I recently woke to a slew of links to reports suggesting that the UK government had euthanized thousands of elderly patients with the drug Midazolam, reporting the deaths as COVID-related for obvious nefarious purposes. After some research, I doubt it.

The assumption is based on statistical data showing a spike in administered doses that coincide with early deaths among elderly care patients (here is the relevant preprint). I don’t doubt there was a spike but as little respect as I have for the Medical Industrial Complex post-COID-response, we should avoid the desire to jump to conclusions. That is, after all, the hallmark of both Pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical intervention failures in response to COVID.

COVID is the flu. The flu kills the old and frail. There is no doubt that the COVID response resulted in countless unnecessary deaths and that far too many people making those decisions or enforcing them against better judgment are responsible. The problem with the Midazolam mass-murder conspiracy theory is that the drug “can legitimately be used for patients who have terminal restlessness or respiratory distress.”

Midazolam and Morphine are used to allow patients to tolerate active treatment e.g. high flow oxygen, by managing their symptoms (which were overwhelming). These medications, if used appropriately, aid symptom management. Systematic reviews have shown no respiratory suppression and no hastening of death due to sedative medications.

In preparation for the arrival of the virus, care home residents were asked whether they wanted to be admitted to hospital should they catch SARS-CoV-2 and develop COVID-19. As the only treatment for the frail was oxygen, many said they would rather not be admitted. Consequently, if a resident who had expressed a wish to remain in the care home subsequently deteriorated and was felt to be dying,  midazolam prescriptions, along with prescriptions for painkillers and anti sickness medications, were written in anticipation of these being needed.

Given the large number of people who died of a respiratory disease in April 2020, it is unsurprising that higher numbers of Midazolam prescriptions were written during that period. However, an increase in prescriptions does not necessarily equate to an increase in drugs actually administered to or taken by patients.

Armed with this legitimate medical application as a possible explanation, I went looking for support for or against the notion and landed on Dr. Pierre Kory’s substack.

The seeming perception of policy makers that they were in a mass casualty when it appears they were not led the care home residents to die of Covid at needlessly excessive rates due to lack of access to hospital support devices. Which then led to many developing severe breathlessness in the home with the only available care options to be those of “comfort meds.” It seems the reason why they put in a medication protocol as part of their policies, is that they knew they would be needed as a result of insufficient hospital capacity with inability to make available the use of non-invasive and invasive ventilators and high-flow oxygen devices.

Dr. Kory cites a number of missteps that we’ve come to know well as responsible for needless excess deaths. Many of us know people who got severe illnesses and ended up victims of protocol, not so much from the virus. Malfeasance and misfeasance were rampant.

More from Dr Kory.

Further, these policies likely explain so many of the troubling reports by patients and their families of being denied care and thus causing the premature death of patients. But again, I believe (although I was not there, I have read some of the investigations into what happened) that it was the policies that caused the excess deaths, not the meds (although I suppose one could argue there is little difference given that the meds were part of the policy, but I personally do see a distinction – the meds were secondary, albeit an unfortunate and ugly part of the whole mess in that early wave). …

But?

But again, although terrible actions were taken by some providers out of fear and confusion as to what the “right” thing to do was, I cannot ascribe the intent of murder or euthanasia systematically to a population of health care providers. Although I, like many others, recognize that individual providers in certain situations may have “lost their minds”,, a.k.a “ethical bearings” and thus may have actually committed those acts out of some combination of ethical ignorance and fear but I refuse to accept they did it out of malice.

Mistakes were made. A lot of them, with mortal consequences. This is not an effort to dismiss those. We continue to stand behind our past reporting, but this analysis about Midazolam being deliberately used to murder the elderly before we really even knew what we were dealing with reeks of a counter-intelligence media trap set to ensnare people so embedded in the anti-globalist agenda that they can’t help but repeat it.

More likely, it is hyperbolic clickbait, but there is a medical/treatment explanation for its use, specifically in the UK, where socialized medicine has, for decades, crippled access to care. In other words, the killer in this story is not Midazolam. It is the system that so ruined itself that a spike in comfort drugs was the best they could do, and while people died, the drugs were not administered to kill them.

They died because of the system, not the medication (in this case). At least, that’s how this looks from where I sit.

You are, of course, encouraged to disagree.

The post Before You Start Shouting About COVID, Midazolam, and Mass Murder … appeared first on Granite Grok.

Schools and Businesses all over New Hampshire announced they would be closed this morning. WMUR shows 78 of them as of 6 am ET. Why? The promise of snowmageddon. A storm that might have dumped up to a foot of white stuff. Also, as of 6 am, we’re getting NoMageddon – less than an inch.

Doctors’ offices, dentists, schools, the list is very diverse. They acted and reacted to forecasts predicting significant snowfall. They canceled appointments, procedures, screening, and classes. The meteorologists had plenty to say, but every report did note that they were watching the storm track and that totals could change.

They did.

The system moved so far south in just two days that southern New Hampshire no longer expects more than a coating to an inch of snow today. But, a few days ago, most of New Hampshire was getting snow, with southern New Hampshire looking at the potential for significant accumulation. Or not. The computer models couldn’t get the facts right on that short runway, but we’re expected to take as gospel model predictions decades or centuries from now.

Can you blame us for being skeptical?

The repeated failure to predict local weather accurately. Climate cultists wearing The End is Near sandwich boards have not gotten anything else right, as none of their cataclysmic predictions has come to pass. Third, there is a lot of money changing hands, much of it ours, to keep this false fearmongering alive. Fourth, the whole cabal of climate catastrophists supports a political agenda to control energy, economics, and human activity.

Activity that came to a standstill at businesses and schools around New Hampshire today is based on another prediction that didn’t come true.

The earth’s climate is far too complex for mere mortals or their computer models – even the ones trying to be honest – to predict. They’ve managed passable scores in the short term, but even those, like today, can be wildly inaccurate.

No amount of technology can surpass the fact that they are guessing, and time and distance make this fortune-telling more prophesy than science.

The only thing the long-range modelers can know is what will get them more funding, and that’s political science, not actual science.

The post Reminder: Can’t Predict Snowfall a Few Days in Advance, But a Few Years From Now … Doom! appeared first on Granite Grok.

It appears that Aldermen Dowd and most of the rest of the Board of Aldermen for the City of Nashua think that the Nashua taxpayers have very deep pockets.

The City of Nashua residents must remember that the city received a total of $44,453,420 in ESSER funds from 2020-2022. That Aldermen Dowd states the ESSER funds were short is a total lie. It seems that the Nashua School District spent the money on other things.

A resident should also remember that ALL of this money only went to public schools, and none went to private/charter schools. Maybe some of the money should have gone to the private schools because they would have tracked the funds that were received accurately.

Currently, the Nashua School budget is $176,664,951, with school bonds totaling $133,011,500 for a grand total of $309,676,451. This is for the lowest enrollment in public schools and in educational scores in the last ten years. Maybe this is why the School District could not keep track of all the money they received.

Last week Aldermen Dowd gave an explanation on the ESSER funds that the City of Nashua received that was appalling. Aldermen Dowd told the board and the public that the city was short on ESSER funds by $4.5 million dollars. Aldermen Dowd said no problem, the School district spent the ESSER funds on other things however that is the school district problem and not the Nashua taxpayer problem.

School officials will just have to cut their spending down by $4.5 million dollars in other places. And whoever made this mistake needs to be fired now. A $4.5 million dollar mistake is no small matter, and someone needs to be held accountable.

Second, if a roofing company gave the City of Nashua a quote to do the two roofs, that is the figure that the Nashua taxpayers should pay. If the roofing company did not realize that there were already two roofs that needed to be removed and now wants to charge the Nashua taxpayers an additional $2 million to remove the old roofs, then maybe taxpayers should not be using them because it appears that they are NOT qualified.

Please stop being so free with the Nashua taxpayer’s money and start holding people accountable for their mistakes.

Nashua residents need to voice their opinions with Aldermen Dowd and other board members. Please send an email to them at boa@nashuanh.gov and tell them that the Nashua taxpayers are tired of paying for other people’s mistakes.

The post Taxpayers Are Tired of Paying for Other People’s Mistakes appeared first on Granite Grok.

There is only one show on network television that I have watched and have for years. Fortunately, thanks to DVRs and streaming services, I have not had to park in front of a television every Friday night for the last 14 years. Blue Bloods has been a constant for over a decade because it is a rarity.

It is quality acting, with great storylines, favorably portrays the police, and has strong family values. For a primetime show with a lengthy history, Blue Bloods has only been nominated for one Emmy, and that was for a stunt performance. No actor has ever been recognized for their work. Why?

I remember years ago reading about why Tom Selleck joined the CBS show. He was brought to tears by the script of the pilot show and wanted to be a part of what he saw as a quality TV series. I am a bit embarrassed to admit that nearly every show has given me wet eyes. Apparently, 15 years later, Blue Bloods still touches Selleck more than just a TV series. Most of the characters on the show have grown up before our eyes, and some have died. This show is a model of quality and consistency in an industry that lacks both. So why the snub by the Emmys? There appear to be many, and none of them are justified.

• Blue Bloods has had consistently high ratings, especially for the Friday night time slot. One of the problems is the age of the audience. The 18-49 age group is not home watching TV on Friday nights. The show is a success, but it is just not popular with the younger set.
• The show’s creators, Mitchell Burgess and Robin Green, were fired from the hit show The Sopranos. This blemish may have harmed Blue Blood’s chances for industry recognition.
• Two female characters, Jennifer Esposito, who played Detective Jackie Curatola, and Amy Carlson, who played Linda Reagan, were both “killed” off the show under questionable circumstances, which may have cast shadows on the show by insiders.
• The Catholic League had always supported the show because of its strong family values but had a change of heart when one of the show’s storylines hinting the Catholic Church was “behind the times” regarding its positions on homosexuality. The episode also featured a cardinal struggling with his sexual identity and a nun who admitted being a lesbian. These views were not received well by the industry.
• Some think Blue Bloods is too pro-police in a time when the police are not in the brightest of lights with the radical left that has deep ties with the entertainment industry.
• Tom Selleck, Bridget Moynihan, and other cast members may have gotten gun permits to carry in New York because of their connection with the show. This preferential treatment doesn’t sit well with some.

Most of these possible reasons seem petty for a show with such success and longevity, but not surprising in an industry so shallow. Fortunately, millions of viewers like me are not hooked on the show because of awards but for the quality of the show. Maybe there is a message there. Not everyone needs a trophy to live a quality life. Just being good at what you do should be enough.

The post What Does Emmys Snub Of “Blue Bloods” Say appeared first on Granite Grok.