Covid in Austria: End-of-Spring Week-in-Review Edition: Compulsory Injections End in Chaos, People are Done with Mandates, and Continued Lying/Ignorance

Nothing new under the sun, even though legacy media items--as well as official régime announcements--becom shriller, all the while people are waking up, with more and more ignoring the mandates

There’s not much news coming out of Covidistan these days that isn’t odd and seasonally absurd (e.g., traffic jams ahead of the main vacation season), so I thought I’d ‘cheer’ you up with a selection of absurdities that cover the past week in review.

The End of the Injection Mandate

Last week on Thursday, the régime announced the abrogation of the injection mandate, much to the chagrin of the virtue-signalling juste milieu. ‘They’ did everything the powers-that-be announced, ever so hastily, at one breathless press briefing after another, including the abject vilification, if not outright condemnation, of ‘the unvaccinated’. Yet, in what they perceive as their finest hour, the régime abandoned them, apparently for no good reason.

Don’t take my word for it, though, here’s what notorious mandate hawk and less-than-nice human being Gabriele Scherndl had to say about this in an op-ed published by Der Standard on 23 June 2022:. Fittingly entitled, ‘The End of Compulsory Vaccination is the Culmination of Covid Chaos’, the piece leads with the line that ‘the government has let compulsory vaccination go to waste’, here’s what Ms. Scherndl wrote about her fellow human citizens (my emphases):

If chaos can have a climax, it was reached on Thursday. The government abolished the compulsory vaccination law. At the worst possible time.

Let us briefly recap the farce masquerading as the Covid vaccination obligation in Austria that almost was: in November, with dozens of people dying every day from or with the virus, hospitals were bursting at the seams and staff everywhere were overstretched beyond measure, then Chancellor Schallenberg (ÖVP) and then Health Minister Mückstein (Greens) announced a general lockdown and—pressured by state governors—the intent to mandate vaccination…

It quickly became clear that—to put it bluntly—there were technical problems, which meant that the law could not actually be implemented as planned. Its provisions were scheduled to be staggered, but for time being without the capabilities of actually imposing penalties. Even before the more serious phases [incl. penalties] were realised, the law was suspended. Then, another three months passed before it was decided to leave it at that.

And now the final end. Officially, this is because it is believed that compulsory vaccination would do more harm than good…at first sight, such a stance may seem plausible. In fact, compulsory vaccination has never convinced any committed anti-vaxxer, but [the injection mandate] reinforced the overall opposition. Let us remember, though, that these people will never get vaccinated without vaccination obligations—and that they have never been threatened with serious consequences.

Can you feel Ms. Scherndl’s exasperated rage? After 2+ years of this entire charade, she still conflates cases and infections (‘dying of or with the virus’). There are no legitimate concerns whatsoever, according to her sentiments, when it comes to anti-injection mandate protesters exercise of bodily autonomy and individual sovereignty. I suspect that Ms. Scherndl and her ilk should take the mandatory civics classes they denounce immigrants must take if they wish to acquire citizenship.

This is an infamous piece of ‘writing’, and I’m not going to comment anymore on the above points, but Ms. Scherndl wasn’t done:

Obviously, the end of compulsory vaccination is due to the fact that no one wants to bother with the unpopular mandates anymore. Even if it is only every three months, when the Vaccination Mandate Commission reassesses the constitutional and medical situation.

The fact that this is happening now of all times is due to the parliamentary calendar - they want to dispose of compulsory vaccination before the summer, but there is not much time left to do so, procedurally speaking. After all, the ÖVP also has to run against the new anti-mandate party MFG in the Tyrol [and, presumably, elsewhere] in autumn. But now, of all times, infections are rising much faster than expected, and no-one knows which variant will come next.

The law should have been left in place, and for the very reason that the government itself has been putting forward for months: because it is better to have a dormant law that you wake up when needed before you waste months trying to recreate it. For society it makes no difference at-all whether the law exists and is not applied—or whether it is actually suspended. These subtleties will not divide people in Austria any more or less.

Compulsory vaccination could have saved lives, if it had come in time and if the law had powerful teeth. Yet, the government has allowed it to wither into a blunt instrument that has cost time, money, and disturbed the social peace. One could almost be glad that it is now being laid to rest, if the next wave were not imminent.

See, I’ve been banging this particular drum for some time now: Covid is a political problem, and now even the people over at the left-liberal (whatever that means) legacy media agree with me. It gets curiouser and curiouser every day…still, imagine the discomfort caused by the fact that a governmental decision—with which Ms. Scherndl and her ilk apparently disagree with—‘disturb the social peace’.

To me, I find it equally appalling that Ms. Scherndl is so ignorant of the proverbial lessons of history that she now argues that we should keep bad laws on the books, you know, just in case. Shall we discuss abortion laws next? I mean, ‘just in case’, as ‘for society it makes no difference at-all whether the law exists and is not applied’, ain’t it? That would be the same with, say, other laws from the 1930s, whose mere existence would similarly be too ‘subtle’ for people to notice, eh?

Dear Ms. Scherndl: there’s a simple reason for certain provisions, such as the Bill of Rights, which in the Austrian case has been on the books, in various forms, from the promulgation of its first-ever written constitution in 1867. How much subtlety would be required to understand the nuances of these provisions?

Let’s move one, shall we?

The People are Done with Mandates

On 28 June, Ms. Scherndl followed-up on one of the above-mentioned issues. In a piece entitled, ‘People Fear Infection, Yet They are Done with Mandates’, here’s the substance of her ‘argument’ (my emphases):

Austria has resigned itself to its fate. This is how the results of a new Gallup survey can be summarised in so many words. Andrea Fronaschütz, managing director of Gallup Institute that ran the poll, admittedly puts it in more nuanced terms when she describes the mood among respondents: ‘People say: I don’t agree with the government, the infection figures are going through the roof, but I still feel less and less like giving away freedoms, and my willingness to behave differently is dwindling, even if I fear infection.’…

46% of respondents said they were afraid of catching the virus, up slightly compared to May, Fronaschütz said, when that figure stood at 43%…at the same time, only less than two-thirds of those surveyed are willing to give up civil liberties for the sake of fighting the pandemic, a figure that stood at 95% in spring 2020 and hovered around 70% at the end of 2021.

At the same time, the number of those who believe the pandemic is under control is decreasing. Since May, it has dropped by ten percent to 31%. The share of those who trust the government to manage the crisis remains low. Currently, only 6% say they trust the government ‘very much’, and about a quarter of respondents went for ‘very much’ or ‘somewhat’.

Of all things, it would appear that more and more people have had enough by now. Even though Der Standard—and Ms. Scherndl in particular—hate it when we the people make our own decisions, they grudgingly admit that Mattias Desmet was not too far off the mark in his assessment that 1/3 won’t be fooled (the middle paragr.), but it may be that the ‘wobbly’ third that could break either way is also abandoning the ranks of the Covid Hawks (the third paragr.): only about 31% of those polled ‘say the trust the government’ somewhere between ‘very much’ to ‘somewhat’.

The mood has also changed with regard to vaccinations. As is well known, Health Minister Johannes Rauch (Greens) called off compulsory vaccination because it would no longer motivate the unvaccinated to get the shot—and the polling data agree with this. Among those surveyed [since spring 2020], 13% more or less constantly state that they will not be vaccinated, and ‘these people cannot be convinced to be vaccinated either’, says Fronaschütz.

Oh, let’s see what the pollsters found, shall we?

Yet, now the situation is changing even among those who have been fully or partially vaccinated. When asked whether they would get a booster—regardless of whether they have been vaccinated once or already fully—almost 20% said no during the current observation period. As recently as November 2021, only 6% refused. However, the government has already realised that it is precisely these people who need to be paid attention to. As early as May, GECKO [the government’s civil-military advisory panel] recommended that vaccination communication should aim to ‘maintain the vaccination protection of those who have already been vaccinated’.

Huhum, the faithful abandoning the sinking ship? Could it be that, with approx. 70% of the population getting infected during the Omicron binge of the past half-year, more people are realising that the injections don’t work? Yes, they are constantly being lied to by officials and their camp followers in legacy media (such as Ms. Scherndl), and even if they don’t bother to read the current papers, personal experience is a good teacher, ain’t it?

Here’s the last paragraph, though, which gives away the game: it could go either way now:

Fronaschütz emphasises that all these moods are volatile. ‘This can all turn around within two days with one headline.’ For example, if a dangerous variant emerges or if measures are decided on that do not make sense. Conversely, for example, the willingness to get boosted could increase, if adapted vaccines cover these new variants.

So, a half-full, or half-empty, glass, I’d say. Further particulars on what follows may be obtained via the below-linked piece:

Covid in Austria: Mandate Hawks are Scheming, Masks Remain Mandatory until 8 July, and the Courts Dismiss More Motions…

Behold: The Fearmongers Are Back

Régime Anticipates 70K Daily Infections

Finally for this installation, here are two news items covering the régime’s newest piece of advice, received a few days ago and written by none other than the civil-military advisory panel GECKO.

Led by one Katharina Reich, a political appointee in the Health Ministry with the imposing job description ‘Chief Medical Officer’, here’s what Ms. Scherndl over at Der Standard had to say just yesterday (my emphases):

In its latest assessment, GECKO calls for better Covid data. Also: it assumes up to 70,000 new infections per day—perhaps even in summer. The population is also on the move more than it has been for a long time, and at the same time they are wearing masks less and less often.

In mid-May, a maximum of 30,000 new daily infections were expected for the summer. Not any more. Now, GECKO anticipates that the course of the next 100 days depends on three things: the dominance of BA.4 and BA.5, the degree of immunisation in the population, and individual behavioural changes.

If you haven’t had enough of this BS, let it be known that, as always, legacy media is doing second-hand reporting, i.e., the quote indirectly from originals that aren’t linked. Here’s the PDF (source) of the GECKO report, courtesy of the Federal Chancellery. I shall go through the news item and then contrast it with the report, o.k.?

The wave will reach a peak, and that will be between 35,000 and 70,000 new infections per day. The scenarios differ only with regard to the timing when this peak is reached.

In the first scenario, people ‘self-responsibly’ reduce their contacts by 15%. That will not be enough to flatten the next wave, writes GECKO. Then Austria would already reach peak levels of up to 70,000 new infections per day as early as summer. But if contacts were reduced by an additional 20% [that would be 35%, if you’re keeping score, or the winter/spring lockdown effect], the wave would flatten out at 20,000 to 30,000 infections as early as July, before peaking in autumn.

If contacts were reduced by 30%, the resulting ‘intermediate peak’ would be even lower than in the BA.1 wave, which peaked at almost 40,000 new daily infections in January. But then there would be a peak after the summer that would be comparable to the BA.2 wave—the peak there was in March with just under 60,000 new daily infections—although GECKO won’t opine which scenario is more likely.

The numbers don’t add up, right? So, reductions by between 15-35% would do…something, although the régime’s experts can’t, or won’t, provide a measured opinion. Wonderful. Do remind me why these people experts meet and chat with each other.

Here’s more ‘insightful commentary’ by Ms. Scherndl:

All of this depends on the so-called vacation effect…it remains questionable whether or not the population’s risk awareness will increase again. In its model calculations, GECKO assumes that the vacation effect will only hit once 20,000 new daily infections are counted.

In any case, it is plausible that the burden on the healthcare system will be similar to that at the peak of the BA.2 wave. That means: 2,500-4,500 occupied beds in normal wards, 150-300 occupied beds in ICUs. In the normal wards, such numbers value are system-critical.

In addition, there will probably be another round of ‘mass quarantine’ of staff, if the isolation and quarantine rules remain as they are at present. Health Minister Johannes Rauch (Greens) has been thinking aloud for weeks about easing or abolishing quarantine at some point.

Mr. Rauch recently stated that quarantine rules won’t be changed any time soon, as he said so in an ORF interview on 28 June 2022. It’s obvious that staff shortages will continue, for all the reasons known for decades. Also, let’s just sit back and watch Ms. Scherndl and her ilk hyperventilate for a few days while calling for harsh measures.

In surveys, the majority of respondents stated that they had not tested themselves at-all in the past four weeks. The proportion of those who no longer wear a mask is also increasing: in April, this was already one-fifth, and GECKO assumes that there are even more by now. The proportion of people who had not met any friends or relatives in the past week was lower than ever before: it was only 12%, and 36% of the tested individuals had contact with more than ten people in the past week.

This is too stupid to comment on: the cognitive dissonance between ‘the experts’ and people ‘moving on’ is palpable. Perhaps we Western will reach Eastern European levels of consciousness on display in 1989 in a few months. In 2022.

Ms. Scherndl concludes her piece by shilling for Big Pharma:

[GECKO] also recommends making medicines against Sars-Cov-2 more readily available. For example, electronic prescriptions should be made easier to fulfil, and family doctors should dispense the drugs directly.

The report also deals with the side effects of vaccinations. Data from Israel, it says, show that a fourth injection does not cause any serious side effects. It is not yet possible to say whether a change of vaccine for the fourth or subsequent vaccinations will lead to changes in tolerability.

So far, so good. Let’s see what the GECKO report actually says about these rather ‘contentious’ issues, shall we?

In their latest report (dated 27 June), GECKO reiterates a lot of questionable stuff, which I find almost too moronic to contemplate. In their assessment of ‘new developments’, GECKO cites this paper by Regev et al (in the NEJM). I won’t go into the details again, for I’ve discussed the pre-print back in February, and even back then, the conclusion were:

Breakthrough infections were common, mostly very mild, yet, with high viral loads. Vaccine efficacy against infection was 30% (95%CI:-9% to 55%) and 11% (95%CI:-43% to +43%) for BNT162b2 and mRNA1273, respectively. Local and systemic adverse reactions were reported in 80% and 40%, respectively.

Yes, the current version of the paper is a bit more weasly-worded, but the fact remains: VE is below 50%, the conventional pre-Covid threshold for approval of any therapeutic (and then it’d be a coin flip). Please read more about the paper here:

Covidistan Annals XXIII: Mückstein missed the Court's deadline, didn't deliver any data; bonus feature--a new paper from Israel on the 4th injection

While Der Standard and GECKO are quite disingenuous, here’s what the reviewed paper’s conclusions hold (references omitted; my emphases):

Our data provide evidence that a fourth dose of mRNA vaccine is immunogenic, safe, and somewhat efficacious (primarily against symptomatic disease). A comparison of the initial response to the fourth dose with the peak response to a third dose did not show substantial differences in humoral response or in levels of omicron-specific neutralizing antibodies. Along with previous data showing the superiority of a third dose to a second dose, our results suggest that maximal immunogenicity of mRNA vaccines is achieved after three doses and that antibody levels can be restored by a fourth dose. Furthermore, we observed low vaccine efficacy against infections in health care workers, as well as relatively high viral loads suggesting that those who were infected were infectious. Thus, a fourth vaccination of healthy young health care workers may have only marginal benefits. Older and vulnerable populations were not assessed.

GECKO holds that

Overall, there has been no significant change in the assessment and data on the frequency, intensity and pattern of vaccination reactions, and side effects have not changed significantly.

This is kinda true, you know: being quite charitable, one could read this as an admission that the data is bad and we don’t really know. That said, I think the GECKO experts actually mean this.

GECKO also reiterates its mantra that the mRNA shots are ‘safe’ and ‘efficacious’ for pregnant women and breast-feeding mothers, even though—there has been no significant change in the assessment and data’ in this regard.

Many people may not know this, but back in December, I objected to this ‘no data’ or ‘concern’ necessary stance, as the BioNTech/Pfizer product description held that there was no data:

Covidistan Annals III: Health Minister claims authority to add future jabs at his discretion

Pfizer’s official insert still holds the following (sections 8.1 on pregnancy and 8.2 on lactation):

Available data on COMIRNATY administered to pregnant women are insufficient to inform vaccine-associated risks in pregnancy…

It is not known whether COMIRNATY is excreted in human milk. Data are not available to assess the effects of COMIRNATY on the breastfed infant or on milk production/excretion.

So, GECKO wasn’t exactly lying when they said there’s no change in knowledge. There’s no data on this, according to the manufacturer, hence they cannot possibly know, eh?

I won’t even go into the group’s assessment of the May mandates (they don’t do it either, for they claim impossibility to assess these, ‘as they are no longer in force’). The most recent data available would be from April, and GECKO somewhat exasperatedly holds:

Already 21% of respondents said they never wear a protective mask. This trend is likely to have continued in May. The values for keeping social distancing, avoiding risky behaviour, and staying at home also reached, or approached, their absolute lows during the pandemic.

This is face-palm territory: I never wore these face-diapers consistently after spring/summer 2020. I also didn’t (and don’t) care about ‘social distancing’, and I’m healthy as can be. Sure, might be coincidental, but I’m not that different from others here in Norway: we’re doing just fine without either, but these news apparently haven’t reached Central Europe:

Only 12% said they didn’t meet any friends or relatives as of late.

Wonderful: this means that hardcore compliance reaches only marginally more than 1 out of 10 people. I’d call this progress, of sorts. /sarcasm

Bottom Lines

So, we can say that Der Standard, Ms. Scherndl, and their ilk have not yet moved to where a sizable chunk of the population is, and has been for quite some time, already. Compliance with non-sensical and empirically refutable measures is waning.

Now, with state elections in the Tyrol, Salzburg, and Lower Austria scheduled to take place within 12 months from now, we can reasonably expect more political shenanigans to occur.

In addition, a date has been set (9 Oct.) for the presidential elections, hence we’ll expect more ‘normal’ topics to dominate the news cycle after the summer. I’m unsure if this is for the better…

As regards the media, well, what can I say? I cannot figure out whether Ms. Scherndl is really ignorant or just pretends to be so. Perhaps you would like to guess?

Finally, what I find striking is the mind-boggling disingenuity with respect to the correct representation of data and studies, such as the Regev paper or the Pfizer product insert.

Yet, while I do think that the adage of ‘fool me once, shame on you—fool me twice, shame on me’ is quite informative here: as the effect of incessant media barrages and political posturing wears off, we may get an opportunity to get out of the mass delusion revolving around Covid before too long.

I haven’t given up hope, but the road ahead is steep, winding, and quite long. Let’s continue walking.