Healthcare
CA’s STRINGENT COVID-19 holiday compliance laws. Sing quietly and more…
If you’re wondering if you still live in the home of the free and the land of the brave, I applaud you. Why? Because that means you’re questioning what it is happening in our nation since the outbreak of COVID-19.
If you aren’t paying attention – or just don’t care to know what is happening then you are part of the problem. Why? Because the guidelines for COVID-19 in many Democratic run states are frankly, un-American and directly contradict our Constitution.
Check out California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s rules for the holidays in the time of COVID-19 and tell me that this isn’t weird and un-American.
In fact, the summary of the compliance guidelines established by the California Department of Public Health is really revealing.
“This guidance provides an updated plan for Californians to gather outside their household and replaces the prior gatherings guidance issued on September 12, 2020 and March 16, 2020,” states the compliance regulation guidelines. “It applies to private gatherings, and all other gatherings not covered by existing sector guidance are prohibited. Gatherings are defined as social situations that bring together people from different households at the same time in a single space or place. When people from different households mix, this increases the risk of transmission of COVID-19.”
I could list every ridiculous rule here but all you need to do is go here to the California Public Health website.
I did pick a few of my favorites to share with you.
Here’s one I’d like to see how California will enforce: “Gatherings that include more than 3 households are prohibited. This includes everyone present, including hosts and guests. Remember, the smaller the number of people, the safer.”
Newsom’s Rules for Singing, Chanting, and Shouting at Outdoor Gatherings
- Singing, chanting, shouting, and physical exertion significantly increases the risk of COVID-19 transmission because these activities increase the release of respiratory droplets and fine aerosols into the air. Because of this, singing, chanting, and shouting are strongly discouraged, but if they occur, the following rules and recommendations apply:
- All people who are singing or chanting should wear a face covering at all times while singing or chanting, including anyone who is leading a song or chant. Because these activities pose a very high risk of COVID-19 transmission, face coverings are essential to reduce the spread of respiratory droplets and fine aerosols;
- People who are singing, shouting, chanting, or exercising are strongly encouraged to maintain physical distancing beyond 6 feet to further reduce risk.
- People who are singing or chanting are strongly encouraged to do so quietly (at or below the volume of a normal speaking voice).
- Instrumental music is allowed as long as the musicians maintain at least 6-foot physical distancing. Musicians must be from one of the three households. Playing of wind instruments (any instrument played by the mouth, such as a trumpet or clarinet) is strongly discouraged.
You can follow Sara A Carter on Twitter @SaraCarterDC
education
Republican Lawmakers Launch Investigation into Withholding of Data on Gender-Related Treatments for Minors
Republican lawmakers are opening an investigation into the withholding of data from a government-funded study on the effects of gender-related medical treatments for minors. This inquiry, as reported by National Review, centers on concerns over the politicization of science and the transparency of taxpayer-funded research.
Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R., Wash.), chairwoman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, strongly condemned the withholding of study findings. “This is a clear example of the politicization of science at the expense of children,” Rodgers said. “Research funded by taxpayer dollars through the National Institutes of Health (NIH) should be publicly disclosed regardless of the results, and Americans deserve access to the truth.” She added that the House Energy and Commerce Committee will investigate the matter.
At the heart of the investigation is a study led by Johanna Olson-Kennedy, medical director of the Center for Transyouth Health and Development at Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles. The study, which began in 2015 and received $5.7 million in NIH funding, examines the effects of gender-affirming care in adolescents, focusing on 95 minors, averaging 11 years old, who were treated with puberty blockers. Over nine years, the study has reportedly received nearly $10 million in federal funding.
In a recent interview with The New York Times, Olson-Kennedy stated that puberty-blocking drugs had not resulted in significant mental health improvements for the children in the study. Instead, she argued that the children were already in good condition prior to the treatments. This claim appears to conflict with a 2020 paper by the same research team, which reported that nearly a quarter of the cohort had endorsed lifetime suicidal ideation prior to receiving puberty blockers.
Olson-Kennedy has been withholding the complete data, citing political concerns. According to The New York Times, she feared that the findings could be “weaponized” to support legal efforts to ban gender-related treatments for minors. She worried that the results might be used in court to argue against the use of puberty blockers.
Republican lawmakers were swift to condemn this action. Morgan Griffith (R., Va.), chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, criticized the withholding of the data, calling it “irresponsible and inappropriate.” He emphasized that the American public has the right to “follow the science” even when findings contradict certain political agendas.
Representative Diana Harshbarger (R., Tenn.) echoed these sentiments, calling it “outrageous” that taxpayer-funded research could be suppressed to align with a particular political viewpoint. “This is a glaring example of why NIH must be reformed with measures like those initiated by Chair Rodgers to ensure transparency, standards of objectivity, and the removal of conflicts of interest in federal taxpayer-funded scientific and medical research,” she told National Review.
Brett Guthrie (R., Ky.), chairman of the Subcommittee on Health, emphasized the need for transparency from public health institutions. He expressed frustration that the study’s findings were not being published, stating, “Not publishing the results of taxpayer-funded research in fear of political blowback… fundamentally undermines the very nature of scientific research.” He further called for the immediate suspension of NIH funding for the study until the results are made public.
According to the NIH, Olson-Kennedy’s team received more than $950,000 in government funding for 2023 alone. Robert Aderholt (R., Ala.) highlighted that by receiving nearly $10 million in taxpayer dollars, Olson-Kennedy has an obligation to provide the public with the study’s results. He accused the left of hiding scientific data that doesn’t align with their agenda, adding, “When the science doesn’t back up their point of view, they will gladly try to hide it.”
Olson-Kennedy, who is also the president-elect of the United States Professional Association for Transgender Health, has been a vocal advocate for gender-affirming medical treatments for minors. In a previous study, she co-authored research that claimed chest reconstruction surgery (mastectomy) had a positive effect on transmasculine minors and young adults.
-
Elections6 days ago
Donald Trump Delivers Victory Speech, ‘I Will Govern by a Simple Motto: Promises Made, Promises Kept’
-
Elections6 days ago
Los Angeles Voters Oust Progressive DA George Gascón in Favor of Moderate Prosecutor Nathan Hochman
-
Elections5 days ago
Voters in Multiple States Approve Measures Prohibiting Noncitizen Voting
-
Elections5 days ago
DOJ Plans to ‘Wind Down’ Federal Cases Against President-Elect Donald Trump, Citing Agency Policy