ANONYMOUS - OUR VOICE

Video surfaces of man in drive-thru vaccine line having a seizure… and then the next man over collapses, too

Video surfaces of man in drive-thru vaccine line having a seizure… and then the next man over collapses, too

Apr 17th 2021, 11:10, by Scott Boyd I...

The ugly truth about COVID

<table><tbody><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td style="font-size: 6px; line-height: 10px; padding-left: 1px; padding-right: 1px;"></td></tr><tr><td><table cellpadding="3" class="btrcontent" style="-moz-border-radius: 4px; -webkit-border-radius: 4px; background-color: white; border-radius: 4px; border: 1px solid rgb(173, 173, 173); font: 13px Helvetica, sans-serif; margin-bottom: 6px; padding: 8px;"><tbody><tr><td><div style="color: #999999; font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 15px; text-align: left;">Apr 17th 2021, 15:53, by Dr. Joseph Mercola </div> <div style="color: #494949; font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"> <h3>STORY AT-A-GLANCE</h3> <ul> <li>Pandemics ~ Data & Analytics (PANDA), co-founded by Nick Hudson, is using live data and open science to empower the public to exercise freedom of choice and preserve free societies</li> <li>Hudson explains the ugly truth about COVID-19, which is that the world is being needlessly crippled by fear due to a false narrative</li> <li>The pandemic response has created "homosapienophobia" — the idea that everyone is dangerous until proven healthy</li> <li>Data compiled by PANDA found no relationship between lockdowns and COVID-19 deaths per million people; the disease followed a trajectory of linear decline regardless of whether or not lockdowns were imposed</li> <li>With looming vaccine passports, the loss of personal liberties is at an unprecedented level, while people are generally living "enslaved by fear" — fear of infection or reinfection, "long COVID," resurgence and mutant variants</li> </ul> <div></div> Nick Hudson, an actuary and private equity investor, co-founded Pandemics ~ Data & Analytics (PANDA) in response to the many threats to civil rights and freedoms that have occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic response. While media and public health institutions have engaged in a campaign of smoke and mirrors — one that is perpetuating paralyzing fear, needlessly, to this day — data and facts don't lie. Hudson and his team at PANDA, which include a data analyst, economist, medical doctors, big data analyst and public health experts, are using live data1 and open science to empower the public to exercise freedom of choice and preserve free societies.2 Hudson spoke at the inaugural BizNews Investment Conference in March 2021, and his keynote address is above. He explains the ugly truth about COVID-19, which is that the world is being crippled by fear due to a false narrative. Anyone who challenges that narrative is being labeled as a lunatic, a menace or a danger to society, which is furthering the repression and unjustified fear. <h3>Bringing COVID-19 Truth to Light</h3> George Washington famously said, "Truth will ultimately prevail where there are plans taken to bring it to light."3 With that in mind, Hudson saw the "seeds of a great tragedy" being planted with the false COVID-19 narrative, and has made it a mission to get the truth out. So, what is the reality about the pandemic? According to Hudson:4 <a href="https://i2.wp.com/noqreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Covid-Truth.jpg?ssl=1"><img alt="Covid Truth" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-114907" data-recalc-dims="1" height="254" loading="lazy" sizes="(max-width: 799px) 100vw, 799px" src="https://i2.wp.com/noqreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Covid-Truth.jpg?resize=799%2C254&ssl=1" srcset="https://i2.wp.com/noqreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Covid-Truth.jpg?w=799&ssl=1 799w, https://i2.wp.com/noqreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Covid-Truth.jpg?resize=300%2C95&ssl=1 300w, https://i2.wp.com/noqreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Covid-Truth.jpg?resize=768%2C244&ssl=1 768w, https://i2.wp.com/noqreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Covid-Truth.jpg?resize=750%2C238&ssl=1 750w" width="799" /></a> The misinformation has been spewed from the beginning, including by World Health Organization director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. In a March 3, 2020, media briefing, he stated, "Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died. By comparison, seasonal flu generally kills far fewer than 1% of those infected."5 But according to Hudson, the 3.4% represents case fatality rate (CFR), which is the number of deaths from COVID-19 divided by the number of cases of COVID-19, while the 1% is infection fatality rate (IFR), or the number of deaths divided by all infected individuals. "By conflating these two separate points (CFR and IFR)," Hudson said, "Tedros was effectively lying." Quantitative scientist John Ioannidis, professor of medicine at the Stanford Prevention Research Center, calculated the IFR for COVID-19 in a review of 61 seroprevalence studies, which was a median of 0.23%, and 0.05% in people younger than 70.6 Based on this, the IFR for COVID-19 is lower than that of the flu. And wouldn't you know it, in a New England Journal of Medicine editorial published March 26, 2020, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), and colleagues wrote that "the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza."7 The media have suppressed this fact, Hudson noted, along with the fact that there's a 1,000 times difference in mortality among those younger than 19 and those older than 70 — something that should have been taken into account in the pandemic response. <h3>Is COVID-19 Really a 'Novel Virus'?</h3> Further <a href="https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/20/misinformation-on-coronavirus.aspx">inflaming widespread fear</a> is the idea that COVID-19 is a "novel virus," which makes it sound like it's something humans have never encountered before. But is it really? According to Hudson: "The reality is that the coronavirus is a very close relative, not even a separate subspecies, a very close relative of the 2003 SARS virus. There are seven related coronaviruses known to cause disease in humans, probably many others, and four of them are in general circulation. Annual, global circulation. So the naming of this disease is terribly inconsistent. This is really a rose by any name, SARS. A variant of SARS. It's not novel." One study even found that 81% of people not exposed to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, were still able to mount an immune response against it, which "suggests at least some built-in immune protection from SARS-CoV-2 …"8 Nonetheless, Maria Van Kerkhove, WHO's technical lead for the COVID-19 pandemic, stated that "a majority of the world's population is susceptible to infection from this virus."9 This is the first of two key elements that, Hudson said, lead to "homosapienophobia" — the idea that everyone is dangerous until proven healthy. The idea of universal susceptibility to COVID-19 is nonsense, Hudson noted, as was demonstrated early on with the Diamond Princess cruise ship. Among the 3,711 passengers and crew onboard the Diamond Princess, 712 (19.2%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, and of these 46.5% were asymptomatic at the time of testing. Of those showing symptoms, only 9.7% required intensive care and 1.3% (nine) died.10 PANDA data also showed that, starting in February 2021, there was not universal susceptibility to the virus. Their data showed cumulative COVID-19 deaths per million people. In Africa, Southeast Asia and Oceania, the population fatality rate was 112 per million compared to 710 per million in Europe and the Americas. As for Africa, Southeast Asia and Oceania, Hudson said, "the population fatality rate there almost isn't an epidemic. In a typical year, they'd have 10,000 deaths per million from all causes." <h3>Fear Mongering Over Asymptomatic Spread</h3> The second element that enables the doctrine of "everyone being a danger" to continue is the idea of asymptomatic spread driving disease. "I was absolutely aghast to find out the poor quality of the science" behind it, Hudson said. One of the seminal papers involved one woman who reportedly infected 16 colleagues while she was asymptomatic.11 The study was widely used to suggest that asymptomatic spread was occurring, but controversy later ensued over whether the woman was actually asymptomatic when the others were infected or if she was symptomatic and being treated for flu-like symptoms at the time.12 In June 2020, Kerkhove also made it very clear that people who have COVID-19 without any symptoms <a href="https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/06/23/who-says-covid-19-asymptomatic-transmission-is-rare.aspx">"rarely" transmit the disease</a> to others. But in a dramatic about-face, WHO then backtracked on the statement just one day later. June 9, 2020, Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of WHO's emergencies program, quickly backpedaled Van Kerkhove's statement, saying the remarks were "misinterpreted or maybe we didn't use the most elegant words to explain that."13 "It's utter, utter nonsense," Hudson said, adding that Fauci also stated in January 2020, "asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks. The driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person."14 A JAMA Network Open study later found, in December 2020, that <a href="https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/05/20/do-asymptomatic-carriers-spread-coronavirus.aspx">asymptomatic transmission</a> is not a primary driver of infection within households.15 A study in Nature Communications also found "there was no evidence of transmission from asymptomatic positive persons to traced close contacts."16 <h3>Lockdown Madness</h3> The myth of widespread asymptomatic spread is what was used to justify <a href="https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/24/global-lockdown.aspx">worldwide lockdowns</a> of healthy people. "Bruce Aylward will go down in history as a criminal of immense stature," Hudson said, referring to Aylward's role as the head of a WHO team that visited Wuhan, China, and concluded lockdowns were working to stop COVID-19 spread.17 "He takes a delegation to China, spends a few days, then comes back and says everyone should follow China's response, the doctrine of universal susceptibility," Hudson said. Yet, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic official guidelines for pandemic response plans recommend against large-scale quarantine of the healthy. In fact, WHO wrote that during an influenza pandemic, quarantine of exposed individuals, entry and exit screening and border closure are "not recommended in any circumstance."18 Likewise, in 2021 a study published in the European Journal of Clinical Investigation found no significant benefits on COVID-19 case growth in regions using more restrictive nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as mandatory stay‐at‐home and business closure orders (i.e., lockdowns).19 Data compiled by PANDA also found no relationship between lockdowns and COVID-19 deaths per million people. The disease followed a trajectory of linear decline regardless of whether or not lockdowns were imposed. What isn't a lie, however, is that lockdowns cause a great deal of harm. Infant mortality, poverty, starvation and joblessness are on the rise, as are delays in medical treatment and diagnosis, psychological disorders among youth, suicide and deaths of despair. Education has been disrupted for an estimated 1.6 billion children, Hudson said, and a survey of 2,000 U.S. adults revealed that 1 in 6 Americans started therapy for the first time during 2020. Nearly half (45%) of the survey respondents confirmed that the COVID-19 pandemic was the driving reason that triggered them to seek a therapist's help.20 According to Hudson: "Perhaps the hardest thing for me to swallow about all of this is in undergraduate epidemiology, it is a well-known finding that when you are confronted with a disease with sharp edge graduation, as you are with coronavirus, measures to generally suppress the spread of the disease have the effect, reliably, of shifting the disease burden onto the vulnerable, who we should be protecting. They worsen coronavirus mortality." <h3>Mask Rhetoric Is Misleading</h3> It's been touted that face masks are essential to stopping the spread of COVID-19 and could save 130,000 lives in the U.S. alone.21 But in 2019, the World Health Organization analyzed 10 randomized controlled trials and concluded, "there was no evidence that facemasks are effective in reducing transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza."22 Only one randomized controlled trial has been conducted on <a href="https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/12/03/efficacy-of-surgical-masks.aspx">mask usage and COVID-19 transmission</a>, and it found masks did not statistically significantly reduce the incidence of infection.23 You may remember that in the early days of the pandemic, face masks were not recommended for the general public. In February 2020, Christine Francis, a consultant for infection prevention and control at WHO headquarters, was featured in a video, holding up a disposable face mask. She said, "Medical masks like this one cannot protect against the new coronavirus when used alone … WHO only recommends the use of masks in specific cases."24 As of March 31, 2020, WHO was still advising against the use of face masks for people without symptoms, stating that there is "no evidence" that such mask usage prevents COVID-19 transmission.25 But by June 2020, the rhetoric had changed. Citing "evolving evidence," WHO reversed their recommendation and began advising governments to encourage the general public to wear masks where there is widespread transmission and physical distancing is difficult.26 Yet that same day, June 5, 2020, WHO published an announcement stating:27 "At present, there is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID-19 and in healthy people in the community) on the effectiveness of universal masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19." The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention did a similar about-face on mask usage, citing a study of two hair dressers in Missouri, who were reportedly symptomatic with COVID-19 and styled 139 clients' hair. None of the clients tested positive for COVID-19, which the CDC suggested was because they and the stylists wore masks.28 Hudson believes, however, that the customers were probably young and not susceptible to the virus in the first place. Another study published in the CDC's journal Emerging Infectious Diseases stated, "We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility."29 PANDA data also showed no differences in transmission in states with mask mandates and those without. Still, health officials are now advising you should <a href="https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/29/is-wearing-three-masks-better-than-one.aspx">double or triple up on masks</a> to make them work better. <h3>Vaccines Being Sold as a Ticket to Freedom</h3> People who stand to make countless billions out of <a href="https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/31/covid-vaccine-software-update.aspx">COVID-19 vaccines</a> are now selling them as a ticket to freedom, Hudson states: "How convenient that we now have a logic that tells us that we need to vaccinate 7.8 billion people for a disease that has a mean survival rate of 99.95% for people under the age of 70. The profiteering here is naked. It is transparent." It's a sad situation when teenagers, who aren't at high risk, are lining up for vaccines just to get their freedoms back, he adds. When you add in all the other inconsistencies and lies — <a href="https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/02/19/covid-pcr-test-fraud.aspx">PCR tests</a> that are not capable of diagnosing infectiousness, inflated death numbers, restrictions on travel, media propaganda and arbitrary rules, like the CDC's recent change in physical distancing in classrooms from 6 feet to 3 feet30 — it's as though we're living in an Orwellian reality. With looming <a href="https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/02/24/covid-vaccine-passport.aspx">vaccine passports</a>, the loss of personal liberties is at an unprecedented level, while people are generally "enslaved by fear" — fear of infection or reinfection, "long COVID," resurgence and mutant variants. "The underpinnings of our civilization are under threat," Hudson noted, and we have a choice. "We've been pushed up against a precipice, will we be pushed off or will we push back?" He urges people to support the Great Barrington Declaration, which calls for "focused protection" and finding a middle ground between locking down an entire economy and just "letting it rip." As of April 4, 2021, the declaration has collected 41,890 signatures from medical practitioners and over 13,796 signatures from medical and public health scientists.31 In addition, the declaration is open for public signatures and has collected 764,089 from concerned citizens around the world. The website allows you to read and sign the declaration, answers many frequently asked questions, shares the science behind the recommendations and explains how the declaration was written. PANDA also published a protocol for reopening society "to provide a road map out of the damaging cycle of lockdowns."32 Hudson quoted Nelson Mandela, who stated courage is not the absence of fear, but the triumph over it. We all need to strive for courage and support awareness campaigns aimed at stopping the harmful narrative, relieving fear and protecting future freedom. The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) recently posted more than 50 video presentations from the pay-for-view Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination held online October 16 to 18, 2020, and made them available to everyone for free. The conference's theme was "Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century" and it featured physicians, scientists and other health professionals, human rights activists, faith community leaders, constitutional and civil rights attorneys, authors and parents of vaccine injured children talking about vaccine science, policy, law and ethics and infectious diseases, including coronavirus and COVID-19 vaccines. In December 2020, a U.K. company published false and misleading information about NVIC and its conference, which prompted NVIC to open up the whole conference for free viewing. The conference has everything you need to educate yourself and protect your personal freedoms and liberties with respect to your health. Don't miss out on this incredible opportunity. I was a speaker at this empowering conference and urge you to watch these video presentations before they're censored and taken away by the technocratic elite. <hr /> <hr /> <h2>'The Purge' by Big Tech targets conservatives, including us</h2> <h4>Just when we thought the Covid-19 lockdowns were ending and our ability to stay afloat was improving, censorship reared its ugly head.</h4> For the last few months, NOQ Report has appealed to our readers for assistance in staying afloat through Covid-19 lockdowns. The downturn in the economy has limited our ability to generate proper ad revenue just as our traffic was skyrocketing. We had our first sustained stretch of three months with over a million visitors in November, December, and January, but February saw a dip. It wasn't just the shortened month. We expected that. We also expected the continuation of dropping traffic from "woke" Big Tech companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter, but it has actually been much worse than anticipated. Our Twitter account was banned. One of our YouTube accounts was banned and another has been suspended. Facebook "fact-checks" everything we post. Spotify canceled us. Why? Because we believe in the truth prevailing, and that means we will continue to discuss "taboo" topics. The 2020 presidential election was stolen. You can't say that on Big Tech platforms without risking cancelation, but we'd rather get cancelled for telling the truth rather than staying around to repeat mainstream media's lies. They have been covering it up since before the election and they've convinced the vast majority of conservative news outlets that they will be harmed if they continue to discuss voter fraud. We refuse to back down. The truth is the truth. The lies associated with Covid-19 are only slightly more prevalent than the suppression of valid scientific information that runs counter to the prescribed narrative. We should be allowed to ask questions about the vaccines, for example, as there is ample evidence for concern. One does not have to be an "anti-vaxxer" in order to want answers about vaccines that are still considered experimental and that have a track record in a short period of time of having side-effects. These questions are not allowed on Big Tech which is just another reason we are getting cancelled. There are more topics that they refuse to allow. In turn, we refuse to stop discussing them. This is why we desperately need your help. The best way NOQ Report readers can help is to donate. Our <a href="https://noqreport.givingfuel.com/noq-report">Giving Fuel page</a> makes it easy to donate one-time or monthly. Alternatively, you can <a href="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=BJBTSXXH3MLUN&source=url">donate through PayPal</a> as well. We are on track to be short by about $5300 per month in order to maintain operations. The second way to help is to become a partner. We've strongly considered seeking angel investors in the past but because we were paying the bills, it didn't seem necessary. Now, we're struggling to pay the bills. We had 5,657,724 sessions on our website from November, 2020, through February, 2021. Our intention is to elevate that to higher levels this year by focusing on a strategy that relies on free speech rather than being beholden to progressive Big Tech companies. During that four-month stretch, Twitter and Facebook accounted for about 20% of our traffic. We are actively working on operating as if that traffic is zero, replacing it with platforms that operate more freely such as Gab, Parler, and others. While we were never as dependent on Big Tech as most conservative sites, we'd like to be completely free from them. That doesn't mean we will block them, but we refuse to be beholden to companies that absolutely despise us simply because of our political ideology. We're heading in the right direction and we believe we're ready talk to patriotic investors who want to not only "get in on the action" but more importantly who want to help America hear the truth. Interested investors should contact me directly with the contact button above. As the world spirals towards radical progressivism, the need for truthful journalism has never been greater. But in these times, we need as many conservative media voices as possible. <a href="https://noqreport.givingfuel.com/noq-report">Please help keep NOQ Report going</a>. Bitcoin: 32SeW2Ajn86g4dATWtWreABhEkiqxsKUGn <div class="emotesBoxDiv"></div> The post <a href="https://noqreport.com/2021/04/17/the-ugly-truth-about-covid/" rel="nofollow">The ugly truth about COVID</a> appeared first on <a href="https://noqreport.com" rel="nofollow">NOQ Report - Conservative Christian News, Opinions, and Quotes</a>. <img alt="" height="1" src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/NoqReport/~4/8tkgQ7lsaBg" width="1" /> </div> </td></tr> </tbody></table> <img alt="" src="https://blogtrottr.com/spot/84lf/3/fVQy" /> </td> </tr> <tr><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

The ugly truth about COVID

Apr 17th 2021, 15:53, by Dr. Joseph Mercola ...

Climate change is making your allergies worse

The warm, inviting spring air coupled with vaccinations for Covid-19 are encouraging people to gather outside. But for allergy sufferers, that air is packing a massive wallop that could send them scrambling back indoors.
From <a href="https://wgme.com/news/local/dry-and-mild-weather-in-maine-leading-to-high-levels-of-pollen-this-week">Maine</a> to <a href="https://www.wsfa.com/2021/04/13/is-there-an-end-sight-this-brutal-pollen-season/">Alabama</a>, clouds of allergens like pollen are wafting over cities, leaving millions of people with watery eyes, headaches, and rashes. 2021 is shaping up to be yet another brutal year for allergies. Just like 2020, <a href="https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Allergy-Sufferers-Prepare-for-Unusually-Long-Season-Expert-Says-507872031.html">2019</a>, and <a href="https://www.sctimes.com/story/life/wellness/2018/09/16/allergy-season-tips-pollen-fall/1226697002/">2018</a> ...
The trend is real: Allergy risk is getting worse over time. The length and intensity of pollen seasons are growing, largely due to climate change. And as the planet continues to warm, more misery is in store.
Up to <a href="http://www.aafa.org/page/allergy-facts.aspx">50 million</a> Americans are estimated to have allergies, and as pollen counts increase, more people may become allergic.
“I think that what will happen is that more people will get sensitized and then they will present themselves earlier because of the higher pollen count, particularly with tree pollen,” said <a href="https://allergymedgroup.com/about/">Sunil Perera</a>, an allergist in Roseville, California, near Sacramento.
That in turn will become a greater burden on health and the economy, as even people with mild symptoms struggle with remaining active and productive. The cost of treating nasal allergies already tops <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21277528/">$3.4 billion</a> per year in the US. Asthma attacks induced by pollen lead to 20,000 emergency room visits a year in the US.
One complication this year, like last, is the Covid-19 pandemic. Many are wondering whether their suffering is being caused by the virus or pollen. There are some overlapping symptoms between Covid-19 and allergies, like a runny nose and a loss of smell, but allergies also produce some distinct signs, like itchy eyes and sneezing, according to the <a href="https://education.aaaai.org/resources-for-a-i-clinicians/covid-19">American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology</a>. The more unique symptoms to Covid-19 include fever, cough, and shortness of breath.
<figure class="e-image"><picture class="c-picture" data-cid="site/picture_element-1618664420_6217_553146" data-cdata='{"asset_id":19950893,"ratio":"*"}'><source srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/wRvtJzUvPdmu-P2exwmPdx2bezA=/0x0:997x736/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/afx0cPjfwPqfdcqIJPUSbWgxNrI=/0x0:997x736/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/tnfRsXd7aZ1KpfDJbBdTX8-MRoc=/0x0:997x736/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/9P4TsRxAm1-UNyQX48vpu5YBO3E=/0x0:997x736/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/EjQo--YrUKCehrLBlXe5cD2mC9o=/0x0:997x736/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/JRhVYOBF4QSPmiDmOGHIdLV9mHc=/0x0:997x736/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Wdi3UpYY5vHBc_uOCjnUyQIvzaA=/0x0:997x736/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/zSMvLuU84v2rwi-w2qKhPSPdXhw=/0x0:997x736/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/XDTNFU9PARO5eBiQBFU8SfCnZrg=/0x0:997x736/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 1920w" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" type="image/webp" /> <img alt="Chart listing symptoms of allergies, influenza, the common cold, and Covid-19" data-upload-width="997" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/H-tts3AiMIV55hTiWfXZZg6wMGU=/0x0:997x736/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png" srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Eynu46P2X335ddw26fUoG8e7qT4=/0x0:997x736/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/F_f4kyO6H9Y7s_0uO3x0uUj7ey8=/0x0:997x736/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/rz-7KEJD7y3_2Zw0JrQReFWadpc=/0x0:997x736/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/mqDYIzQ3fmXR8oF7Zy0Y9_ydOLE=/0x0:997x736/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/8EeJE1iqA2rwGT8KXbWnfD7-vZk=/0x0:997x736/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/8zRBm-G8BsftJA6KGxbSSBwNhVs=/0x0:997x736/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/OaqAEkaP8VviccV5pA3mpm3pkqw=/0x0:997x736/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/jnbrHayBlwvJehzsA1uBRoy-ONk=/0x0:997x736/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/_loIg5kXAC4QhSfIyty__bHP23Y=/0x0:997x736/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:997x736):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19950893/Screen_Shot_2020_05_07_at_2.46.38_PM.png 1920w" /></picture>
<figcaption>Allergy symptoms can overlap with Covid-19, but there are some distinct signs.</figcaption>
<cite><a class="ql-link" href="https://www.aaaai.org/Aaaai/media/MediaLibrary/Images/Promos/Coronavirus-Symptoms.pdf" target="_blank">American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology</a></cite></figure>
However, many people with Covid-19 have no symptoms at all. And there’s no reason why someone couldn’t have Covid-19 and allergies at the same time.
In fact, doctors warn that severe allergies could make people more vulnerable to respiratory infections. “When allergic inflammation occurs in the respiratory tract, [infections] are easier,” Perera said. “We see concurrent allergies and infections when [patients] come see us.”
Face masks may provide allergy sufferers with some relief, although they leave eyes exposed. But as the planet continues to warm, allergy sufferers will have a harder time finding refuge. Grains of pollen range in <a href="http://www-saps.plantsci.cam.ac.uk/pollen/index2.htm">size</a> from 200 microns down to 10 microns, with smaller grains able to penetrate deeper into the lungs. Small pollen grains can even seep indoors. And researchers are finding out just how much our own insults to the environment are to blame.
Allergies are the result of the immune system overreacting to something that is otherwise benign. That can lead to annoying but mild symptoms like hives or itchy eyes. But it can also cause life-threatening complications like <a href="https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/anaphylaxis/symptoms-causes/syc-20351468">anaphylaxis</a>, where blood pressure plummets and airways start swelling shut.
Pollen is one of the most common allergens. It’s produced as part of the reproductive cycle of plants. The timing of pollen production varies depending on the plant species, with trees peaking in the spring, grass over the summer, and ragweed in the fall.
<figure class="e-image"><picture class="c-picture" data-cid="site/picture_element-1618664420_2200_553147" data-cdata='{"asset_id":16290518,"ratio":"*"}'><source srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/xwUKW0SQ8gBwDXLxHm4NAeElEPA=/0x0:627x512/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/q-oUqh32apW5Nv6QIDP8cdCaxmc=/0x0:627x512/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/PzKRLc9GMKq96fYEFRrLe_EQp-U=/0x0:627x512/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/NAAHOg7dPh6myYBATXpxprHCU8g=/0x0:627x512/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/rTFtixQJETjvxf_o_iqoPJq9s_Q=/0x0:627x512/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/MqSVDqLawYfV5oqqt3QxKZQPJzM=/0x0:627x512/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/8YJ1gVWbY8YTeuBX4eDwPmWkSRQ=/0x0:627x512/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Dtb1MeV9dyXUjdODqZAFIoZsSL4=/0x0:627x512/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/kbszz10XDBzp_M0uapmGfrbr4B4=/0x0:627x512/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 1920w" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" type="image/webp" /> <img alt="This chart shows the pollen peaks for various species in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States. Tree pollen peaks in the spring, grass pollen peaks in the summer, and weed pollen peaks in the fall." data-upload-width="627" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/VNVi467ehAO88VkDtuGlrEzOpDU=/0x0:627x512/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png" srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/JFF2pJQ3RVvjiZXTN08-KDdqk5Y=/0x0:627x512/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/__Judl282fZunR6qETMC4y8PFik=/0x0:627x512/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/vzNX33HcvnST0UMMtPCcVb63jOE=/0x0:627x512/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/MM1HQ7BXFIXTD622qXGFyoL-wSI=/0x0:627x512/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/04H7IygdR2T8e7xxsWFv_rsf0lA=/0x0:627x512/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/J7TjBiyl-MJp_qkD2hBFYmRIV3I=/0x0:627x512/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/D55M_x1nTW2RNTtUWE1Kz7Iy1z8=/0x0:627x512/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/89Osdwl7r4E8M47bX-4TXdf85LU=/0x0:627x512/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/vszTekUNAJYjm82NkuB6wGVS0dQ=/0x0:627x512/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:627x512):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16290518/Screen_Shot_2019_05_21_at_10.12.42_AM.png 1920w" /></picture>
<figcaption>Different plants reach peak pollen production at different times of year.</figcaption>
<cite><a class="ql-link" href="http://jhuasthmaallergy.jhmi.edu/allergicreactions/pollen-chartmidatlantic.pdf" target="_blank">Johns Hopkins University, Division of Allergy and Clinical Immunology</a></cite></figure>
There are two main ways that humans are changing pollen production. One mechanism is that humans are increasing the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels. Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations have risen from 280 parts per million in the 1800s to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2021/04/05/atmospheric-co2-concentration-record/">420 ppm today</a>.
“When CO2 goes up, plants tend to grow a little bigger,” said <a href="https://faculty.utah.edu/u6003057-WILLIAM_ANDEREGG/research/index.hml">William Anderegg</a>, an assistant professor of biology at the University of Utah. “They tend to put out more flowers as a fraction of their mass, and individual flowers tend to have actually more pollen on them.”
Plants that produce more pollen tend to produce more seeds. That also means more pollen-spewing plants in the next season.
The other mechanism is the warming induced by carbon dioxide. Since it traps heat, higher concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are causing the planet to heat up. This is leading to warmer winters and earlier springs, giving plants a head start on pollen production. “As spring heats up, all of these life cycle events, including pollen seasons, tend to shift earlier,” Anderegg said.
The combination of these two factors is leading to more pollen production and over a longer period of time.
<a href="https://www.vox.com/21452781/zogg-fire-glass-wildfire-california-climate-change-hurricanes-attribution-2020-debate">Attribution</a> is the growing climate science field that seeks to figure out not just how the climate is changing but also to what extent human activity is specifically to blame — and what amount of change might have occurred otherwise, without human meddling. Scientists use observations and models to figure out how phenomena ranging from extreme flooding to wildfires would be different if humans weren’t spewing gigatons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
“Think of it as looking at a baseball player before and after they start using steroids,” said <a href="https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/people/our-faculty/lhz2103">Lewis Ziska</a>, an associate professor at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University.
Researchers have now begun to attribute changes in allergens to human activity. In a study published in February in the <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/118/7/e2013284118">Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America</a>, Ziska, Anderegg, and their colleagues calculated that human impacts on the climate account for roughly half of the increase in the length of pollen seasons in North America. Human-caused climate change also accounts for 8 percent of the observed increases in pollen concentrations.
“There is a very distinct climate signal that is appearing that we can directly associate with these changes in pollen, both with respect to load — how much pollen — but also with respect to the entire exposure time,” Ziska said.
<figure class="e-image"><picture class="c-picture" data-cid="site/picture_element-1618664420_9693_553148" data-cdata='{"asset_id":16016697,"ratio":"*"}'><source srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/i9flFIgeK6kEoince4ApKsocdSQ=/0x0:4625x3048/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/71BGU6-4F7Lm8fqM2Z5Puc6_4rg=/0x0:4625x3048/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/QJ3StjlwkJOz0TgvRbaVOanG8XE=/0x0:4625x3048/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/xk_mv2dtCKbJ6p2WXWTR8FLDD5o=/0x0:4625x3048/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/RC0eA3yfScMUbyuctSKfj5RRvB0=/0x0:4625x3048/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Hl7nF-4k0a9q171LmH8q-OVlsNg=/0x0:4625x3048/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/n0hIzUfnZQVuAOyX_4FrQA4fGgY=/0x0:4625x3048/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/XGPc5fBS8s781awe8cEdAiHr0R8=/0x0:4625x3048/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/34UWdpjcxBtTW2mNy3vij_RufvA=/0x0:4625x3048/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 1920w" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" type="image/webp" /> <img alt="A massive cloud of pollen wafts from the trees in a coniferous forest around the Niedersonthofener Lake in Germany." data-upload-width="4625" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/lwj9YSbLmg6V4XIKmpgrkjXb7JI=/0x0:4625x3048/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg" srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/IZ0uqllO_68U63up1gQf33uPvPY=/0x0:4625x3048/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/vjkIGhgSZHc7VUB25wDwed8jBPs=/0x0:4625x3048/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/HlX7yVgSe5Iqka0KNXnGKZJVvaM=/0x0:4625x3048/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/_MM8bS8xsOm6YlaxN0yRH4uxZTo=/0x0:4625x3048/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/-kJWCMDg5QSN0n3WRSK4fsLwJNk=/0x0:4625x3048/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/10BygFDufiWIv1mWODPEWdhrinE=/0x0:4625x3048/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/4esl62mz0Vw4FR3zlNvpbQ3s7ys=/0x0:4625x3048/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/ViiDWiWA8MC8sAW3P8FOPBOFIsI=/0x0:4625x3048/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/mqwNyGcT4A8Vhs83R1A2_0_R118=/0x0:4625x3048/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:4625x3048):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16016697/GettyImages_977060358.jpg 1920w" /></picture>
<figcaption>Humans are changing the climate, which is making pollen seasons longer and more intense.</figcaption>
<cite>Karl-Josef Hildenbrand/Picture Alliance via Getty Images</cite></figure>
These effects are already visible, and as humanity continues burning fossil fuels, these impacts are poised to grow. Some estimates show that pollen counts of all varieties will <a href="https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/stories/1059973047/">double by 2040</a> in some parts of the country, depending on what pathway the world takes on greenhouse gas emissions.
The northern latitudes will likely end up sneezing the most since they are the fastest warming parts of the planet. And pollen isn’t the only allergen of concern. As permafrost melts in places like Alaska, moisture is seeping into homes, creating an inviting habitat for mold. That mold can then produce spores that trigger allergies. Stinging insects are another concern in the far north. Warmer winters mean more insects survive into the spring, increasing their numbers. People who may not have realized they are allergic to stings can end up finding out the hard way that they are vulnerable.
<a href="http://www.allergyalaska.com/about-us/our-providers/jeffrey-g-demain-md">Jeffrey Demain</a>, director of the Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Center of Alaska, told Vox in 2018 that he observed that the northernmost part of Alaska saw a 626 percent increase in insect bites and stings between 2004 and 2006 compared with the period between 1999 and 2001.
What’s emerging from the haze is that the health burden from allergies of all sorts is poised to grow, and there will be little relief for allergy sufferers on the horizon. But it also highlights how climate change impacts are already here, and they’re going to get worse. “This really underscores the urgency of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and tackling climate change as quickly as we can,” Anderegg said.
 
 
source <a href="https://www.vox.com/22383707/allergies-2021-pollen-allergy-covid-19-climate-change-asthma">https://www.vox.com/22383707/allergies-2021-pollen-allergy-covid-19-climate-change-asthma</a>

vox Climate change is making your allergies worse

The warm, inviting spring air coupled with vaccinations for Covid-19 are encouraging people to gather outside. But for allergy sufferers, th...

The Supreme Court hears a case next week that could make Citizens United even worse

<div><img class="ff-og-image-inserted" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Ztt30N0tuIsBbDC-R8PWVflEcYc=/0x125:2610x1491/fit-in/1200x630/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19877270/1204097749.jpg.jpg" /></div>
The Supreme Court will hear a major case on April 26 that could fundamentally alter the Court’s approach to laws requiring political organizations to disclose their donors — a change that could make it much easier for big spenders to hide the ways they seek to influence policy and elections.
That case is <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/americans-for-prosperity-foundation-v-becerra/">Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Rodriquez</a>. But to fully understand it, it’s important to keep in mind the Supreme Court’s decision in <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-205.ZO.html">Citizens United v. FEC</a> (2010).
Citizens United is best known for its anti-canonical holding that corporations may spend unlimited money to influence elections. While five of the justices who heard Citizens United voted to dismantle much of the nation’s campaign finance laws, eight justices also voted that the government has fairly broad authority to require advocacy groups to disclose major funders of their political activity.
Disclosure requirements should be upheld, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the Court, so long as there is “a ‘substantial relation’ between the disclosure requirement and a ‘sufficiently important’ governmental interest.”
A lot has changed since Citizens United tucked this pro-disclosure ruling into its broader ruling against campaign finance limits, however. Four of the eight justices who supported disclosure rules have since left the Court, and three of them were replaced by judges who are significantly more conservative than the person they replaced.
Which brings us to Americans for Prosperity Foundation. The plaintiffs in the case — which include a conservative advocacy group <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/26/koch-brothers-americans-for-prosperity-rightwing-political-group">closely associated with the billionaire Koch brothers</a>, and the Thomas More Law Center, a conservative law firm that claims it was formed to promote “<a href="https://www.thomasmore.org/about-the-thomas-more-law-center/">America’s Judeo-Christian heritage</a>” — seek to undercut pro-disclosure decisions such as Citizens United. And, with six Republican appointees on the Supreme Court, they have a very good chance of prevailing.
The specific issue in Americans for Prosperity is fairly far afield of the foundational questions about money in politics that animated Citizens United. The plaintiffs challenge a California regulation that requires charities that wish to raise tax-deductible funds in California to disclose their largest contributors to the state attorney general’s office. State regulations require the attorney general to keep this information confidential from the public, but the attorney general’s office may use it to investigate allegations of fraud by nonprofits.
The Americans for Prosperity plaintiffs claim that this disclosure regulation is unconstitutional, and they rely largely on doctrines created to prevent civil rights organizations from having to disclose their donors to Jim Crow government officials in the 1950s and ’60s.
There are difficult questions underlying Americans for Prosperity. If you are inclined to be unsympathetic to a Koch-aligned group that wants to keep its donors secret, imagine a very similar case where Texas required Planned Parenthood to disclose its donors to the state attorney general’s office. Would you have confidence that no one in that office would leak the names of those donors to Tucker Carlson?
But the Court has also spent the past 60 years striking a careful balance between the public’s interest in requiring charities and advocacy groups to disclose where they get their money, and the groups’ interest in making sure that their donors are not harassed, intimidated, or attacked by people who loathe a particular group and what it stands for.
Americans for Prosperity gives the Court’s very conservative majority an opportunity to rework this balance. And those justices could allow political groups to operate with far more secrecy, allowing wealthy donors to shape American politics in the shadows.
In the mid-1950s, an Alabama court ordered the NAACP, which was then the preeminent organization fighting segregation in the Jim Crow South, to turn over a full list of its members to the state attorney general — and then imposed a $100,000 fine on the NAACP if it did not comply.
Had the NAACP complied, it could have placed those members in grave danger. State officials could have turned over the list of members to the Ku Klux Klan. Or they may have disclosed them to racist employers who could have fired the NAACP’s members and blacklisted them from obtaining future employment.
The Alabama court’s order, in other words, was a fairly transparent effort to shut down the NAACP’s operations in Alabama, either by terrorizing the organization’s members or by imposing crippling fines on the NAACP. The $100,000 fine imposed by the state court was roughly the equivalent of a <a href="https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/">$1 million fine in today’s dollars</a>.
Ultimately, however, this scheme did not succeed. In <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4515566352758049665&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr">NAACP v. Alabama ex rel. Patterson</a> (1958), a unanimous Supreme Court ruled that Alabama could not force the NAACP to disclose its members, given the obvious danger to those members if their names were disclosed.
“We think that the production order, in the respects here drawn in question, must be regarded as entailing the likelihood of a substantial restraint upon the exercise by petitioner’s members of their right to freedom of association,” Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote for his Court. He added that the NAACP had made “an uncontroverted showing” that “revelation of the identity of its rank-and-file members has exposed these members to economic reprisal, loss of employment, threat of physical coercion, and other manifestations of public hostility.”
NAACP was an extreme case, and the plaintiffs in Americans for Prosperity do not allege anything that even vaguely resembles the kind of abuse and intimidation that NAACP members faced in the Jim Crow South. As a lower court that upheld California’s disclosure law <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/16-55727/16-55727-2018-09-11.html">explained</a>, an executive with the Americans for Prosperity Foundation “described two individuals who, she believed, stopped supporting the Foundation in light of actual or feared retaliation by the IRS,” and another donor who “did business with the Government” said that he and his associates “did not feel like they could take on the risk of continuing to give to us.”
Similarly, the Thomas More Law Center “introduced a letter from a contributor who chose to make a $25 contribution anonymously out of fear that ISIS would break into the Law Center’s office, obtain a list of contributors and target them.”
Unlike the NAACP in the 1950s, in other words, the Americans for Prosperity plaintiffs largely raise speculative fears that, by disclosing their major donors to one government agency, that information may somehow — in violation of California state regulations — wind up in the hands of another agency, which might target those donors. (Or, in the case of the law center, that the donor information might wind up being discovered by a terrorist organization located on the other side of the globe, which will then target American donors to the law center.)
That said, the plaintiffs do have some basis to fear that some of their donor information might accidentally be disclosed to the public. An expert witness hired by Americans for Prosperity was able to hack the state’s website and uncover confidential donor information — although this security hole has since been plugged — and clerical workers in the California attorney general’s office once accidentally made a small fraction of the office’s confidential records public.
The plaintiffs fear that, had their donor information become widely available to the public through a similar error, then those donors might be harassed or their businesses might be boycotted.
The core question in Americans for Prosperity is whether this fear that an inadvertent disclosure might happen and that such a disclosure might lead to consequences for donors is sufficient reason to invoke constitutional protections intended to shield organizations like the NAACP in the Jim Crow era.
Under current precedents, the Supreme Court uses two sorting mechanisms to help it identify which disclosure laws should be struck down.
The first is a balancing test <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-205.ZO.html">described in Citizens United</a>. Under that test, a disclosure law should be upheld if there is “a ‘substantial relation’ between the disclosure requirement and a ‘sufficiently important’ governmental interest.” Thus, Alabama’s attempt to obtain the NAACP’s members list was invalid, because the only “interest” that Alabama sought to advance when it sought this list was undermining the NAACP.
By contrast, a federal appeals court upheld California’s disclosure rule because, by obtaining information about major donors to nonprofit organizations, the state advanced its important interest in determining “whether a charity is <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/16-55727/16-55727-2018-09-11.html">actually engaged in a charitable purpose</a>, or is instead violating California law by engaging in self-dealing, improper loans, or other unfair business practices.”
As California explains in its brief to the Supreme Court, the state’s disclosure rule “helps state regulators detect whether a charity is misusing charitable assets, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-251/172982/20210325141442657_19%20251%2019%20255%20Brief%20on%20the%20Merits.pdf">such as by diverting funds for a donor’s personal enrichment</a>.” A businessman might, for example, make a tax-deductible “donation” to a nonprofit organization, which immediately turns around and hires that businessman’s company as a “consultant” — thus allowing the businessman to take a fraudulent tax deduction without actually contributing anything to charity.
The second mechanism that the Court uses to sort through challenges to disclosure laws is that it ordinarily requires such challenges to be brought on an “as applied” basis, a mechanism that allows courts to pay special attention to the specific facts of an individual case.
Courts distinguish between “facial” challenges, which allege that a law is invalid in all circumstances and must cease to operate altogether, and <a href="https://www.vox.com/2020/1/8/21051739/abortion-june-medical-gee-third-party-standing-supreme-court-roe-wade">“as applied” challenges</a>, which allege that the law is only unconstitutional when applied to a particular plaintiff. Thus, if a plaintiff prevails in a facial challenge, the challenged law can no longer be enforced against anyone. But if a plaintiff prevails in an as-applied challenge, the government may still be able to enforce the challenged law against other parties.
As-applied challenges are the preferred mechanism to challenge a disclosure law because such a challenge typically hinges on the particular impact of that law on a particular plaintiff. In Americans for Prosperity, for example, the plaintiffs allege that they engage in unpopular political work that makes their donors unusually vulnerable to harassment and intimidation. But the same cannot be said about most nonprofits — it is highly unlikely, for example, that donors to the March of Dimes would be harassed if their donations became public knowledge.
Thus, when a party challenges a particular disclosure law, courts will often ask whether that individual party should be exempted from the law, rather than striking down the law on its face. In Citizens United, for example, the Court explained that a facial challenge to certain campaign finance disclosure laws was inappropriate, but “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-205.ZO.html">as-applied challenges would be available</a> if a group could show a ‘reasonable probability’ that disclosure of its contributors’ names ‘will subject them to threats, harassment, or reprisals from either Government officials or private parties.’”
Nevertheless, the plaintiffs in Americans for Prosperity bring a facial challenge to California’s disclosure law. They also claim that the balancing test described in Citizens United should be abandoned in favor of something much more skeptical of disclosure laws.
Though there are some important differences between the argument in the <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-251/169507/20210222113359763_19-251ts.pdf">Americans for Prosperity Foundation’s brief</a> and the <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-251/169531/20210222131516000_19-255%20Brief%20for%20Petitioner.pdf">Thomas More Law Center’s brief</a>, both argue that Citizens United’s relatively permissive rule governing disclosure laws should be, in the words of the former brief, “confined to election regulation.” Thus, while the government may be able to require advocacy groups to disclose their donors when those groups attempt to influence an election, disclosure laws enacted in any other context would be treated as more suspect.
Most disclosure laws, the plaintiffs claim, must be “narrowly tailored” to serve the purpose of that law. Thus, they argue, the California law should fall because the state could use less intrusive methods to investigate fraudulent nonprofits, such as only subpoenaing records from charities that are under investigation.
The state, for its part, argues that relying on subpoenas is not enough, in part because subpoenas tip off a fraudulent organization that it is under investigation. But there’s also a much more fundamental problem with the plaintiffs’ attempts to draw a line between election-related disclosure laws and laws that do not touch on elections — the border between “issue” advocacy and election-related advocacy is notoriously porous.
Before Citizens United opened the floodgates to unlimited corporate sending on elections, for example, lawmakers struggled to draw a sensible line between “issue” ads — ads intended to inform voters about a policy-related matter — and “<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/527s/electioneering.php">electioneering communications</a>,” which sought to influence an election. If an advocacy group runs an ad saying “tell Congressman Smith that he was wrong to vote for Obamacare,” for example, is that ad merely educating voters about a policy matter, or does it seek to undermine Smith’s reelection bid? What if the ad also praises Smith’s opponent for opposing Obamacare? What if the ad runs a week before the election?
The plaintiffs’ proposed rule could very easily allow advocacy groups to evade disclosure rules that apply to election ads and similar communications with voters, so long as those communications superficially appear to focus on “issues.”
Ultimately, cases like Americans for Prosperity come down to a question of values. Should donors who wish to spend gobs of money influencing public policy be allowed to do so anonymously? And if we think that the answer to this question typically should be no, at what point should we give special protections to donors who face harassment, boycotts, or worse?
In <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/09-559.ZO.html">Doe v. Reed</a> (2010), a case about whether the public should be allowed to learn who signed a petition seeking to call a referendum on a state law, Justice Antonin Scalia offered a <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/09-559.ZC4.html">bracing answer to these questions</a>:
<blockquote>
Requiring people to stand up in public for their political acts fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed. For my part, I do not look forward to a society which, thanks to the Supreme Court, campaigns anonymously . . . and even exercises the direct democracy of initiative and referendum hidden from public scrutiny and protected from the accountability of criticism. This does not resemble the Home of the Brave.
</blockquote>
“Harsh criticism, short of unlawful action,” Scalia added, “is a price our people have traditionally been willing to pay for self-governance.”
There do have to be some limits on the government’s power to require advocacy groups to disclose their donors — NAACP presents a particularly stark example of why. And if either of the plaintiffs in Americans for Prosperity has evidence that their donors face a serious risk of illegal reprisals, then they should be allowed to bring an as-applied challenge to disclosure laws that endanger those donors.
But the Americans for Prosperity plaintiffs ask for much more. They ask for a fundamental shift in how the Court approaches disclosure laws. And, while they concede that there may still be campaign disclosure laws in the elections context, it’s far from clear that the Court will draw a sensible line between issue-related advocacy and election advocacy.
The views that Scalia expressed in Doe represent a confident conservatism — a conservatism that believes it can win the hearts and minds of the nation through open debate. But that brand of conservatism has been replaced by something far more insecure, and far more fearful of a <a href="https://www.vox.com/2021/3/2/22309176/fox-news-dr-seuss-cancel-culture-fox-news-biden">frequently overblown “cancel culture”</a> that is ready to pounce on anyone brazen enough to express a conservative viewpoint.
Americans for Prosperity will be an early sign of just how far this new, far more insecure conservatism has penetrated into the Supreme Court.
 
 
source <a href="https://www.vox.com/2021/4/17/22384256/supreme-court-citizens-united-disclosure-americans-for-prosperity-rodriquez-thomas-more">https://www.vox.com/2021/4/17/22384256/supreme-court-citizens-united-disclosure-americans-for-prosperity-rodriquez-thomas-more</a>

vox The Supreme Court hears a case next week that could make Citizens United even worse

The Supreme Court will hear a major case on April 26 that could fundamentally alter the Court’s approach to laws requiring political organi...

Fauci: ‘Very Frustrating’ to Get Questioned about Freedoms without Mentioning COVID Deaths

<div><img class="ff-og-image-inserted" src="https://api-assets.infowars.com/2021/04/Screenshot-2021-04-17-at-13.13.29.png" /></div>
On Friday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “The ReidOut,” White House Chief Medical Adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci said “it’s very frustrating” when people question him about restrictions and freedoms without mentioning the number of people who have died from coronavirus and that while he wants to get his life back, “I, also put, as a higher priority, the health and the safety and the lives of the American public.”
Alex Jones breaks down the fight for liberty in the face of medical tyranny as Rep. Jim Jordan is told to ‘shut your mouth’ by Mad Maxine Waters after questioning Fauci about the end of the lockdown.
<a href="https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2021/04/16/fauci-very-frustrating-to-get-questioned-about-freedoms-without-mentioning-covid-deaths-health-and-safety-higher-priority-for-me/">Read more</a>
 
 
source <a href="https://www.infowars.com/posts/fauci-very-frustrating-to-get-questioned-about-freedoms-without-mentioning-covid-deaths">https://www.infowars.com/posts/fauci-very-frustrating-to-get-questioned-about-freedoms-without-mentioning-covid-deaths</a>

news Fauci: ‘Very Frustrating’ to Get Questioned about Freedoms without Mentioning COVID Deaths

On Friday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “The ReidOut,” White House Chief Medical Adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci said “it’s very frustrating” when peopl...

WATCH: BLM Activist Asks When People ‘Ready to Get Blood on Their Hands?’

<div><img class="ff-og-image-inserted" src="https://api-assets.infowars.com/2021/04/Screenshot-2021-04-17-at-13.04.17.png" /></div>
An activist speaking at Black Lives Matter Plaza asked how long before “people are really ready to get blood on their hands” to make change happen. His call to action came during a “Jail Killer Cops” rally in Washington, DC, on Friday evening.
<figure class="wp-block-embed-twitter wp-block-embed is-type-rich is-provider-twitter">
<div class="wp-block-embed__wrapper" readability="8.384126984127">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true" readability="10.590476190476">
“How much longer can we protest and march in the streets before we are ready, really ready, to get blood on their hands because one of these days, it’s going to have to come to that.”
-BLM activist
Meanwhile, POTUS wants to take our defensive firearms.<a href="https://t.co/7FcqhUYBDa">https://t.co/7FcqhUYBDa</a>
— Dean (@quixxdraw) <a href="https://twitter.com/quixxdraw/status/1383372770340343815?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 17, 2021</a></blockquote>
</div>
</figure>
“Voting is not gonna bring us this (change),” Rahim B., a 21-year-old activist, said during a “Jail Killer Cops” rally held Friday night in the nation’s capital. “We voted in the new president, Joe Biden, but I told folks straight up — Joe Biden ain’t gonna do nothing for us because Joe Biden was in office as the vice-president when the Black Lives Matter movement started and ain’t nothing changed.”
“We’ve been protesting for a really long time,” Rahim continued. “How much longer can we protest and march in the streets before we are ready, really ready, to get blood on their hands because one of these days, it’s going to have to come to that.”
Earlier in his speech, Rahim said he was ready to “dedicate my life to change.”
<a href="https://www.breitbart.com/law-and-order/2021/04/16/watch-blm-activist-asks-when-people-ready-to-get-blood-on-their-hands/">Read more</a>
 
 
source <a href="https://www.infowars.com/posts/watch-blm-activist-asks-when-people-ready-to-get-blood-on-their-hands">https://www.infowars.com/posts/watch-blm-activist-asks-when-people-ready-to-get-blood-on-their-hands</a>

news WATCH: BLM Activist Asks When People ‘Ready to Get Blood on Their Hands?’

An activist speaking at Black Lives Matter Plaza asked how long before “people are really ready to get blood on their hands” to make change...