal paper published in JAMA.

I have argued that the anaphylaxis rate is an appropriate number to use to (under) estimate deaths because I believed that deaths would be less reported than anaphylaxis to VAERS for two reasons: 1) usually lacks the time proximity to vaccination, 2) the person seeing the death may not know the vaccination status of the victim and may not technically be required to report the death.

Some people have quibbled with that assumption, including my friend Professor John Ioannidis, who argued that there is no evidence that that is true and it could be the other way around. It’s a fair point and I told John it’s only an estimate and I’m happy to modify it when we have more data.

That day has arrived courtesy of Wayne at VAERS Analysis.

Wayne did a URF computation using death data in CMS. This overcomes any objections about the validity of using anaphylaxis rates as a proxy for death rates.

The VAERS URF he computed was 44.64.

This seems reasonable to me. It’s really not far from the 41 I calculated.

Also, Wayne subsequently looked at the numbers for 9 states. The average value was 40, not far from the 41 I calculated from anaphylaxis.

I had two team members (Albert Benavides and Jessica Rose) double check his numbers. No mistake.

Now, let’s see what that means.

As of Dec 14, 2021, there are 9,136 deaths reported into VAERS for domestic deaths (if you are using OpenVAERS, flip the switch at the top to see the US only deaths). If we subtract out more than twice the total number of deaths reported in any previous year (to be super conservative about estimating background deaths):

So our new best estimate of the number of “excess deaths” caused by the vaccine is 388,000. Because there isn’t a plausible mechanism of excess death other than the vaccine (certainly our “always vigilant” CDC has never suggested an alternate cause), the process of elimination leads us to conclude the obvious: that these excess deaths were, in fact, caused by the vaccine.

This should really be a surprise to anyone paying attention to...

The Lies Of The Deep State Media Have Come Home To Roost!

Their Lies Have Become Their Own Financial Nightmare....

Say your prayers, little one

Don't forget, my son

To include everyone

I tuck you in, warm within

Keep you free from sin

Till the Sandman he comes

Virginia hospital found in contempt of court for denying patient prescribed round of Ivermectin

A drawn-out court battle became the reality of one family who wanted to try Ivermectin on their ailing mother

A Virginia court on Monday found a hospital in the state in contempt of court for failing to comply with previous orders to provide prescribed Ivermectin to a COVID-19 patient.

The court ruled that if the Fauquier Health hospital, in Warrenton, failed to provide the dose by 9 p.m. on Monday the state would be allowed to fine the hospital $10,000 a day.

The hospital reportedly agreed Monday to comply with the order after a week of back-and-forth with the court. But it was unclear as of Tuesday morning whether the patient received the prescription, over which its effectiveness in treating virus symptoms health care providers disagree.

The patient, Kathy Davies, was admitted to the hospital with COVID in October and placed on a ventilator in the ICU on Nov. 3. Her husband, Donald Davies, and the couple’s children have been fighting to get for weeks to the patient a dose of Ivermectin.

Hospital doctors have adamantly refused to comply with the wishes of the family, prompting Davies to hire a legal team earlier this month.

According to a Daily Wire report, the court initially ruled that the patient had the right to try Ivermectin and any other drug prescribed by her doctor.

However, on Dec. 7, when one of Kathy’s sons and a registered nurse arrived to administer the drug – which had been prescribed by Dr. Martha Maturi – the “hospital administration barred [him and the nurse] from entering the ICU with the Ivermectin,” reads a court document.

Following several rounds of back-and-forth between the hospital and Maturi over the matter of admitting Maturi to the hospital to care for her patient, the Davies returned to court to claim that the hospital had behaved unreasonably in its effort to provide the patient with care and should therefore be held in contempt of court.

Judge James. P. Fisher, of the 20th Judicial Court of Virginia, agreed with the arguments presented by the Davies family attorney and ruled to hold the hospital in contempt of court and compel the $10,000 a day fines, which could be applied retroactively beginning...

I took a line that leads you to the opium trail
Oriental eyes reveal the lies, deceit, betrayal
On this journey behold one who travels far
You called him fool but now you are

The wizard wanders through the world made from dreams
The splashing whirlpool drowns the frightened streams
Exotic dancers, flashing lancers, this mysterious space
The fanfare advances, the warlord falls from grace

Biden White House Offers Bonuses for Doctors Who Mandate ‘Anti-Racism Plans’

The Biden Administration is planning to offer bonuses to any doctors who “create and implement an anti-racism plan” in their medical facilities, according to the Washington Free Beacon.

The directive was issued under new rules from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which aim to update Medicare in order to “reflect changes in medical practice.” As of January 1st, doctors involved in Medicare can increase reimbursement rates by holding “clinic-wide reviews” of their facilities’ “commitment to anti-racism.” HHS notes that, in such surveys, race must be defined as “a political and social construct, not a physiological one.”

“It is important,” the new rules read, “to acknowledge systemic racism as a root cause for differences in health outcomes between socially-defined racial groups.”

The initiative follows the precedent set by one of Biden’s first moves after assuming office. Shortly after his inauguration in January, Biden signed an executive order outlining a “whole-of-government equity agenda,” which includes, among other things, “equitable delivery of government benefits.”

The new race-based incentives will alter Medicare’s Merit-Based Incentive Payment System, the metric by which eligible doctors’ reimbursement rates are determined. This system was first implemented by Congress in 2015, and originally intended to reward medical professionals who provided the highest-quality and most cost-effective medical care. But this new “equity”-based system will shift the focus away from merit in favor of ideological conformity.

These new changes have already faced criticism from those who crafted the original 2015 system. Chris Pope, a scholar with the Manhattan Institute who, as a Hill fellow in 2015, helped draft the original legislation, pointed out that the original system was approved with bipartisan support. By contrast, the revisions are being done unilaterally, without the consent of...