This Will Be Unpopular....
The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions. For investment, legal or other professional advice specific to your situation contact a licensed professional in your jurisdiction.
NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.
Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility; author(s) may have positions in any firm or security discussed here, and have no duty to disclose same.
Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.
The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)
Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must be complete (NOT a "pitch"), include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. Pitch emails missing the above will be silently deleted. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.
Considering sending spam? Read this first.
As many of you have read in these pages Ishmael has contributed several articles on the clown world challenges of the last few years. No, that's not me writing under another name, and yes, it is one contributor.
Let me offer, at this point, a different perspective: We won, they lost.
The outcome was in doubt for quite some time. But now, its not.
Rasmussen ran a poll not long ago and found a very large percentage of people who are convinced that someone they knew was seriously injured or killed by the vexxines. Remember the old mantra -- safe and effective? Its no longer an opinion that holds sway among the American people.
But its not just opinion anymore: Now its fact, as we keep seeing. Report after report, even showing up in the mainstream media, of people taking the Fauci Flop. Allegedly healthy people, even elite level athletes, suddenly collapsing and in many cases dying.
Reality is that everyone dies and death is not uncommon. But unexpected, sudden death among people younger than 60 or so is quite unusual. Especially among athletes and other people of prominence, except from drugs, which of course have always been a scourge and have claimed people all the time. Elvis infamously died on the crapper and upon autopsy they found ten prescription drugs in size and a seriously damaged liver. Not all that long ago my sister died under similar circumstances, and from similar root causes. I've had friends who also succumbed from the same sort of abuse of substances and that sucks.
But many of these are not slow suicides by drug abuse -- or, for that matter, by potato chip and sugared beverages. They're "side effects" of something peddled to the masses and everyone knows it. Those who were conned are scared of meeting God and having to explain their personal insanity to him, thus that fearful look in their eye. Their attacks on you both over the last two years and today are from that exact reason: They're scared they got it wrong and you had it right -- and they may be literally walking while already dead. Those who conned others or worse, who were enforcers either through soft coercion or even literal force, such as politicians, police officers, CEOs and supervisory people are not just scared they might be next but that their particular fiefdom and ambitions are screwed, never mind their personal life and wealth, perhaps terminally so.
The suck that the so-called "mitigations" caused from destruction of two+ years of children's education and productivity in our economy is nowhere near finished. In fact the worst of it is just starting. A virus that for many including healthy young people was actually less dangerous than the flu has done what essentially every highly mutable respiratory virus does: Entropy is not a suggestion any more than the laws of thermodynamics (which is what gives rise to entropy, by the way) and nothing escapes it. Covid followed the same pattern that OC43 did back in the 1890s when nobody knew a damn thing about the structure of viruses nor were there any shots. Even with our tampering the laws of physics were not to be denied or evaded; man may create God in an image that suits him, but he can't make hydrogen and oxygen turn into gold instead of water.
There is a maxim I didn't much discuss when I was running a business (because I certainly preferred not to educate my competition!) which is that you don't make money selling things -- you make money when you buy them. Its has and always will be true. When you take advantage of someone else's stupidity (which you're not responsible for since you didn't contribute to the stupid act) you acquire an advantage your competitor cannot outrun or outmaneuver whether its in business or your personal life. MCSNet managed several of these, with one of the larger being a deal we found for office space (which of course every business needs) that was at about 20% of the going rate as a result of another firm's stupidity. I was able to capitalize on that because I had stashed back cash, acquire a five-year lease on said office space and the cost of operations advantage over others was immense -- and dropped immediately and durably to the firm's bottom line.
The "suck" is going to tempt you in the next few years to whine and cry. Don't. That's self-destructive, especially if it prompts you to do something stupid like drown yourself in a bottle of gin. Instead, if you're one of the people who said "no" and meant it build reserves, live frugally, shed unnecessary debt and expenses and be patient. The stupidity that has run through not just the United States but worldwide over the last three years has not been local or minor: It has been immense, it has crossed nearly all professions and it has sucked into its maw the majority of Americans, say much less those in other nations. The opportunities this will generate are also going to be immense, particularly when coupled with all the other stupidity of the last 20 years, including so-called "diversity hiring." Just look at one minor piece of this -- the recent NOTAM meltdown in civil aviation. NOTAMs even got "diversity renamed" to Notice to Air Missions when in fact it is Notice to Airmen. It really is a trivial problem from a computing point of view; just a list of notices that deal with a specific route or place to warn pilots of local and abnormal conditions, such as a restriction on flying into a given set of coordinates during a certain time. I could probably code up a system to do this in a weekend and run it in a single rack of equipment for the entire nation, then triplicate that in three strategic locations so there are two always-on spares -- literally. Well, the FAA apparently did not care about making sure this "non-safety critical" (after all, if it fails it doesn't directly crash a plane) system actually worked and was redundant, and it failed. The problem is that without it you can't fly because if you take off without having the NOTAMs for the area you're operating in and go somewhere you can't as a pilot your ticket gets punched, so said failure basically grounded the entire US non-military aviation system, commercial and civilian, for several hours.
This occurred because the stupid has run rampant throughout or civil and government systems where competence is no longer the gating factor to employment and supervisory positions but rather has been replaced with blind obedience to whatever the flavor of the day happens to be whether its hiring someone due to their skin color or their pronouns and then, in the last couple of years, whether they damaged their bodies stupidly because of a bunch of money-grubbing jackasses along with their enablers in the media and government.
All this will unwind and those who did the stupid things will be the ones who pay for it. Yes, you'll have to live through the suck and we're all going to have to deal with that. If you're younger you have never lived through a real suck. That must be nice. I'm almost 60 and I did -- both little sucks (e.g. early 1990s) and one pretty nasty one in the late 70s and early 80s which was caused by stupidity and arrogance, just like this one. That latter one went on for about five years before it turned and started to improve but if you were prepared and took advantage you did damn well. I was both too young and personally stupid at the time but I learned from that and in the 1990s pounced on its little brother. That smaller one came at a great time for me professionally and was a big part of MCSNet being successful. Some people levered up and won but most who did that lost with many literally losing everything. The prepared who didn't lever up did quite well without the risk of a zero; winning less is ok unless you're a pig, in which case go ahead and grab for that Ring of Power -- just don't whine if you fall off the cliff into the lava instead of getting it.
Those of you who said NO -- the most-powerful single word in the English language -- are already winning. You don't wake up every morning wondering if tonight you will go to bed and never wake up from a clot you throw in your sleep. You might have been persecuted, fired and ostracized but you have your health and are not wondering if there's a ticking time bomb in your chest.
You should contemplate putting your unvexxed status everywhere -- including especially on resumes.
Wear it proudly -- you were RIGHT and its a perfectly-valid marketing point to use both personally and professionally.
Those who cheated (e.g. bribing the doc $50 to squirt it in the trash) are arguably in the worst situation of all. You branded your own chart by doing that and in today's world with EMR (electronic medical records) you can never undo it. If you ever used that fake credential you committed an offense against the person who you gave it to and might have committed a crime but even if it wasn't a crime if and when you get caught (and yes, it is possible for it to be proved you never got the actual shots) or try to walk it back you risk being blackballed in your industry or worse, particularly if your profession has ethics clauses -- and many professions do. Even if you can't be blackballed you marked yourself as untrustworthy, and that cannot be reversed.
The consequences from all of this stupidity are going to have to go through the system and this is not going to be "over and done" as if nothing happened next week -- or next year. But those consequences are going to create tremendous opportunities. All-cause mortality is currently running in the high single-digits to around 12% all over the world, it is not coming back down materially and that is not a small figure.
Then there's disability, which is doing its best impression of a skyrocket just after launch:
Note the dip in "disabled" as we went into 2020; that was disabled people dying from the virus. They were medically fragile and succumbed; we know this virus was especially ugly in those who were already seriously medically compromised, and that shouldn't have surprised anyone. But what happened afterward and why, even though Omicron has been the dominant virus form for the last year and it kills almost nobody, has that trend in disability gone vertical? Those newly-minted medically-fragile are the new screwed -- and they did it to themselves. Perhaps this will level off in the next year or two and stop but if it doesn't, and the evidence thus far is that it is not slowing down, asset prices are going to collapse in many areas and those who are healthy and didn't screw themselves will be writing their own ticket, which will go a hell of a lot further when it comes to standard of living than it did five or ten years ago.
Take a million and a half extra people out of the workforce every year just from disability and perhaps 1/5th of that again in deaths on top of the normal everyday rate and guess what: That's almost exactly the 3% rate of "seriously screwed" I predicted and what this data appears to show was a pretty darn good educated guess.
The rage over the last couple of years was surcharging people's health insurance for refusing the jab as a punitive, coercive act. On a forward basis those who took it may find themselves uninsurable at any price, never mind life insurance and those who refused have every right and should demand all of those surcharges back in cash, with interest at today's higher rates. This is where you'll get caught if you try to lie too, because both the damage and residuals from taking the vexxine is almost-certainly going to be detectable and will be looked for. Elevated troponins or even worse LGE on a cardiac MRI are impossible to hide. Yeah, Obamacare will be there but for the healthy this means subsidy levels for decent insurance will go way up and that's good if you don't need it because it means you can have reasonable coverage for little or no cost. In private business when this worm turns the screwed may find themselves unemployable at anything other than part-time, no-health-insurance jobs as the prognosis for those with LGE is both very poor and hideously expensive. Then there are all the younger people still in or before their childbearing/siring years -- you have to be out of your damned mind as a young man or woman to date with the intent to marry and try to create children with a vexxed partner when you have the choice of a someone who didn't take it -- and you do. Three percent doesn't sound all that bad but it is: Do you like adding a one in thirty risk that your husband or wife-to-be is mortally wounded and going to stick you with both the psychic and economic costs of their prior decision two, five or ten years down the road, never mind the possibility of being unknowingly unable to have children? How about the recent study that found evidence of cardiac damage in nearly one in five young people?
How do you like those odds if you're a young man or woman?
Choose wisely -- which means unvexxed. Let the vexxed have each other and whatever misery comes to them. They bought the ticket; don't take their ride for them.
Here's my take: Those who thought for themselves, read the available information and then stuck up the middle finger at the people attempting to convince them to take the vexxines not only will win they have already and will keep winning. Be smart now and into the future, build reserves, live frugally so you're prepared and be patient; you're not just winning now, today and here you're going to continue winning and those who made the other decision are going to continue losing both now and well into the future. Not everyone who did a dumb thing will lose but in terms of economic impact that does not matter; all that matters is that many, far more than usual in our society, did a stupid thing and you will be able to take advantage when they are awarded their stupid prize. If you do that and keep your powder dry five years from now you're odds-on to have a big fat grin on your face.
When all is said and done I expect mRNA to be consigned to the dustbin of history, the worst of a bad set of medical experiments run on entire populations without cause -- and those firms involved in it are going to be severely damaged if not (as in the case of one-trick-ponies) utterly destroyed. Biotech firms blowing up is nothing new; they do it all the time and most of them fail. The only difference here is the size of the detonations as a result of the stupidity of attempting to use unproved medical technology on a mass basis.
Do not expect the economic and sociological impact will be over or "back to normal" in a year. If we're lucky in five years we'll be coming out of it; if not it might be a decade or even longer. But those who made smart decisions will be the winners on a statistical basis and already are winning.
Hold your head high if "screw you!" was your answer to this garbage.
You were right and it is rapidly becoming consensus whether the media and so-called "bigwigs" like it or not.
So CDC, NIH and others are over-reach and bullshit extraordinaire.
I was asked to speak on this briefly today. And did.
Then the conversation went toward "smart meters" and the overtones of "5g."
Jesus, cut the shit folks.
So-called "smart meters" are nearly all Zigbee-style devices which is a quite-common option for home automation. This is a mesh technology and typically runs in the same bands as your WiFi router does, with less power in terms of ERP (effective radiative power) than your cellphone -- and not by a little either, given the wild difference in distance between the device and you.
The reason the power companies use this is because it can be certificate-based for security and thus is quite secure from interception or tampering, which is a really big deal when you're talking about people's power bill never mind being shut off if you don't pay. While they could have designed their own why re-invent what already exists and is available to anyone who wants to use it when that is perfectly-suitable to the task and quite secure?
Here's an ARRL document on them, which is entirely accurate by the way. 902 Mhz is very close to the Z-wave US frequency (908 Mhz) and I've had that stuff all over my house for over ten years. You probably have too, since it was one of the earlier "cordless phone" frequencies (nowdays most are on 2.4Ghz.)
FCC power requirements limit such a meter to one watt of RF power. For comparison your cellphone is tower-controlled as to power level but, because you walk around with it near and on your body (which attenuates the signal thus can cause the power required to go up) its limited to 600mw, or 0.6w, which is the maximum for a handheld device.
A common ham radio HT or "walkie talkie" has both a 1W and 5W setting. I own two. My ham "base" transceiver has a base power level settable of up to fifty watts but the power I'm allowed to run depends on the band I'm operating on and, depending on the band and the power limits associated with amateur radio use on same I can run a linear amplifier behind that and boost the power to ten or more times that level.
I also used to work on Ku and C band microwave transmitters and in fact did control software for some of them; the C-band klystron units, in particular, had rated power outputs into the kilowatt range, with TWT units typically having rated outputs around 300-600 watts. These were continuous ratings, not "burst" or "pulsed".
All of RF is, as you learn if you ever study it, subject to the inverse-square law. This is why the local FM radio station frequently runs somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 watts of output power yet at your radio the signal level received by the antenna is tiny.
Thus while your meter may emit 1 watt and your cellphone is 6/10ths of that the meter is almost-certainly a hell of a lot further away from you than the phone just as your FM radio or TV is from the transmitter and thus the actual power you are exposed to is a tiny fraction of that from your cellular device, laptop connected via WiFi (which of course is transmitting) and similar.
In addition the meter transmits on a periodic basis because all the others within "listening range" have to not be transmitting at the same time or they will "step on" each other since they're all on the same frequency band. The "mesh" is what makes this work; in short your neighbor "helps" your signal get to one of the utility company's antennas and vice-versa. This is, of course, wildly different than what happens when you use a cellphone, PDA or laptop where your transmission is for you -- and only you.
In short the argument is bullshit unless, of course, you have no electronic devices in your house and do not live anywhere near a transmitting radio or TV station, nor do you have a transformer (which also emits EMF) on the pole or pedestal outside your home. Well, perhaps not if you're Amish. For everyone else? It's crap. Period.
The other argument is "dirty power." Guess what I own? A Tek digital storage oscilloscope, with which I can trivially look at the power quality coming from my AC outlets just as easily as I can use it to design, diagnose and fix electronics. I have. The claim is nonsense.
Why do power companies love smart meters? Because they don't have to send people out to read them, so their costs are lower. In addition nearly all (if not all) have a remote disconnect capability. This cannot be used to shut you off for load management as its not designed to be used on a regular basis (it has a rated connect/disconnect under load life of perhaps a hundred cycles) so in terms of a "rolling blackout" that's not how they'll do it -- if they try they'll be buying a lot of new meters when the contacts fail.
But if you don't pay your bill, well, that's a "once in a while" deal and yeah, they can and do use it that way since now they don't need to send someone out to remove the meter from the socket and potentially meet the deadbeat with a 12ga shotgun who's rather interested in them not removing it and thus shutting their power off.
What I was asked to speak to was CDC overreach and my view that the agency should be destroyed, as their malfeasance and misfeasance, all of it intentional, goes back decades and is well-documented as is that of the FDA and NIH. AIDS was one of the most-egregious examples but hardly the only one prior to Covid, never mind the CDC's refusal to actually act within their authority and seize and destroy contaminated items in interstate supply (such as E-coli contaminated food), which under statute they are empowered to do.
Nonetheless I refuse to have my name associated with bullshit and, while I'm polite enough not to call it out while on the Zoom, it shall not pass without my commentary here, on the record and exempt from roll-off.
I, like Dr. Noorchashm, have some concerns with Dr. Kory and loud advocacy down one specific road. I understand where he's coming from: When someone tries to silence debate rather than engage in it the only way to break through the intentional wall is to yell louder, or shoot the persons building the wall.
Since the latter is frowned upon in a polite society we're left with the other option.
Nonetheless I object -- and have -- to a single-minded focus. By definition it fails to account for acquired knowledge over time, never mind being exactly what the other side is doing.
As for calling Dr. Kory's view a scheme, that's over the line. In fact, its likely actionable, specifically when couched in the claim, no matter how-carefully wrapped, that unlawful acts are taking place. Which Noorchashm did, I remind you.
As someone who has had Covid-19 and hit it with repurposed drugs, all of which I had to source outside of alleged "professional advice", and having successfully treated my own person with same, knowing it was Covid because I seroconverted and proved that both before (being negative) and after (being positive) the fact, again, without any professional assistance from your so-called "profession" because it was denied me, never mind formal refusal at the time to be given monoclonal antibodies because I was not fat, over 65, diabetic or non-white I think I have plenty of reason to ride your ass and that of the "orthodoxy."
Yes, I know my experience is called "an anecdote" or a "case study" and is not proof. It is, however, my experience and thus stands as it is, like it or not.
I have every right to relate my personal experience to others.
Yes, I refused to take these so-called "vaccines" prior to getting Delta. Why? Many reasons, and I will list them again since otherwise you'd have to go back and read my work over the 18 months prior to my getting hit:
Given all of the above the decision was not difficult at all. I had a large body of unknowns that could not be discovered for a period of years, some of which if they became realized risks would be catastrophic or even immediately fatal. As time had gone on additional serious risks were discovered to be potentially in play, none of which had been addressed, discussed or disproved. On the other side of the scale was about a year of knowledge of the disease etiology, its mechanisms of damage to the body, how certain personal health factors influenced that and what mitigations had statistical correlation with interdicting it.
I made my decision, I was ultimately infected, I used the drugs and supplements that I believed would be of benefit and while Delta was no cake-walk the outcome was success. I neither went to the hospital or died, and I have no long-term discernable effects from the event, other than an IgG antibody titer that persists to this day (last checked a couple of weeks ago.) In fact on an objective cardio-pulmonary basis the impact of my infection with the "evil" Delta was materially less than that which I suffered from whatever got me in the first week of January 2020, which was likely (although I can't prove it) H1N1. That infection took more than six months to fully recover from in terms of cardio capacity!
Of course then the so-called "good doctor".... goes here.
But what is more concerning to me is that you three do so, while expressing unusual zeal for ignoring the established principles of Immunological science, as licensed American physicians to vocally disparage and dissuade millions of Americans, who have already lost trust in their government and expert institutions, from becoming immunized against COVID-19. This is a critical medical and ethical judgement failure on your parts.
Well, to put not fine a point on it: Bullshit.
There is no clear balance of risks and benefits for the jabs that applies on a blanket basis. This is in fact true for every immunological product and indeed for every drug irrespective of its class or purpose. I would not take a varicella shot for one simple reason: I already had chicken pox and thus it offers me nothing but risk. Yes, the risk from that shot is extremely small but when measured against zero benefit you would be stupid to allow anyone to give it to you.
Yet when it comes to Covid-19 this is precisely the problem -- we had a decent part of the population as of December of 2020, before the first jab went into anyone on a widespread basis, that had already had Covid-19. So where was the loud outcry then and where is it now, or even threats to revoke medical licenses for giving the jabs to people who already had the disease? Even the CDC now admits there is zero statistical benefit to receiving one or more such jabs if you have previously been infected. Such a recommendation or even demand is thus nothing more than risk, including the risk of death, without the possibility of benefit and yet even today the CDC and everyone else screams at people to get jabbed and boosted even if they've been previously infected and recovered!
The jabs originally looked like a fairly decent risk:benefit gamble for those in nursing homes and otherwise at very high risk, but who had not been previously infected, at the outset. I said so at the time, quite-clearly -- even with all the unknowns given that we knew of a roughly 5% infection mortality rate in severely-compromised people, plus the fact that the average survival time for a person admitted to a nursing home is six months the choice to be jabbed was, on the basis of available data, reasonably determinable as odds-on for such persons.
For everyone else the decision was never that clear.
This, even with what was trivially-discernible as trials that failed to demonstrate either sterilizing immunity or durable protection. Three months is not durable. In addition indications that the trials were gamed were present all the way back when they began.
Now, with more time, we've developed information that is more adverse to both the safety and efficacy of the shots!
Indeed the reported rate of serious complications and death from these jabs looks to be some one hundred times that of another common non-sterilizing (and often worthless or nearly so) inoculation we hand out to over 100 million Americans a year -- the flu shot.
When all the "errors" go one way it is extremely likely they're not errors at all -- they're probably intentional -- because errors do not have a directional bias.
Why should not Dr. Kory present the position that the risk and benefit equation is not clear, it is certainly not clear for younger, healthy people and the data was deliberately screwed with to make it look better than it was?
All of which is true, by the way.
How bad is what appears to be the deliberate skewing of the data? We don't know and thus we cannot put boundaries on it or prove it.
We can't look. So says Pfizer, Moderna and J&J. So says the FDA.
"Eat this, inject that!" says the doctor.
"Show me the data", says I.
"No." says the doctor and the government.
Well then fuck you sir, and may the plague of a thousand locusts descend upon your home, your assets, your clothing and your penis.
Especially when you further tilt the scales by actively denying people the right to choose mitigating drugs that, to the extent each or all of them work, make the risk:reward benefit calculation adverse to getting the shots.
Speaking of risk and reward how about Remdesivir. Or, as I've taken to call it, Run-Death-Is-Near. A drug with a known toxicological problem, specifically to the kidneys, that is a multiple-time loser, including with Ebola where it not only didn't help it led to higher rather than lower mortality rates and thus was stopped during the trials. May I remind you that Solidarity, a fairly large-scale trial, said Remdesivir was worthless? These results were reported in the NEJM close to one year ago yet hospitals in the US are still pumping people full of that crap today.
The reality is that our federal public health agencies have badly failed at accurate and honest messaging about the vaccine and its efficacy. The vaccine’s presentation by Mr. Biden’s administration as a binary silver bullet was an error that only stoked more mistrust, when its inefficacies became visible with the growing environmental viral load.
It was not an error: It was an intentional lie and it pervaded not only Biden's Administration but Trump's as well and still does right now and here at the FDA, which claims the shots PREVENT the disease.
They do not.
We know this conclusively; exactly none of them provide the at least one year, 50% or better protection against infection and transmission that the FDA has historically required as a minimum, which is (usually) barely met by the flu shot.
The original trials were never powered to detect whether these jabs met that criteria, nor was the routine testing and follow-up done to detect it either -- on purpose.
Therefore any claim that these jabs prevent the disease was and is not an error -- it is intentionally false, especially given the data we have now.
The antibody titers produced were wildly beyond that from natural infection without any explanation as to why. A reasonable explanation is that the manufacturers either knew or suspected that (1) the protection would rapidly wane and thus gamed the test so as to pass the deliberately-short timeframe required to sell them and (2) viral evasion due to mutation was likely. Worse, setting the titer there while serving to conceal the failure and thus sell product may have also potentiated enhanced binding antibody levels, that is, vaccine-enhanced disease over time which would not become evident until after the trials were complete and 200 million Americans got jabbed.
Which, sadly, we may now be seeing with Omicron and even with Delta.
Can I prove the latter? Not yet. But if turns out to be true what are you going to do about it?
Oh by the way, every prior attempt at vaccination against a coronavirus ended in this sort of failure. The entity that claims it doesn't this time carries the burden of proof and it better be iron-clad proof too because if you're wrong the harms can be catastrophic.
See, that's why we don't do this sort of thing as a rule and anyone who is intellectually honest both knows and admits it: This risk is real, if it happens you screw an utterly huge number of people, the screwing is likely to be long-term or even permanent and there's nothing you can do about it.
Is not allegedly the "prime directive" in medicine First, do no harm?
Well now..... experimental jabs, liability shields, using known toxic drugs that have repeatedly failed trials due to safety and in fact has repeatedly caused mortal injury in those trials on a widespread basis in hospitals and systematically denying access to drugs that have decades-long safety records to people at the earliest sign of illness.
Doctor, hypocrisy much?
BUT, none of these federal failures, nor any of Dr. Fauci’s prejudices and errors (or even the alleged corruption my friend, RFK Jr., elaborates on in his new book), justify anyone, especially three seemingly decorated and licensed American physicians, acting to compound the harm to America and American institutions, by disparaging UN-IMMUNE persons from becoming vaccinated.
There might be a reason for it sir. The above may well be the reason.
Now let's talk about the jabs specifically.
The truth is that COVID-19 vaccine induce a powerful Adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein in the majority of vaccinated persons. This immune response, though it wanes and requires boosters in some, protects the majority of the vaccinated from severe illness. It protects the majority from becoming infected. It reduces transmission in the majority.
Only the first statement in that paragraph has factual basis. The rest are conjecture and require balance, which you refuse to provide. Indeed, you deny it even in the face of large-scale "natural experiments" such as in Israel and Denmark where, the data now shows, against Omicron the jabs are worse than worthless; they make infection more likely.
Indeed the data is that even against the pre-Delta variants this was true until two weeks after the jab sequence was completed. That is, you were temporarily made more-susceptible and this pattern of wildly-increased infection occurred in every state and nation where jab rollouts commenced exactly when it commenced. You and everyone else dismissed this by falsely claiming these people were "unvaccinated". If you are offering jabs into the middle of a pandemic then an infection that occurs at any time after the jab is accepted must count against the vaccine's effectiveness. It is your profession that chooses when to offer and recommend said jabs, I remind you and thus if you choose to administer them into a spike of infections and they make that worse that outcome counts against the intervention you prescribed.
Why should I ever believe someone in the future when it comes to my health once I prove they've lied. Many have, and they claim to be experts. "You become a dead end to the virus" if you get jabbed? "Vaccinated people do not carry the virus -- they don't get sick"? Yeah, Rachel Maddow is not an expert at anything except having diarrhea of the mouth. How about Fauci, Walensky and Bouria? Is not the latter the CEO of one of the companies making these products? Are not the former two those who encouraged lockdowns, mandatory masking, mandatory vaccinations and more? All three claim to be subject-matter experts and all three were completely full of crap.
Indeed there is evidence that the original trials were deliberately gamed and thus were frauds. I've gone over this in substantial detail. Can I prove it? Not without subpoenas but eventually someone is going to get through that wall. How is it that you accept alleged "trial" data that is generated and filtered only by the interested parties and which nobody else can look at, especially after the first batch of it is proved to be garbage? It's not like pharmaceutical companies have lied before, right? Oh wait, they have, and have been charged, prosecuted and punished for it. Do you believe a bank robber who has been convicted will not rob a bank in the future? Why would believe a pharmaceutical company that has been caught cheating would not cheat again, especially when they try to hide data from the public for decades and in fact go to court in an attempt to block its release? How about when those same firms execute contracts with governments that require the government to indemnify them if, in the future, it is proved the product is defective? We know they did exactly that because those agreements have been leaked and published.
Further, and perhaps most-seriously, we knew very early on that viremia, that is, virus in the bloodstream, including the spike, only occurred with severe and fatal cases of Covid-19. We also knew starting in September of 2020 and documented by December that the spike alone, absent the rest of the virus, was pathogenic in the human body, specifically in the endothelium. It is thus a reasonable belief that when someone ends up in the hospital or dead from Covid-19 this is likely the root cause at least some of the time -- and maybe all of the time.
It is impossible to inject something without some of it ending up in the circulation -- that is, in and around the endothelium. That begs the obvious question as to which is more-dangerous: A definite exposure of your endothelium to the spike from an injection or a possible one from infection if, and only if, you get severely hammered? Nobody knows and nobody has done the work to find out. Despite the signal in December of 2020 we went ahead anyway without first disproving that the balance of harms went the wrong way especially in healthy, low-risk individuals.
On top of this we knew very early on that there was no reduction in transmission from the jabs; a person who had a "breakthrough" was just as infectious (per Fauci and the CDC itself) and thus might be more-dangerous because by hiding symptoms you make the problem worse. If I do not know I'm sick I will not self-isolate in my home since I have no reason to suspect I'm infected. An inoculation that does not prevent infection, replication or transmission but prevents symptom expression is thus not only bad from a public health perspective its disastrous. Indeed one can reasonably make the argument that intentional blinding of symptoms is involuntary manslaughter. We have historical precedent for this, incidentally, in the fiasco surrounding the DTP vaccine in the 1970s and the twenty-fold higher case rate for pertussis today after the formula for that jab was changed to DTaP, a non-sterilizing inoculation that prevents neither infection or transmission. Do you think I can't read history and the CDC's own data on pertussis cases?
What's worse is that we now know the jabs don't work with any degree or durability at all. How do we know this? Because the CDC has proved it with their own contemporary data, that's how. The >65 cohort is the most vaccinated in the United States. Indeed, the CDC says that 88.3% of those >65 have been fully vaccinated, and 64.3% have received boosters, that is, the third shot.
The proof they don't work is that the CDC also reports that hospitalization among those >65 for Covid is roughly as high or higher this winter as it was last winter when there were no shots. With nearly 90% of that age cohort fully vaccinated across the entire United States if the jabs worked to prevent severe disease we would see a ratable decrease in hospitalization among that cohort. Indeed, since we know natural immunity is protective against severe disease for much longer than the jabs, at least one year, again by the CDC's own data, if the jabs did nothing we'd expect to see a lower rate among that segment of the population simply because many of them already had the virus and survived. There are simply not enough unvaccinated and uninfected seniors remaining if the jabs work and yet there is in fact no decrease at all compared with last winter's surge among the most-vaccinated population subgroup.
This strongly implies that what the jabs are doing is producing VEI (vaccine-enhanced infection); that is, causing actual harm and either wildly potentiating first infections or, far worse, destroying immunity from infection whether prior to or subsequent to vaccination such that people are getting the virus a second or subsequent time and not mildly either; they're getting hammered since this is not relying on "infections", it's hospitalizations. We knew the latter was likely this summer, incidentally, because "N" protein seroprevalence in Britain flatlined during Delta -- an impossibility unless the vaccine was interfering with building that titer or destroyed existing antibody titers if jabbed after being infected and recovered.
Never mind that there's evidence these jabs may be back-boosting other common coronaviruses. That was known to be a risk in May of 2021. We see that in the data too; people showing up in the ER and Urgent Care with "covid-like illness" but they don't have Covid, and a huge percentage of them are vaccinated. Are these jabs turning the common OC43 and HKU1 coronaviruses, that usually produce mild colds, into severe disease events? Maybe -- and we knew they might in May of last year but didn't bother to follow up on that either. Since OC43 is believed to have been the cause of a Covid-like pandemic in the 1890s if this proves up we will have screwed millions of Americans -- or even perhaps tens of millions -- instead of helping them.
But, even then, systematic off-label use of controversial and unvetted drugs in millions of Americans would be a very questionable practice.
What is "controversial" and "unvetted" about a drug that has a 30+ year record with nearly four billion human doses consumed worldwide and, of course, all of the results of same in evidence? You can run all the teeny little trials you want but you will never get the statistical power on safety that comes from decades of widespread use. We have that for Ivermectin. We have it to a lesser, but still powerful extent, for hydroxychloroquine. I know people who are using Plaquenil and have been for an extended period of time for chronic conditions. They're not falling over dead while this specific use would be for a week or so at maximum.
How about budesonide? We dose people with systemic steroids all the time; prednisone to name one. We know its safety profile quite well, because we use it for a whole host of other reasons. Budesonide, as an inhaled steroid, has much less systemic effect yet it concentrates the effect where you want it if Covid gets out of hand on you before you get sick enough that your O2Sat collapses -- in the lungs. Is it 100% safe? Of course not. No drug is.
What if I demand those things, take them, and they do nothing? So what? Your alternative on offer was chicken soup! Unless the drugs harm me in short-term, acute use I can't be worse off than what you offered me as an alternative, which was nothing!
Explain to why you believe you have the right to deny me that choice.
I remind you that in a tiny little nation called Mexico to our south these drugs are sold over the counter. Indeed you can buy Zpak, HCQ and Ivermectin there for just a few dollars without any gatekeeping whatsoever by the medical "profession."
If your argument is that such active denial "encourages" your preferred path I have a word for that and it has a punishment too: Extortion.
Close to one year ago I posted a list of lies from physicians and alleged public-health experts. Indeed it is precisely your group that has spent close to the last two years claiming a physical impossibility: That a mask could and will stop an aerosol virus. You and your pals, in short, have and still argue that a chain-link fence around my porch will stop mosquitoes from biting me. In addition to not failing math I also did not fail physics.
At the same time you so-called experts have refused to follow up on alleged Covid cases (that is, PCR+) with an inexpensive, couple of dollar fingerstick antibody tests two weeks later. Why is this important? Because a person who comes positive on a PCR test at Ct40 likely never had the virus at all. Since none of the labs report the Ct value to the patient said person has no idea if their "positive" denotes a nearly-certain infection with Covid or one that is wildly-improbable to be a true positive. In the latter case if they were sick they had something else. If they weren't sick they had nothing, In both cases they may well still be susceptible. By calling them "sick and now recovered" you caused them to take risk they would otherwise not take, and this also became (and still is!) part of your argument for "everyone must get jabbed."
But if they do follow up and a huge percentage of the so-called "had Covid" people find out they were lied to and never had the virus perhaps that would be bad..... Indeed it might lead to a very-justified call for heads if your profession quarantined and economically destroyed tens of millions of Americans who weren't actually sick.
I had to go "outside the lines" to source these tests on my own. I did so.
It is my sincere hope that any American reading my opinion here will think carefully about the best way to protect themselves from COVID-19.
On this we agree entirely. I have done so since this first began. Indeed that is part of being an adult.
But my attempts to do so, including to document whether what I had in January of 2020 was Covid, have been intentionally, willfully and maliciously interfered with by people just like you. My access to safe drugs that, on reading of hundreds of formal studies, some great, some not-so-great, some undoubtedly riddled with errors and even lies was refused even though said drugs are in fact as safe or safer than those I can buy over the counter in the local WalMart or CVS.
I can buy all the allergy meds I want without proof that I have an allergy. I can buy all the Tylenol I want without proof that I have a headache or fever. Why can't I buy a drug that is, on the data, roughly one hundred times safer than Tylenol?
The bottom line is this: Until and unless you have a proved-effective alternative on offer at the same point in the progression of disease there is no argument ever for interfering with someone using a safe drug irrespective of whether you believe, or can prove, that it works. The test for this must be simple, binary and put into law NOW: If I can buy something as safe or safer over the counter then I can buy this if I so choose, period. It's my ass and thus must be my choice when all you will offer in the alternative is nothing at all.
The reason is trivially-easy to understand: If a person uses it and it doesn't work provided its safe they're no worse off than eating the chicken soup.
We should demand -- and you, as a so-called "professional" had a duty to demand that all of the data surrounding these jabs be released before they went into arms. You have a duty to insist that there be actual criminal penalties for failing to report adverse events into VAERS and even more-severe penalties for anyone tampering with, redacting or sitting on said reports including not autopsying persons who die shortly after using experimental treatments and publishing the findings, which the jabs all are.
You further have a duty to stop lying in your professional capacity and so does everyone else who claims a "professional" credential when it comes to medicine. There are no approved jabs available to the public and the reason for it is obvious: Until and unless approval and recommendation comes for children marketing and selling the "approved" version is outside of both the PREP Act and NCVIA liability shields which means if Pfizer sells it and someone gets harmed they will get sued and lose. Comirnaty is not available; I challenge you to find vials of it with lot numbers and produce them. I have issued this challenge repeatedly since the alleged approval but not one such lot number and photograph of a vial has been shown in actual use. The jabs that are available are all under EUA, they are and remain experimental to this day, the trials appear to have been gamed, the control group was deliberately destroyed making fair comparison impossible, some data from the trials was not reported at all including some that suggested a significant mortality increase, there is now a significant mortality increase in the working-age population that is not from Covid-19 and exactly correlates with the initiation of these jabs into that part of the population, the CDC's own data says that the most vaccinated cohort is still getting sick and winding up in the hospital WITH COVID in equal numbers to before any jabs were available and more.
But you have done none of this.
Indeed what you have done is the opposite and in fact you still claim that which the data and even the CDC disclaims: That the jabs prevent, on a material basis, acquisition and transmission of the virus.
I have no quarrel with anyone who reads your material, mine and everyone else's, does their own evaluation of all of it, weighing it as they see fit and comes to the opposite conclusion I did -- that for them in their opinion, the jab is a superior choice. Were I in a different personal health situation I might well have come to that conclusion as well.
But there is no clear-cut, true for everyone answer in this regard especially when much of the data necessary to accurately calculate the odds either is being withheld on purpose from public disclosure and analysis, is being deliberately misrepresented or, perhaps worse, simply cannot be discerned without the passage of time that has not yet occurred.
I am not anti-vaccine. I was forcibly inoculated with a whole host of things when I was young as are most children but on analysis as an adult I cannot disagree with the choices my parents made on my behalf. Likewise, I made those decisions for my daughter when she was a child, and with one exception I agreed with the recommendations and she received those shots. The one exception she had every capacity to change upon reaching her 18th birthday and I explained to her both my decision and that she was free to alter it at her discretion as an adult. I have no idea what she decided because, since she is now an adult, her private health decisions are none of my damned business. Likewise she decided (as a young adult) against the Covid-19 shots, got the disease (at the same time I did, which is why I know she had it), recovered without incident and now has natural immunity just as I have.
When it comes to the medical "industry" and "profession", especially that of so-called "public health" I do not trust it -- or you -- and never will in the future. Your "profession" has destroyed its own credibility with your own hands and words. Your "profession" has engaged in a two year long scream-fest of lies, you have failed to take reasonable mitigating actions for the most-vulnerable who we knew within weeks were at especially high risk, many of your cohorts deliberately exposed people in nursing homes to infected individuals, you have advocated for and used extraordinarily dangerous drugs which in addition to being dangerous have been proved in large trials to be worthless, you have continually advocated for "protective measures" that are physically impossible to be functional in actually reducing transmission and might increase it through physical transport of contaminated material from one place to another and you have repeatedly claimed, without evidence, that your preferred intervention is in fact a sterilizing inoculation and are completely, 100% of the time safe. These were not errors -- these statements and acts were undertaken either with reckless disregard for the truth and known limitations of the data available or worse, with actual knowledge of falsity where there has been years or even (in the case of masks) decades of hard science proving you were full of crap.
Covid-19 is not the first load of garbage your so-called "profession" has run on the American population. Roughly a million Americans a year die each and every year in whole or part as a result of the decades long pile of garbage your profession has and continues to run on what people should put down their piehole and is largely why obesity and diabetes continues to wildly expand in the United States and elsewhere. Indeed that load of crap is likely responsible for a huge percentage of all Covid-19 deaths -- perhaps as many as half or even more!
There is no possible way for you to reclaim credibility with me. You simply can't. That which you or any other so-called "medical professional" assert from here onward must be backed by scientific evidence with all the data exposed, no redactions and no "trust me" assertions because you are not trust worthy. Each and every piece of evidence that is missing I will construe against whatever you assert and that is perfectly reasonable, given the history of the last two years.
I write in defense of the United States and Her public health,
Hooman Noorchashm MD, PhD
In a word:
I'm getting very tired of the tin-foil-hat crowd.
When this blog opened up originally in 2007 I inserted a term into the TOS that made clear that certain Reynolds items were going to lead to instant banhammering. Specifically, from the TOS:
Any discussion of 9/11 "Troofer"-related nonsense on Tickerforum will result in an immediate, no-notice and permanent account (and possibly IP-level) ban. There are literally thousands of places on The Internet where you can run this sort of tripe. This is not one of them, and those who refuse to respect this constraint will have their access privileges removed.
I meant it then and it holds to this day. Post that event I spent a decent amount of time given that the basic "graving" plans if you will for the towers were public on simulation and satisfied myself that such claims were bullshit. There are plenty of others, including "we never went to the moon" that fall into the same category.
This virus has led to whole bunch of others that are similarly bullshit. Some of the people running this garbage are simply crazy, but I suspect some are put up to it and do so in an attempt to brand anyone deviating from the "official story" as nuts. Here are a few of the self-declarations of insanity, stupidity or both that that will get you tossed instantly around here with no apologies and no second chances -- along with a handful of facts that we now know really did happen because there is documentary proof of them -- and in many cases we know who's responsible too because those are the people who wrote the documents or were collecting and analyzing the data referred to in them.
Yeah, I can show you exactly how this goes together; what I posted the other day is enough for you to find it with a few minutes of effort. The executive summary is enough, on the first page, standing alone to recognize what happened. It will take longer to read the 75+ page grant proposal for the detail on that and about 2 minutes to read the DARPA rejection -- and why, which very-clearly documents how fucking stupid and arrogant what they were doing was. It may take 30 seconds beyond that point for you to realize that basically the entire program was the responsibility of a European and multiple United States entities. Yes, the Chinese were involved as well -- there's no absolution to be found there.
Within weeks there were pissed-off families of over 100,000 dead who had every reason to want and expect blood in exchange for their loved ones that were slaughtered as a direct result of this stupidity. Today that number is much larger. It takes nothing more than that to recognize that even if only one percent of said loved ones are willing to get that retribution and don't give a wild fuck how they get it that if it starts every single person involved (and plenty who are fingered but really weren't) are going to have very bad days.
That's all this is folks -- and all it ever was.
Wild-eyed corruption that blew up in their face and then of course those who take advantage of others to sell bullshit and snake oil even at the expense of even more lives, cough-pharma-cough-cough swoop in and enlist those who are branded in the media as "heroes" to sell their crap.
Exactly as has been done myriad times before, and until you stop the with the tinfoil bullshit and are willing to put a pitchfork up the ass of the responsible parties will happen again.
The much-screamed about federal "contractor" guidance is out. It does not say what Biden said it says. Once again, the petulant 2-year old in diaper (literally, Depends) is lying and trying to scare you.
That proposed rule defines a contract or contract-like instrument as an agreement between two or more parties creating obligations that are enforceable or otherwise recognizable at law. This definition includes, but is not limited to, a mutually binding legal relationship obligating one party to furnish services (including construction) and another party to pay for them. The term contract includes all contracts and any subcontracts of any tier thereunder, whether negotiated or advertised, including any procurement actions, lease agreements, cooperative agreements, provider agreements, intergovernmental service agreements, service agreements, licenses, permits, or any other type of agreement, regardless of nomenclature, type, or particular form, and whether entered into verbally or in writing.
Yeah, ok, and this is news? A contract is a contract. But, as you will soon see, a contract is a contract and that's a problem for Biden and his pissy little temper tantrum -- and the government admits it right on page 5:
Covered contractors must ensure that all covered contractor employees are fully vaccinated for COVID-19, unless the employee is legally entitled to an accommodation. Covered contractor employees must be fully vaccinated no later than December 8, 2021. After that date, all covered contractor employees must be fully vaccinated by the first day of the period of performance on a newly awarded covered contract, and by the first day of the period of performance on an exercised option or extended or renewed contract when the clause has been incorporated into the covered contract.
And there it is folks.
Most contracts are for a term, negotiated in writing. Indeed, if performance is to stretch over a period of one year or more there is this nice little thing called "The Statute of Frauds" (which doesn't actually cover fraud) that mandates that the contract be in writing to be enforceable. Therefore all the contracting parties with the federal government, where performance will meet or exceed one year, do indeed negotiate same in writing and sign off on it. That's because they're not stupid.
If a contract has options to extend then you have a contract with the ability to make it longer. For example, let's say I have one that is a one-year contract with the option to extend for additional one year periods up to five years. Fine and well, except that when you exercise that option you can't change the terms unless they're mutually re-renegotiated.
What this document says is that when such options exist the government shall do that -- in other words they shall renegotiate to include said term (you must be fully vaccinated.) That's perfectly legal but doing so means the contractor can refuse and/or reopen negotiations -- say, on price or other terms.
Note that since this document provides burdens to the covered contractor you can bet the price will go up. Not only is record-keeping involved workplace "social distancing" and masking is involved too along with a demand for compliance officer(s) to be employed. These are real costs and, in some cases, fairly-extreme costs.
Covered contractors shall designate a person or persons to coordinate implementation of and compliance with this Guidance and the workplace safety protocols detailed herein at covered contractor workplaces.
They will be immediately met with demands for more money and snarl the supply chain to the government, since they're now a demand for every contracting entity. Good -- maybe Mordor and its various agencies will get ratfucked by the inability to secure at a reasonable price, or even at all, the goods and services it wants to buy.
What's even worse for the government is that the way they're going to word this requirement (which isn't yet released), according to Q16, those will become part of existing agreements entered into after November. Yes, you can do that in a contract; explicitly agree that one side or the other can change terms in various ways -- in this case, for whatever the Government decides are "Covid" reasons. But since that set of requirements which may be imposed on the contractor is unknown as to both scope and cost (in other words the contractor cannot price it with any sort of precision) you can bet it's going to trigger very large adjustment demands from the contracting firms.
Note that in the FAQ Q12 it specifically addresses what's obvious: You cannot unilaterally change the terms of a contract so these requirements cannot be, and are not, imposed until the option period comes up -- which triggers renegotiation -- or, for a new contract, when it is awarded.
Further, Biden's administration has figured out that attempting to run this all the way down the supply chain to products and those incorporated in others is likely to result in an erected middle finger and the collapse of the government's procurement process, and so they didn't do that. Read Q13.
Good luck you demented asshole; you're going to need it.
And no, if you work for a contractor or are one, you're not required to be vaccinated in November. The Government hasn't even issued the actual rule yet, nor its language. But when it does issue contracts that are extended, optioned or newly-drafted after that date must include it. Fine. Your price should reflect their stupidity and may it cause the Feral Fuckface-In-Dementia to CHOKE.