Mattress producers to car manufacturers to aluminum foil makers are buying more material than they need to survive the breakneck speed at which demand for goods is recovering and assuage that primal fear of running out. The frenzy is pushing supply chains to the brink of seizing up. Shortages, transportation bottlenecks and price spikes are nearing the highest levels in recent memory, raising concern that a supercharged global economy will stoke inflation.
In a statement provided to Fox News, a spokesperson said that the company is working to fix the issue. “Due to industry-wide supply chain disruptions, some Chick-fil-A restaurants are experiencing a shortage of select items, like sauces,” the spokesperson said. “We are actively working to make adjustments to solve this issue quickly and apologize to our Guests for any inconvenience.” […] Chick-fil-A isn’t the only restaurant chain suffering from supply chain shortages. Moe’s Southwest Grill, McAllister’s Deli and sandwich chain Schlotzsky’s have all announced that some items may be temporarily unavailable because of the supply chain shortages.
The world’s major nations have taken further significant steps to help limit climate change.
Note: This article is behind a registration wall at Telegraph.co.uk.
Millions of Britons had their movements “unwittingly tracked” using their mobile phones to see if vaccinated people moved about more after their jabs, the Telegraph has learnt. A report from the SPI-B committee of Government scientists admitted that data from one in ten peoples’ phones were tracked in February, without their owners’ express knowledge. The figures were used by researchers at Oxford University, who carried out studies for the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviors (SPI-B), which advises the Sage group of Government scientific advisers.
This is the first in a series of articles arguing that obeisance to constrictive evidence-based medicine (EBM) treatment protocols in a pandemic is causing an unnecessary loss of hundreds of thousands of lives.
If, instead of exclusively relying on EBM for developing treatment recommendations, we made medical decisions based on looking at all the available evidence and 1) made recommendations, which are most consistent with the evidence to date, 2) made recommendations that are more likely than not to save the most lives, and 3) considered the costs of being wrong (death vs. minor temporary side effects), then we would arrive at a completely different set of recommendations. We would not be afraid to make mistakes because we would be seeking to minimize the loss of life.