Lady Justice Wears A Blindfold For A Reason

Dear Editor,

When people see situations running the gamut from the Hildabeast getting a pass from someone who believed she was going to be his boss soon to the current situation involving Mr. Floyd and others, both published and unpublished, it’s not hard to believe why people believe there is a two-tier justice system where who you know gets you better treatment then the common person.

Look at the statue of Lady Justice. There are five symbols, three of which are supposed to reflect the three things most important in our system of justice, yet they are being completely ignored.

The serpent being trampled underfoot represents evil and lies.

The book represents the laws made by men, which are part of the bedrock of civilization.

The sword symbolizes final justice swiftly administered.

The scales depict the weighing of evidence and how evidence should stand on its own.

Finally, there is the blindfold she wears. This represents impartiality, the ideal that justice should be applied without regard to wealth, power or other status. Let me say that again. It represents impartiality, the ideal that justice should be applied without regard to wealth, power, or other status. For the most part this has been the case – for us commoners. But for other people, those in positions of power at all levels, those of wealth, those symbols mean nothing because they feel they are above all that. Because of who or what they are they have a different set rules that they get to write as it suits them or their lackeys.

The other thing is they couldn’t get away with this unless the people who were given the sacred duty, who took an oath before man and God to administer those rules and laws equally to all no matter who or what they are. And it has always been my mantra, the finger of blame needs to be pointed at everyone who sits back, complains that somebody needs to do something then goes back to their Netflix and online shopping saying they don’t have time to participate or don’t want to rock the boat or whine their one vote won’t count for anything. In other words, sheeple who passively and willingly line up to be sheared regularly.

Just keep in mind there is only so much we sheepdogs can do on our own. Put down the remote and the mouse and step up.

Alan Marshall



What We’ve Learned About COVID-19

Dear Editor,

As soon as one COVID fear is proven incorrect new ones arise. Will answers to these questions change anything?

For two months we heard that infected individuals may not develop immunity. Early studies demonstrated recovered patients with low fleeting levels of anti-COVID-19 antibodies (IG). Further testing demonstrated more robust COVID antibody response. So we are now frightened that anti-COVID antibodies may not provide immunity. The truth has always been that antibodies are one imperfect marker of adaptive immunity. As an example, if antibodies are produced against inner parts of the viral capsid, which is only exposed after cellular infection, a clinical infection may occur even in presence of antibodies. So IG may not demonstrate sufficient immunity. Other aspects of adaptive immunity are ignored by IG tests. Cellular, T cell, response and memory cells are also important. Even if correct antibodies do not last long, they will likely be produced much sooner during reinfection. We know cold coronavirus has short-lived IGs yet we still have more efficient less severe cold coronavirus reinfection due to enhanced immune response.

Also, if we are unable to produce adaptive immunity to COVID 19, we would never be able to recover once infected. We’d all die. Since so many patients have little to no symptoms, the body is producing an adaptive immune response with associated memory cells/cellular immunity.

The big issue our fear mongers are missing is, “So what?” If we cannot mount any lasting natural adaptive immunity, then it makes a vaccine that much more difficult to develop with current biotechnology. If COVID-19 imparts zero natural immunity nothing really matters. In that case the only way to prevent reinfection would be to live in isolation forever. Even if our bodies remember nothing, the virus has low case fatality. The alternative would be to continue to get the disease repeatedly until we become a high-risk group. We’d still be much more likely to die from many other things. In the end, we would have the same two choices that we have now between quality and quantity of life. Knowing more pieces of info is great for science; it is useless for policy makers. Waiting for many of the posed questions only prolongs the policy decision at great cost.

We need to stop delaying reopening for fears that, in the end, are extremely unlikely and even if realized change nothing.

Alan Burke