Connect with us

Politics

Tennis Australia boss reveals how Novak Djokovic granted medical exemption for Australian Open

Published

on

Tennis Australia CEO Craig Tiley has revealed world number one Novak Djokovic did not receive special treatment when he was granted a medical exemption to play in the Australian Open in Melbourne this month.

Speaking on Wednesday morning, Tiley outlined the process that will see the Serbian athlete soon arrive in Australia, and said the tennis superstar’s application was reviewed and approved anonymously by two independent medical bodies.

‘Novak applied for a medical exemption which was granted by a panel of experts,’ he said.

‘Professional players do not have to reveal their personal or medical information… the grounds are the same for everyone.

‘They were given the opportunity to be added to the Australian Immunisation Register which sees (some) people exempt from vaccines if approved by a panel.

Tennis Australia CEO Craig Tiley has confirmed world number one Novak Djokovic (pictured) will play at the Australian Open in Melbourne this month – after the tennis superstar was controversially granted a medical exemption

The reaction from tennis fans to Novak Djokovic playing at the Australian Open despite his clouded vaccination status will be a major talking point

The reaction from tennis fans to Novak Djokovic playing at the Australian Open despite his clouded vaccination status will be a major talking point

The Serbian world No 1 has packed his bags and will take part in the January 17 tournament - revealing the move to fans on social media (pictured)

The Serbian world No 1 has packed his bags and will take part in the January 17 tournament – revealing the move to fans on social media (pictured)

‘As an organisation, we (Tennis Australia) abided by the conditions and the decision was left in the hands of medical experts.

‘A total of 26 athletes applied for the same exemption – and (only) a handful were granted.’

While the identity of those other players or coaching staff was not revealed, Tiley was quick to point out no ‘special favours’ were granted to Djokovic.

‘We told players as far back as six months ago getting vaccinated would ensure they could arrive and then play in Australia,’ he added.

‘It is up to Novak whether he wants to disclose his medical status and personal information.’ 

Speaking on 3AW, Tiley confirmed there was no special treatment given and said Djokovic ‘did what everyone else could do to come to Australia’.

‘Every application was reviewed anonymously. No one knew whose application was received by who. They looked at it purely on the grounds that were set medically by the government,’ he said.

Djokovic’s successful exemption followed a review process involving two independent panels of medical experts — the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) and the Independent Medical Exemption Review Panel appointed by the Victorian Department of Health.

His application was approved after Djokovic also confirmed he has not tested positive for Covid-19 in the past six months. 

Djokovic’s vaccination status remains unknown – but in April 2020, the 34-year-old said he was opposed to mandatory jabs.

‘Personally I am not pro-vaccines,’ he said at the time. ‘I would not like it for someone to compel me to be vaccinated so I can travel.’

The 34-year-old, who is gunning for an 10th grand slam in Melbourne, confirmed on Monday he will be heading down under to defend his title from 2021.

‘Happy New Year, everybody!’ Djokovic wrote on Instagram.

‘Wishing you all health, love, and happiness in every present moment and may you feel love & respect towards all beings on this wonderful planet️.

‘I’ve spent fantastic quality time with my loved ones over the break and today I’m heading Down Under with an exemption permission. Let’s go 2022 !!’. 

The decision by Tennis Australia to grant Djokovic an exemption on medical grounds has infuriated some tennis fans and sports commentators.

World number one tennis star is on his way to play in the Australian Open - despite failing to reveal his vaccination status

World number one tennis star is on his way to play in the Australian Open – despite failing to reveal his vaccination status

In October, Victorian premier Dan Andrews said Djokovic needed to be vaccinated to play at the Australian Open

In October, Victorian premier Dan Andrews said Djokovic needed to be vaccinated to play at the Australian Open

 ‘Australians have been denied for two years, but this bloke — who’s taken extraordinary liberties in the face of the coronavirus — gets his exemption. Novak Djokovic is an all-time great, but he ain’t essential,’ Melbourne based sports commentator Andy Maher wrote on social media.

Former AFL star Corey McKernan went a step further, tweeting: ‘People with loved ones who are dying / some needing urgent treatment cannot get into their own states. You tell people they can’t go to Coles or a cafe without being vaxxed but if you’re world number 1 you get a pass? F***ing disgrace.’ 

News of Djokovic heading to Melbourne will also leave Victorian Premier Dan Andrews red-faced.

In October, Andrews said Djokovic needed to be vaccinated to play at the Australian Open.

‘Those (grand slam) titles won’t protect you either. The only title that will protect you is that you can be able to say you’ve had your first dose and you’ve had your second dose,’ he said.

‘The notion of you getting in here without being vaccinated I think is very, very low.’

‘All the people who are watching the tennis at the Australian Open, they’re going to be double-vaxxed, all the people that work there are going to be double-vaxxed.

‘It stands to reason that if you want to get into the country to be part of that tournament, then you should be double-vaxxed as well.’

Djokovic also won’t have to quarantine when he arrives in Australia for two weeks – with the Australian Open beginning on Monday, January 17. 

In a brief post on Instagram, the 20-time grand slam winner and nine-time Australian Open champion revealed he was heading to Melbourne (pictured, the tennis star after winning the Open in 2021)

In a brief post on Instagram, the 20-time grand slam winner and nine-time Australian Open champion revealed he was heading to Melbourne (pictured, the tennis star after winning the Open in 2021)

WHY IS DJOKOVIC EXEMPT? 

Australia’s Department of Health says medical exemptions are handed out if the individual has an ‘acute major medical condition’.

Under the guidelines, these conditions could include: 

– Inflammatory cardiac illness in the last three months 

– Undergoing major surgery or hospital admission for a serious illness 

– A Covid-19 diagnosis that means vaccination cannot be made for six months

– Any serious effect to a Covid-19 vaccine in the past (Note: Djokovic has not confirmed whether or not he has been jabbed)

– If the vaccine is a risk to themselves or others during the vaccination process 

– Underlying developmental or mental health disorders 

Victoria’s Deputy Premier James Merlino said last month that medical exemptions are ‘not a loophole’. 

‘Medical exemptions are just that,’ he said. ‘It’s not a loophole for privileged tennis players. 

‘They are medical exemptions in exceptional circumstances – if you have acute medical conditions.’

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Politics

Hailey Bieber Details Terrifying ‘Life-Altering’ Mini-Stroke She Suffered And Procedure To Close Hole In Her Heart

Published

on

Hailey Bieber has spoken out in her “own words” about the “life-altering,” “scariest moment” of her life she had after suffering what she called a mini-stroke, and later underwent a procedure to close a hole in her heart.

The 25-year-old supermodel and wife of superstar singer Justin Bieber took to her YouTube channel Wednesday and opened up about the terrifying experience of being hospitalized last month after she suffered a blood clot to her brain that traveled through a hole in her heart between 12 and 13 millimeters, reported People magazine.

“I had, like, a very scary incident on March 10, basically,” Bieber shared. “I was sitting at breakfast with my husband, having a normal day … and all of the sudden, I felt this really weird sensation that kind of like traveled down my arm from my shoulder all the way down to my fingertips. And it made my fingertips feel really numb and weird.”

“Justin [her husband] was like, ‘Are you okay?’” she added, as she explained that she tried to respond to him, but she “couldn’t speak.” “The right side of my face started drooping; I couldn’t get a sentence out.”

“Obviously, immediately, I thought I was having a stroke,” the supermodel continued. “He thought I was having a stroke. Right away, he asked for somebody to please call 911 and get a doctor.”

Hailey said that where they were, there happened to be a medic who started asking her lots of questions and testing her arms, calling it definitely the “scariest moment” of her life. The model talked about how the “facial drooping lasted for probably like thirty seconds.” Her speech did came back, but her “anxiety” about what was happening just made “everything worse.”

“By the time I got to the emergency room, I was pretty much back to normal – [I] could talk, [I] wasn’t having any issues with my face or my arm,” Bieber explained.

She said scans revealed she had, in fact, suffered a “small blood clot” to her brain which was labeled a “TIA” [Transient Ischemic Attack]. Hailey told her followers it was basically like having a “mini-stroke.”

Doctors still weren’t sure what caused it, but she said it was widely believed it was a combination of birth-control issues, recently having COVID-19, and having just traveled “to Paris and back in a very short amount of time,” calling it a “perfect storm.”

Further testing at the University of California, Los Angeles, revealed Bieber had a Grade 5 PFO [a small opening in the heart that usually closes after birth]. The outlet said the hold measured between 12 and 13 millimeters. She later underwent a procedure to close the hole, and said it went “very smoothly” and she’s recovering.

“The biggest thing I feel is I just feel really relieved that we were able to figure everything out, that we were able to get it closed, that I will be able to just move on from this really scary situation and just live my life,” Hailey shared.

“If there’s anybody that watches this that has gone through the same thing or something similar, I definitely really empathize with you,” she concluded. “And I understand how life-altering and scary it is.”

Bieber, who’s the daughter of actor Stephen Baldwin and Kennya Baldwin, married her husband Justin in 2018.

Related: Hailey Baldwin Credits Christian Faith For Marriage To Justin Bieber

The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies for breaking news, investigative reporting, sports, podcasts, in-depth analysis, books, and entertainment for a reason: because we believe in what we do. We believe in our country, in the value of truth and the freedom to speak it, and in the right to challenge tyranny wherever we see it. Believe the same? Become a member now and join our mission.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Wikipedia’s Left-Wing Bias

Published

on

I love Wikipedia. I donated thousands of dollars to the Wikimedia Foundation.

Before Wikipedia, all we had were printed encyclopedias—out of date by the time we bought them.

Then libertarian Jimmy Wales came up with a web-based, crowd-sourced encyclopedia.

Crowd-sourced? A Britannica editor called Wikipedia “a public restroom.” But Wales won the battle. Britannica’s encyclopedias are no longer printed.

Congratulations to Wales.

But recently, I learned that Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger now says Wikipedia’s political pages have turned into leftist “propaganda.”

That’s upsetting. Leftists took over the editing?

Sadly, yes. I checked it out.

All editing is done by volunteers. Wales hoped there would be enough diverse political persuasions that biases would be countered by others.

But that’s not what’s happening.

Leftists just like to write. Conservatives build things: companies, homes, farms.

You see the pattern comparing political donations from different professions: Surgeons, oil workers, truck drivers, loggers, and pilots lean right; artists, bartenders, librarians, reporters, and teachers lean left.

Conservatives don’t have as much time to tweet or argue on the web. Leftists do. And they love doing it. This helps them take over the media, universities, and now, Wikipedia.

Jonathan Weiss is what Wikipedia calls a “Top 100” Wikipedian because he’s made almost half a million edits. He says he’s noticed new bias: “Wikipedia does a great job on things like science and sports, but you see a lot of political bias come into play when you’re talking current events.”

Weiss is no conservative. In presidential races, he voted for Al Gore, Ralph Nader, and Barack Obama. Never for a Republican. “I’ve really never identified strongly with either political party,” he says.

Maybe that’s why he notices the new Wikipedia bias.

“People on the left far outweigh people on the center and the right … a lot [are] openly socialist and Marxist.” Some even post pictures of Che Guevara and Lenin on their own profiles.

These are the people who decide which news sources Wikipedia writers may cite. Wikipedia’s approved “Reliable sources” page rejects political reporting from Fox but calls CNN and MSNBC “reliable.”

Good conservative outlets like The Federalist, the Daily Caller, and The Daily Wire are all deemed “unreliable.” Same with the New York Post (That’s probably why Wikipedia called Hunter Biden’s emails a conspiracy theory even after other liberal media finally acknowledged that they were real).

While it excludes Fox, Wikipedia approves even hard left media like Vox, Slate, The Nation, Mother Jones, and Jacobin, a socialist publication.

Until recently, Wikipedia’s “socialism” and “communism” pages made no mention of the millions of people killed by socialism and communism. Even now, deaths are “deep in the article,” says Weiss, “treated as an arcane academic debate. But we’re talking about mass murder!”

The communism page even adds that we cannot ignore the “lives saved by communist modernization”! This is nuts.

Look up “concentration and internment camps” and you’ll find, along with the Holocaust, “Mexico-United States border,” and under that, “Trump administration family separation policy.”

What? Former President Donald Trump’s border controls, no matter how harsh, are very different from the Nazi’s mass murder.

Wikipedia does say “anyone can edit.” So, I made a small addition for political balance, mentioning that President Barack Obama built those cages.

My edit was taken down.

I wrote Wikipedia founder Wales to say that if his creation now uses only progressive sources, I would no longer donate.

He replied, “I totally respect the decision not to give us more money. I’m such a fan and have great respect for you and your work.” But then he said it is “just 100% false … that ‘only globalist, progressive mainstream sources’ are permitted.”

He gave examples of left-wing media that Wikipedia rejects, like Raw Story and Occupy Democrats.

I’m glad he rejects them. Those sites are childishly far left.

I then wrote again to ask why “there’s not a single right-leaning media outlet Wiki labels ‘reliable’ about politics, [but] Vox, Slate, The Nation, Mother Jones, CNN, MSNBC” get approval.

Wales then stopped responding to my emails.

Unless Wikipedia’s bias is fixed, I’ll be skeptical reading anything on the site.

COPYRIGHT 2022 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation. 

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com, and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. 

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Public Health England to blame for sending patients to care homes without Covid tests

Published

on

Speaking on condition of anonymity, Whitehall officials alleged that Prof Duncan Selbie, the former PHE chief executive, was ultimately responsible for informing Mr Hancock of the risks.

Prof Selbie is working as a senior adviser to the DHSC. Neither he nor the department responded to requests for comment on Wednesday.

Mr Hancock, who was replaced by Sajid Javid last year, claimed the High Court ruling had exonerated him and the had been cleared “of any wrongdoing” because PHE “failed to tell ministers what they knew about asymptomatic transmission”.

The High Court judges concluded that care home policies in March and April 2020 were “irrational” because they failed to advise that those discharged from hospitals “should, so far as practicable, be kept apart from other residents for up to 14 days”.

“Since there is no evidence that this question was considered by the secretary of state, or that he was asked to consider it, it is not an example of a political judgment on a finely balanced issue,” they said. “Nor is it a point on which any of the expert committees had advised that no guidance was required.”

After the ruling, Boris Johnson said he wanted to “renew my apologies and sympathies” to relatives who lost loved ones, adding: “The thing we didn’t know in particular was that Covid could be transmitted asymptomatically in the way that it was.”

However, the risks of asymptomatic transmission had been highlighted by Sir Patrick Vallance, the Government’s chief scientific adviser for England, who said it was “quite likely” as early as March 13 2020. Varying levels of risk had been outlined in papers from late January, the ruling said.

The judicial review was brought by Dr Cathy Gardner and Fay Harris, whose fathers, Michael Gibson and Donald Harris, died after testing positive for Covid.

‘Opens the floodgates for potential claims’

Paul Conrathe, a solicitor at Sinclairslaw who was instructed by both women, said: “It’s possible that care home providers and relatives who lost loved ones in the first wave could bring compensation claims. The Government was found to have acted ‘irrationally’ – that’s a very high legal hurdle.”

Nadra Ahmed, who chairs the National Care Association, said the ruling “opens the floodgates for potential claims to be brought against government policy”.

“This will be especially pertinent where the individual was not given a choice,” she said. “There will be a lot of people assimilating to the information as they consider if the loss of their loved one was premature, and holding the Government to account is the only way forward for them.”

Helen Wildbore, the director of the Relatives and Residents Association, said that the ruling proved “the protective ring around care homes was non-existent” and that older people were “abandoned at the outset of the pandemic”.

A government spokesman said it had been a “very difficult decision” to discharge hospital patients into care homes, taken when evidence on asymptomatic transmission was “extremely uncertain”.

The spokesman added: “We acknowledge the judge’s comments on assessing the risks of asymptomatic transmission and our guidance on isolation, and will respond in more detail in due course.”


‘He was in a home and should have been safe’

They stood outside the Royal Courts of Justice, two women unknown to each other before the Covid pandemic but brought together by tragedy, writes Tom Ough.

Cathy Gardner spoke first, delivering a steely reading of a statement. Matt Hancock’s boast of a “protective ring” encircling care homes, Dr Gardner said, was “a despicable lie of which he ought to be ashamed and for which he ought to apologise”.

Fay Harris, more downcast in demeanour but no less forthright, told journalists: “I have lost precious years with my wonderful Dad.”

Both women lost their fathers in early 2020, arguing that they might still be alive were it not for hospital patients having been discharged into care homes without having been tested for Covid.

Michael Gibson, born in 1931, had been a superintendent registrar of births and deaths. “He was in a home and should have been safe,” Dr Gardner told The Independent after his death.

Mr Gibson, who had advanced dementia, had fallen ill a couple of weeks before the first lockdown. Staff at his care home were unable to procure tests for Covid, but the virus is believed to have struck him down.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending