The Market Ticker - Cancelled
What 'They' Don't Want Published - Category [Corruption]
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Sarah's Blog
Full-Text Search & Archives
Legal Disclaimer

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 include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2022-09-21 07:30 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 3081 references
[Comments enabled]  

The common chestnut among those with a bit too much Reynolds wrapped around their head:

This is part of a depopulation move to kill you all.

IMHO, nope.

Why?  Because while those who think they're your "betters" are indeed desirous of you all getting "out of their way", such as not being on Martha's Vineyard if you're brown and from Venezuela, unless of course you're already a servant (Want to see this in prime action?  Visit Jackson Hole, MV, or any of these other places); if you are suddenly there and "in their face" they want those folks as actual people who expect to be treated on an equal footing about as much as a plantation owner wanted the black folks in his house sleeping in his bed (other than when providing sexual pleasure "on demand", of course.)

But even so all these people do fully understand that without plenty of roughnecks and "lessers" in the form of something as simple as a car mechanic they're fucked.  Their jet is useless without fuel in size and to get it to their airport it first must be drilled for, extracted, refined and then transported and none of these people will dirty their hands to do any of that.  Never mind that effectively zero of them could replace a wheel bearing on their nice expensive car if it required it; without said replacement when it needs to be done the vehicle is a 2-ton brick.

How about something more-simple?  Not all that long ago the diverter door motors in my truck puked.  The A/C and heat, while they still worked, were basically useless since the HVAC system knew those motors were faulted and would not do what the system wanted, and thus it limited things.  One of those was the inability to run defrost on the windshield, which in the right conditions means you're not able to see while driving.  How many of these "highfalutin" folks could crawl around under the dash of said vehicle and replace the actuators?  You see, that's a job for the servants; they just throw money at the problem which is fine if you have the money but you also need the servants.  What happens when they're gone?  Your car is fucked, that's what.

So no, they didn't try to kill everyone.  Not even close.  And the problem with an indiscriminate "thinning" is that it makes the taxation and spending divide greater rather than lesser, and guess who doesn't pay any taxes?  That's right -- the servant class.  Why do you think people hire them instead of lawful immigrants who have green cards or are citizens?  Simple: If you have to pay the taxes you also demand higher wages.  The point is servitude thus its cheaper, and yes, the so-called "rich" are pigs at that level all the way up and down the line.  They can afford it and choose to screw people, Americans and immigrants alike.

Thus there is an equally bad explanation that requires no tin foil around the head: Its all about the money and power; people and safety be damned where there is money to be made.

That has an extremely long history worldwide and, incidentally, was what spawned things like OSHA in the first place which, applied with reason, makes perfect sense and is probably necessary because the guard on that saw costs $20 and without OSHA the shop owner does not care if his "lessers" cut off their fingers; he can always just go get another "lesser" when the current one is no longer useful due to missing digits.

Here are the facts:

  • Parts of our defense infrastructure are very invested in bioweapon defense, with good cause.  While nobody sane uses bioweapons in war because you cannot control the "own goal" problem and every look at them inevitably reaches that conclusion that doesn't mean someone won't try anyway.  They might, thus that investment is prudent, like it or not.

  • DARPA turned down work on what certainly appears to have been Covid, and post being turned down the NIH and other entities, including universities and other entities in the United States, did it anyway.  Exactly what part that played in Covid showing up is not known at present and may never be known as much of it was in China and it must be assumed the records necessary to prove it conclusively have been deliberately destroyed.  Proving something when the evidence has been destroyed can be quite difficult especially when fact-finding is obstructed which we know, as fact, China has repeatedly done in this regard.  We also know that some of the interested parties were responsible for claiming that it didn't happen and crafting that narrative.

  • We also know that investigations of mitigating drugs were intentionally slanted or worse not run at all and thus buried.  Budesonide and Hydroxyurea, to name two that were deliberately buried.  One of them I'm quite sure works in at least some people because I used it and the positive response occurred within hours.  Is that proof?  No; I'm one person.  Perhaps God decided to create that correlation.  But near-immediate and very significant response, even in one person, is strongly suggestive.  The hydroxyurea response and results are wildly more interesting in that those were not limited to one person and were in those already written off for dead by medical science, nearly all of whom became not dead when it was used.  There was exactly zero follow-up on this.

  • At the same time even though the WHO had disavowed Remdesivir as early as the fall of 2020 it remained and still does remain a "front line" drug for hospitalized Covid patients.  This, despite a trial being stopped for Ebola when it killed more people than those who got nothing, a virus with much more lethality than Covid has.  Let me note again: Remedesivir has never passed a clinical trial for anything -- it failed for cancer, it failed for Ebola and in a huge multi-national trial for Covid it failed there too, and it has a known and proved nasty propensity to do serious or fatal damage to the kidneys.  I'm not sure how anyone can qualify that as acceptable with a straight face and not treat any such use as murder complete with the penalties that should be associated with same, but there you have it.

  • The "mRNA" nonsense has never worked either.  Every trial run prior to Covid has resulted in unacceptable safety signals.  Those signals including biodistribution were known and deliberately not run in this case in the United States.  Japan demanded and got those distribution studies which should have resulted in an immediate hard stop as they evidenced intentional concealment of risk.  Now add to that Pfizer's attempt to seal the data for 75 years (which failed, incidentally.)  There is now evidence in the form of heightened all-cause deaths, especially in younger people, that began coincident with the roll-out in that part of the population and it has not abated since.  No, they don't "kill everyone" and won't, but something that changed in the first part and middle of 2021 has resulted in a persistent elevation of all-cause death among people who do not usually die, and its not Covid because those people are not being killed by the virus and recorded as such.

None of this requires any more motive than money.  I point to two specific examples I have bought up before, both of which are proved and one of which is contemporary too -- statins and the recent approval of a drug for Alzheimer's.

Statins do reduce LDL cholesterol.  That's a scientific fact.  But, in persons who have not previously had a documented heart attack, they do not reduce all-cause mortality.  Dead is dead, in short, and if the point of a given drug is to make it less-likely that you will be dead due to some body parameter being out of a claimed "acceptable range", the drug reduces the parameter and yet you still die then quite-obviously whatever is being claimed as the reason you become dead is wrong.  Anyone claiming otherwise is neither a scientist or a doctor; they are money-grubbing assholes.

The Alzheimer's drug is another example.  The disease has been believed for a long time to be caused by "plaques" in the brain.  The seminal study, incidentally, that allegedly showed this originally has been exposed as almost-certainly a fraud, which you'd think would result in voiding all the downstream work including this drug.  You'd be wrong.  The drug does on a very-significant basis, reduce said plaques.  However, it does nothing to halt or reverse the cognitive impairment from Alzheimer's in the studies submitted, and thus on the basis of what occurs with Alzheimer's disease it failed.  The FDA approved it anyway despite this showing, and that's not an EUA either; it received full approval.  Again, this is neither science or medicine; it is in fact exploitation of people suffering from a horrid disease with the only true motive being the acquisition of money.

In both cases there was lots of money to be extracted, billions in the case of statins and who knows how much will be collected from desperate Alzheimer's patients and their families (likely even moreis all that matters; obviously whether the drug(s) in question actually work to stop the bad thing from occurring is immaterial.

One final example: "Trans" stuff with kids.  This also has nothing to do with anything but money.  Witness the recent blow-up with VUMC (Vanderbilt) being caught peddling add-a-dick-to-me garbage and bragging about the increase in number of procedures.  You think this isn't purely about the money?  Like hell it isn't; not only is the surgery very expensive it generates effectively-mandatory continuing expense too; some estimates are that for every such person who "transitions" they make close to a half-million dollars!

Now look at our local hospital and its record of dead bodies during the back half of 2021 with Covid.  Did our "illustrious and conservative" Governor give a crap about the latter?  He said not one word and neither did our County Mayor; you see, lots of money was made.

All this comes down to is money.  That's it.  Callous disregard for the health of the public be damned; nobody cares about that, not in Congress, not in our regulatory agencies and definitely not in our pharmaceutical businesses.  If their drugs and other devices happen to produce some measurable effect by which they can get an approval and make money that's all they care about.

We, as Americans, have steadfastly refused over the space of four decades to respond to this sort of corruption with a demand that it stop or we will stop it and we don't care what means are required to do so.  The HIV/AIDS years should have been more than enough to bring about massive change in this regard, never mind Vioxx and countless others.  One small part of the HIV/AIDS "make money" scam was pushing AZT to the exclusion of anything else, including a known effective prophylaxis against PCP pneumonia, Bactrim.  Some sixty thousand people were shoved in the hole in America as a direct result of that, most of them gay men, and all because protecting the money flow from AZT was very important.

I remind you that AZT was also a failed cancer drug and it failed on toxicity, often doing critical damage to the marrow and immune system which is partially rooted there.  This was known about the drug before it was "pushed" for AIDS and in the fullness of time it was found that in fact AZT did not work and did not save a single person who had AIDS.

At the same time creating more customers is part and parcel of the game too.  Again, witness AIDS.  It was known by the CDC within months of the original cases that gay bathhouses in San Francisco were the largest vector source for the virus.  The obvious thing to do was to shut that crap down and make very clear that promiscuous gay sex was a literal death sentence for which we had no means of stopping at the present time.  We didn't do that, deliberately, and thus seeded the virus all over the nation and indeed the world at a highly-accelerated rate.

The same thing just happened with Monkeypox, it was known almost immediately that men screwing each other in the ass was the common factor between people who got it and yet the CDC and state authorities have been and still are refusing to shut down large public events that feature as their prime attraction for gay men lots of highly-promiscuous and high-volume sex between said gay men.

Covid simply put into the public sphere something that was going to screw everyone to some degree and, since it was of nearly-universal impact the amount that could be grifted off and taken was much larger than, for example, a flu bug or even HIV.  That's all.

Indeed grift, intentional crafting of trials to evade answering questions the companies know are likely to kill their drug's prospects and even tampering with trial data, which has repeatedly occurred and been proved has not led to those doing it going to prison.  Never mind the alleged "trials" that, when run by a disinterested party, fail to produce statistically-identical results which implicates either sloppy procedure or intentional misconduct along with depraved indifference as to whether you live or die so long as there is money to be made.

In short the same pattern of behavior that has gone in the so-called "medical industry" for the last forty years continued and resulted in these failures and deaths.  It was not different in character or motivation, only in impact and only because of the size of the target population, in this case damn near everyone in the United States and indeed worldwide.

If you're younger than 60 (yeah, this includes me) then get up and go look in the mirror.  Your refusal to demand that this crap stop over the last 40 years if why it all happened this time and if you were one of those talked into it and you or a loved one got or get fucked that happened because you sat on your ass during those last four decades and did not put a stop to it.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2022-09-20 11:20 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 625 references
[Comments enabled]  

It is a felony to wiretap someone without a court order.

"Tech" has claimed a "necessity defense" on this repeatedly, and there's logic to it to the extent it really is necessary.  That is, it's not a felony for the phone company to "wiretap" (listen into your call) to find a fault in their circuit.  The intent isn't to divulge the contents of the conversation or monitor it per-se; it is to find out why there's static on the line and repair the fault.

Same applies in the tech world.  When I ran MCSNet if you were having problems with email, for example, there's nothing wrong with me, or a tech in the company, looking into the system to find the problem and fix it, even though we might wind up reading emails to or from you in the process.  Our intent isn't to monitor your communications which you have a reasonable expectation of being private even though I did not encrypt them, it is to find and address technical issues with the service.  This is perfectly legal.

What Facebook was doing, assuming this is correct, was and is not.

Facebook has been spying on the private messages and data of American users and reporting them to the FBI if they express anti-government or anti-authority sentiments — or question the 2020 election — according to sources within the Department of Justice.

Under the FBI collaboration operation, somebody at Facebook red-flagged these supposedly subversive private messages over the past 19 months and transmitted them in redacted form to the domestic terrorism operational unit at FBI headquarters in Washington, DC, without a subpoena.

IMHO that's a felony.

Facebook can respond to a subpoena; I used to get them from time to time and while you can challenge one I never got one that I believed was worth of challenge.  We therefore complied rather than go to court because on its face the subpoena was reasonable.  I didn't know if the claimed thing was true but that's not the test -- the test is whether or not the subpoena, given the information available to me without taking upon myself a duty I don't have (e.g. to investigate and prove up or not the allegations made) is reasonable.  Said subpoena was reasonable in every case, therefore it was complied with.

have, in other contexts, fought subpoenas -- successfully.  In fact every time I did challenge one I prevailed and it was either withdrawn or quashed.  Yes, people do use them as weapons and that's why you have a right to challenge them.

But the allegation here is that Facebook, despite holding forth the statement that "messenger" is a person-to-person and not public communications medium then systematically violated the privacy of the people involved.

There is no expectation of privacy in what you post to the public.  But if I am having a private conversation via a venue or method that some company or other entity represents is limited to the knowing participation of the parties involved, as is the case for a phone call, surface mail with a stamp on it or, as is the case here, an electronic emulation of the same then for that to be systematically invaded for the purpose of monitoring the content and giving it to outside parties, including the government, without a subpoena is quite-arguably both a felony and a ruinously-serious civil cause of action as well.

So where are the handcuffs?

Oh, about in the same place they are for Pfizer's CEO who stated in public that his jabs prevented you 100% from getting Covid when he knew damn well that was a lie -- and yet without that being true there was utterly no basis, ever, for any mandate issued against anyone since all benefit, whatever it might be, would be entirely personal.

We will never stop the crazy in this country until and unless people who lie in this fashion are held to account -- and "held to account" does not mean the firms are fined.

It means people MUST go to prison, which is an equally-nasty consequence for all irrespective of how rich you are, a severity that is never true in the case of a fine because a fine that impoverishes a middle-class chump is laughed at by people like Zuckerpig.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2022-09-11 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 740 references
[Comments enabled]  

... and you should too.

Biden, of course, will make the obligatory speech.

The terrorists killed some 3,000 Americans, all of whom died because the FBI was not just incompetent, they were willfully blind.

Do recall that all of the below happened:

  • Bush governor in Florida gave a bunch of non-citizens driver licenses, with which they bought tickets and boarded the planes.  This was wildly improper since exactly zero said non-citizens and non-permanent residents had a permanent, legal Florida address yet exactly nobody was ever punished, that is, fired or prosecuted, for doing it.

  • The FBI ignored a call from the flight school where the terrorists were "learning" to operate said plane; the owner of same was ex military and called the FBI because said "students" had no interest in landing.  He was blown off despite being a military veteran with first-hand knowledge of extraordinarily unusual and suspicious activity.  Not one person in the federal government (including the FBI) was fired or prosecuted for their outrageously gross negligence which in fact was directly responsible for 3,000+ dead Americans.

  • Not one prohibited item got on board that morning yet millions of Americans are sexually assaulted every year since and, when the TSA is challenged by "tests" to see if they can actually find and stop bombs or guns they fail a disgusting part of the time.  Not once when they have failed said tests, which can only reasonably occur if you're not actually looking at the display, have the agent(s) involved been charged criminally for their clear criminal malfeasance or even fired.

  • Whether the private security and airlines who hired them were culpable has never been tested in court because the US Government protected that incompetence, both on the ground and in the aircraft itself.  We allegedly have courts for this exact purpose; to test said claims openly and assign liability.  In other words we no longer have a rule of law you can rely on.

  • It was clear within hours the hijackers were all, or nearly all, Saudi nationals.  Bush let many more Saudi nationals, some of whom might have been personally involved, leave the nation via private jet while the rest of us had our air travel suspended.  That is, our government deliberately allowed people who likely could have been tried and imprisoned for this or even sentenced to death to go free.  Fuck every single element of our government who did that, including the office of the President, the FBI and more.

Is 9/11 a day of somber remembrance?  You bet it is.

It's one of the key bright-line test days in which it was proved our government no longer functions except as a grift, fraud and death-dealing machine that can and will be turned on anyone, including our own citizens, whenever some rich jackass demands it.  Oh by the way, there are more than a few Americans dead this last time from combat with a virus for the exact same reasonso cry me a fucking river given that even after some nutjobs flew planes into buildings the American people refused to wake the fuck up.

PS: Before commenting make damn sure you read the FAQ.  This post does not suspend the rules around here and I suspect I will obtain a nice upper-body workout at least once today... 

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2022-09-09 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 344 references
[Comments enabled]  

This is the sort of nonsense that has zero balance and is fact full of falsehood; in other words an opinion piece masquerading as "news":

Tennessee’s law is one of the strictest in the country. It makes performing an abortion a Class C felony, punishable by up to 15 years in prison. There are no exceptions. This is the part that Akers has since found herself having to repeat, often eliciting raised eyebrows and deeply drawn breaths: Unlike many states’ abortions bans, including the one in Texas, this law does not explicitly exempt abortions performed to save a mother’s life.

Instead, it offers doctors an “affirmative defense.” The difference is linguistically subtle but extraordinarily meaningful in criminal law, Akers says. The law makes performing all abortions illegal. And instead of the state having to prove that the procedure was not medically necessary, the law shifts the burden to the doctor to convince a court that it was.

Yeah, which came about because "health" got twisted into knots to the point that having morning sickness was considered "lack of health."

In other words the presumption was shifted to put the decision into the hands of a judge and (potentially) a jury because the left went the other way to the point that outrageous falsehoods were run on the other side.

That's how the pendulum works in the US and its what the left deserves for what they did over the previous 30+ years, including in Casey.

There is in fact no chance that a doctor will be successfully prosecuted for removing an ectopic pregnancy, although this nutjob claims otherwise in that opinion piece.  Absolute zero risk of such a prosecution exists; such a pregnancy is never viable, it can never result in a live birth and will almost-always kill the mother if not terminated.

Do I like the Tennessee law, living here and having read the entire thing?  No.  But I understand how it got passed and why it was proposed in the first place.  It was specifically because nutjobs argued that it was perfectly acceptable to stick what amounted to a pair of scissors into the neck of a half-born child and kill it, calling that "abortion" and a civil right.

Newton's Third Law applies to politics.  For every action there is an equal an opposite reaction.  If the crazies on the left hadn't pushed the above crap the Tennessee law would have never been proposed, say much less passed.

I remind you that Roe, flawed thought it was, never provided for abortion on demand through the first breath of the newborn child.  Indeed Roe's trimester "test" established that the presumption was that the State had a valid argument in prohibiting third-trimester abortions, with few exceptions.  The problem is that the left refused to accept that.

Time and medical science have moved on since the 1960s.  Today there is little to zero excuse for someone who wants an abortion to not produce one via medication and thus absent a serious medical complication (e.g. an ectopic pregnancy) that demands the mother's life be saved there are few if any instances in which a woman cannot procure an abortion on her own with two pills.  Unfortunately what has also happened is that at the same time the left has been screaming about "abortion rights!" it has sucked off the medical and pharmaceutical businesses and allowed them to price said drugs at exorbitant mark-ups; a literal five dollars worth of medication is marked up by 100x or more so it is essentially the same price as surgery.

If the left gave a wet crap about women in general instead of seeing them as a walking ATM machine in the form of a uterus to be enslaved by the medical industry and pandered to unholy Hell would have been raised two decades ago and those two pills would be available over the counter at every pharmacy in the United States for under $10.  The only valid question is "when was your last period?" and if you miss by more than a few days you spend the dollar on the test and, if pregnant and you don't want to be, ten bucks it is.  

Note that this is perfectly legal in the US as of 2021 and thus in fact the pills are available over the counter:

On December 16, 2021, the FDA removed the in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone and expanded the distribution to certified pharmacies in addition to certified clinicians.

But the price issue remains -- and it remains precisely because the Left doesn't want the problem solved; it wants a political wedge issue and is willing to injure or even kill women to have it.

There is zero issue with abortion access anywhere in the United States irrespective of state laws as exactly zero people know if you gobbled two pills.

But to admit this and solve the price problem means that the issue disappears as the means to score political points and profit from it, even though when you get down to it what's being sold in order to make said profits is the health and life of women, and it is specifically the left -- that is, the screaming harpies and Democrats generally -- that are doing it.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2021-11-02 07:40 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 58629 references
[Comments enabled]  

There is an article floating around from The Expose that makes an explosive claim: There is a wildly statistically-significant skew in the death rate from Covid-19 vaccines by lot number.

What originally got my attention was the tinfoil hat crowd screaming about lots being intentionally distributed to certain people to kill them -- in other words certain Covid-19 vaccine lots were for all intents and purposes poisoned.  That was wildly unlikely so I set out to disprove it and apply some broom handles to the tinfoil hatters heads.  What I found, however, was both interesting and deeply disturbing.

Lots are quite large, especially when you're dealing with 200 million people and 400 million doses.  Assuming the lots are not preferentially assigned to certain cohorts (e.g. one goes to all nursing homes, etc) adverse reactions should thus be evenly distributed between lots; if they're not one of these things is almost-certainly true:

  • There is a serious manufacturing quality problem or you produced something without understanding how it would work in the body and thus failed to control for something you had to in order to wind up with reproduceable results.  That is, some lots are ok, others are contaminated, have too much or too little of the active ingredient in them, some produce wildly more spike-protein than others in the body when injected, etc.

    OR

  • Much worse, the lots are intentionally segregated to produce different results. This implies some sort of nefarious intent such as killing people on a differential basis or that the manufacturers are running unsanctioned experiments on a mass basis among the population at-large, since they know what is in each lot and intentionally varied the contents.

    OR

  • Perhaps worst of all, reports are now being intentionally suppressed, the injury and death rate hasn't changed and there are lots with one of the two above problems but it is being intentionally not reported, having been detected almost-instantly and health providers were directed to not report anything serious (e.g. death) associated with the jabs.

Now let's talk about VAERS.  You can grab the public data from it, but VAERS intentionally makes it difficult to discern differences in lot outcomes.  Why?  Because they separate out the specifics of the vax (the manufacturer, lot number, etc.) into a different file.  This means that simply loading it into Excel does you no good and attempting to correlate and match the two tables in Excel itself is problematic due to the extreme size of the files -- in fact, it blew Excel up here when I tried to do it.  But that's an external data-export problem; internally, within HHS, it is certainly not hard for them to run correlations.

Indeed the entire point of VAERS is to find said correlations before people get screwed in size and stop it from happening.

Let's step back a bit in history. VAERS came into being because back in the 1970s the producers of the DTP shot had a quality control problem.  Some lots had way too much active ingredient in them and others had nearly none.  This caused a crap ton of bad reactions by kids who got the jabs and parents sued.  Liability insurance threatened to become unobtanium (gee, you figure, after you screw a bunch of kids who had to take mandatory shots?) and thus the manufacturers pulled the DTP jab and threatened to pull all vaccines from the market.

Congress responded to this threat of intentional panic sown by the pharmaceutical industry by giving the vaccine firms immunity and setting up a tax and arbitration system, basically, to pay families if they got screwed by vaccines.  Rather than force the guilty parties to eat the injuries and deaths they caused Congress instead exempted the manufacturers from the consequences of their own negligence and socialized the losses with a small tax on each shot.

Part of this was VAERS.  We know VAERS understates adverse events because it while it is allegedly "mandatory" it is subject to clinical judgment and there is a wild bias against believing that these jabs, or any jab for that matter, has bad side effects.  In addition there is neither a civil or criminal penalty of any kind for failure to report.  We now know some people who have had bad side effects from the Covid-19 jabs have shown up on social media after going to the doctor and then tried to find their own record, which is quite easy to do if you know the lot number from your card, what happened and the date the event happened -- their doctor never filed it.  This does not really surprise me since filing those reports takes quite a bit of time and the doctor isn't paid for it by the government or anyone else, so even without bias there will be those who simply won't do the work unless there are severe penalties for not doing so.  There are in fact no penalties whatsoever.  The under-reporting does not have a reliable boundary on it, but estimates are that only somewhere between 3% and 10% of actual adverse events get into the database.  That's right -- at best the adverse event rate is ten times that of what you find in VAERS.

But now it gets interesting because VAERS exports, it appears, were also set up, whether deliberately or by coincidink, to make it hard for ordinary people to find a future correlation between injury or death and vaccine lot number.

NOTE THAT THIS EXACT CIRCUMSTANCE -- THAT MANUFACTURERS HAD QUALITY CONTROL PROBLEMS ORIGINALLY -- IS WHY VAERS EXISTS.  YOU WOULD THINK THAT IF CONGRESS WAS ACTUALLY INTERESTED IN SOLVING THE PROBLEM THIS WOULD BE THE EASIEST SORT OF THING TO MONITOR AND WOULD BE REGULARLY REPORTED.  YOU'D ALSO THINK THERE WERE STRONG CIVIL AND EVEN CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR NOT REPORTING ADVERSE EVENTS.

You'd be wrong; the data is across two tables and uncorrelated as VAERS releases it and there is no quick-and-easy reporting on their site that groups events on a comparative basis by lot number.  While it is possible to do this sort of analysis from their web page it's not easy.

(Further, and this also intentionally frustrates analysis, VAERS keeps no record nor reports on the number of shots administered per lot, making norming to some stable denominator literally impossible.  If you think that's an accident I have a bridge for sale.  It's a very nice bridge.)

But, grasshopper, I have Postgres.  Indeed if you're reading this article it is because I both have it and know how to program against it; this blog is, in fact, stored in Postgres.

Postgres, like all databases, is very good at taking something that can be foreign-key related and correlating it.  In fact that's one of a database's prime strengths.  Isn't SQL, which I assume VAERS uses as well, wonderful?

So I did exactly that with the data found here for 2021.

And..... you aren't going to like it.

Having loaded the base table and manufacturer tables related by the VAERS-ID I ran this query:

karl=> select vax_lot(vaers_vax), count(vax_lot(vaers_vax)) from vaers, vaers_vax where vaers_id(vaers) = vaers_id(vaers_vax) and died='Y' and vax_type='COVID19' and vax_manu(vaers_vax)='MODERNA' group by vax_lot(vaers_vax) order by count(vax_lot(vaers_vax)) desc;

This says:

Select the lot, and count the instances of that lot, from the VAERS data where the report ID is in the table of persons who had a bad reaction, said bad reaction was that they died, where the vaccine is a Covid-19 vaccine and where the manufacturer is MODERNA.  Order the results by the count of the deaths per lot in descending order.

vax_lot | count
-----------------+-------
039K20A | 87
013L20A | 66
012L20A | 64
010M20A | 62
037K20A | 49
029L20A | 48
012M20A | 46
024M20A | 44
027L20A | 44
015M20A | 43
025L20A | 42
026A21A | 41
013M20A | 41
016M20A | 41
022M20A | 41
030L20A | 40
026L20A | 39
007M20A | 39
013A21A | 36
011A21A | 36
031M20A | 35
032L20A | 35
010A21A | 33
011J20A | 33
030A21A | 33
028L20A | 32
011L20A | 32
004M20A | 32
025J20-2A | 31 << -- What's this? (see below)
041L20A | 31
011M20A | 31
031L20A | 30
032H20A | 29
030M20A | 28
042L20A | 27
Unknown | 27
006M20A | 27
012A21A | 25
002A21A | 25
043L20A | 24
032M20A | 24
023M20A | 23
040A21A | 23
027A21A | 23
017B21A | 22
036A21A | 20
unknown | 19
020B21A | 19
047A21A | 19
006B21A | 18
044A21A | 17
038K20A | 17
048A21A | 15
003A21A | 15
014M20A | 15
031A21A | 15
031B21A | 15
021B21A | 15
025A21A | 14
007B21A | 14
003B21A | 14
001A21A | 13
038A21A | 13
025B21A | 13
001B21A | 12
046A21A | 12
027B21A | 11
045A21A | 11
038B21A | 11
025J20A | 11
002C21A | 11
016B21A | 11
036B21A | 11
039B21A | 10
002B21A | 10
018B21A | 10
019B21A | 10
008B21A | 10
029K20A | 10
029A21A | 10
028A21A | 9
047B21A | 9
001C21A | 9
044B21A | 8
045B21A | 8
009C21A | 8
048B21A | 8
026B21A | 8
UNKNOWN | 7
039A21A | 7
040B21A | 7
046B21A | 7
032B21A | 7
038C21A | 6
030m20a | 6
027C21A | 6
008C21A | 6
006C21A | 6
004C21A | 6
047C21A | 6
007C21A | 5
025C21A | 5
042B21A | 5
043B21A | 5
025J202A | 5  << -- Same as the above one?
052E21A | 5
003C21A | 5
030B21A | 5
030a21a | 5
016C21A | 5
017C21A | 5
N/A | 5
NO LOT # AVAILA | 5
037A21B | 5
037B21A | 5
024m20a | 4
031l20a | 4
003b21a | 4
026a21a | 4
041B21A | 4
005C21A | 4
033C21A | 4
035C21A | 4
021C21A | 4
040a21a | 4
041C21A | 4
006D21A | 4
022C21A | 4
037k20a | 4
048C21A | 4
03M20A | 3
008B212A | 3
039k20a | 3
024C21A | 3
016m20a | 3
038k20a | 3
025b21a | 3
033B21A | 3
026C21A | 3
Moderna | 3
033c21a | 3
014C21A | 3
.....

There are 547 unique lot entries that have one or more deaths associated with them.  Some of the lot numbers are in the wrong format or missing, as you can also see.  That's not unusual and in fact implicates the ordinary failure to get things right when people fill out the input.  For example "Moderna" in the above results is clearly not a lot number.  I've made no attempt to "sanitize" the data set in this regard and, quite-clearly, neither has VAERS even months after the fact with their "alleged" follow-up on reports.

But there is a wild over-representation in deaths of just a few lots; in fact fewer than 50 lots account for all lots where more than 20 associated deaths accumulated and out of the 547 unique entries fewer than 100 account for all those with more than 10 deaths.

Evenly distribution my ass.

How about Pfizer?

vax_lot | count
-----------------+-------
EN6201 | 117
EN5318 | 99
EN6200 | 97
EN6198 | 89
EL3248 | 86
EL9261 | 84
EM9810 | 82
EN6202 | 75
EL9269 | 75
EL3302 | 69
EL3249 | 67
EL8982 | 67
EN6208 | 59
EL9267 | 58
EL9264 | 57
EL0140 | 54
EN6199 | 54
EJ1686 | 51
EL9265 | 50
EL1283 | 48
ER2613 | 48
EN6204 | 47
EN6205 | 45
EK9231 | 43
EL3246 | 43
EN6207 | 41
EN6203 | 41
ER8732 | 40
EL1284 | 39
EL0142 | 38
EJ1685 | 38
ER8737 | 37
EN9581 | 36
EN6206 | 35
EP7533 | 35
EL9262 | 34
EL9266 | 33
EL3247 | 32
ER8727 | 28
EP6955 | 27
ER8730 | 26
EW0150 | 25
EK5730 | 24
EP7534 | 24
EM9809 | 22
EK4176 | 22
EH9899 | 21
EW0171 | 21
unknown | 20
ER8731 | 19
ER8735 | 18
EW0172 | 18
EL9263 | 17
EW0151 | 15
ER8733 | 15
EW0158 | 14
EW0164 | 14
EW0162 | 14
EW0169 | 14
ER8729 | 13
ER8734 | 13
Unknown | 13
EW0153 | 13
EW0167 | 12
EW0168 | 10
EW0161 | 10
EW0182 | 9
NO LOT # AVAILA | 8
EW0181 | 8
EW0186 | 8
ER8736 | 8
EW0191 | 8
FF2589 | 7
EW0173 | 6
EW0175 | 6
FA7485 | 6
EW0177 | 6
FD0809 | 6
301308A | 6
EW0170 | 6
FC3182 | 6
EW0217 | 6
EK41765 | 5
EW0196 | 5
EW0176 | 5
EW0183 | 4
EN 5318 | 4
el3249 | 4
EW0178 | 4
EW0179 | 4
EW0187 | 4
FA6780 | 4
FA7484 | 4
EN 6207 | 4

Pfizer has 395 unique lot numbers associated with at least one death and, again, there are a few that are obviously bogus.  But again, evenly distribution my ass; there is a wild over-representation with one lot, EN6201, being associated with 117 deaths and fewer than 20 are associated with more than 50.

For grins and giggles let's look at the age distribution for 039K20A -- the worst Moderna lot.

karl=> select avg(age_yrs) from vaers, vaers_vax where vaers_id(vaers) = vaers_id(vaers_vax) and vax_type='COVID19' and vax_manu(vaers_vax)='MODERNA' and vax_lot(vaers_vax)='039K20A' and age_yrs is not null;
      avg
---------------------
 51.4922202119410700
(1 row)

Ok, so the average age of people who got that shot, had a bad reaction (and had a valid age in the table) is 51.

How about for 030A21A which had 33 deaths?

karl=> select avg(age_yrs) from vaers, vaers_vax where vaers_id(vaers) = vaers_id(vaers_vax) and vax_type='COVID19' and vax_manu(vaers_vax)='MODERNA' and vax_lot(vaers_vax)='030A21A' and age_yrs is not null;

       avg
---------------------
 61.1097014925373134
(1 row)

Well there goes the argument that we jabbed all the old people in nursing homes with the really nasty outcome lot and they died but it not caused by the jab and the second lot, which had a much lower rate, all went into younger people's arms and that's why they didn't die.  Uh, no, actually when it comes to the age of the people who got jabbed in these two instances its the other way around; the second lot, which was less deadly, had bad reactions in older people on average yet fewer died -- and significantly so too (by 10 years.)

What's worse is that the "hot" lots for deaths also are "hot" for total adverse events.  If the deaths were not related to general pathology from a given lot there would be no correlation -- but there is.  Oops.

In addition there is no solid correlation between the "bad" lots and first report of trouble.  The absolute worst of Moderna had a bad report in the first days of January.  But -- another lot of their vaccine with only 172 reports against it (1/20th the rate of the worst for total adverse events) had its first adverse event report on January 6th.

What is evenly-distributed with a reasonable bump for the original huge uptake rate?  When people died.

 

What the actual fuck is going on here?  You're going to try to tell me that the CDC, NIH and FDA don't know about this?  I can suck this data into a database, run 30 seconds of queries against it and instantly identify a wildly-elevated death and hazard rate associated with certain lot numbers when the distribution of those associations should be reasonably-even, or at least something close to it, across all the lots produced and used?  Then I look to try to find the obvious potential "clean" explanation (the higher death rate lot could have gone into older people) and it's simply not there when one looks at all adverse event reports.  I have Moderna lots with the same average age of persons who died but ten times times the number of associated deaths.

Then I look at reported date of death and.... its reasonably close to an even distribution.  So no, it wasn't all those old people getting killed at once in the first month.  So much for that attempted explanation.

Oh if you're interested the nastiest lot was literally everywhere in terms of states reporting adverse events against it; no, they didn't concentrate them in one state or region either.

The outcome distribution isn't "sort of close" when most of the lots have a single-digit number of associated deaths.

Isn't it also interesting that when one removes the "dead" flag the same sort of correlation shows up?  That is, there are plenty of lots with nearly nothing reported against them.  For Moderna within the first page of results (~85 lots) there is more than a three times difference in total adverse events.  The worst lot, 039K20A with 87 deaths, is not only worst for deaths; it also has more than 4,000 total adverse event reports against it.  For context if you drill down a couple hundred entries in that report the number of total adverse events against another lot, 025C21A number 417 with five deaths.

Are you really going to try to tell me that a mass-produced and distributed jab has a roughly ten times adverse event rate between two lots and seventeen times the death rate between the same two, you can't explain it by "older people getting one lot and not the other" and this is not a screaming indication that something that cannot be explained as random chance has occurred?

Here, in pictures, since some of you need to be hit upside the head with a fucking railroad tie before you wake up:

 

That's Pfizer deaths by lot, worst-to-best.  Look normal to you?  Remember, zero deaths in a given lot doesn't come up since it's not in the system.

How about adverse events of all sorts?

 

(Yes, there are invalid lot numbers, particularly in the second graph, with lots of "1s".  The left side however is what it is.)

There's a much-larger problem.  Have a look at Moderna's chart of the same thing.  First, deaths:

 

And AE's....

 

These are different companies!

Want even worse news?

JANSSEN, which is an entirely different technology, has the same curve.

 

and

 

What do we have here folks?

Is there something inherent in the production of the "instructions", however they're delivered, that results in a non-deterministic outcome within a batch of jabs which was not controlled for, perhaps because it isn't understood SINCE WE HAVE NEVER DONE THIS BEFORE IN MAN OR BEAST and if it goes wrong you're fucked?

This is a power-law (exponential) distribution; it is not a step-function nor normally or evenly distributed.  Those don't happen with allegedly consistent manufacturing processes and the potential confounding factor that could be an innocent explanation (all the bad ones were early and killed all the old people early who died of "something" but it wasn't the vaccines since they all got the jab first) has been invalidated because the dates of death are in fact reasonably distributed.

Have doctors been told to stop reporting?  Note that HHS can issue such an order under the PREP Act and there is no judicial review if they do that.  Did they?

This demands an explanation.  Three different firms all using spike proteins, two using a different technology than the third, all three causing the body to produce the spike rather than deliver it directly and all three of them have a wild skew of some lots that hose people left and right while the others, statistically, do not screw people.

This data also eliminates the hypothesis put forward that lack of aspiration technique is responsible -- that is, that occasional accidental penetration of a vein results in systemic distribution.  That would not be lot-specific.

Next question, which VAERS cannot answer: Is there an effectiveness difference between the lots that screw people and those that do not?

Are we done being stupid yet?  Statistically all of the adverse events of any sort are in a handful of lots irrespective of the brand.  The rest generate a few bad outcomes while a very, very small number of lots generate a huge percentage of the harm.  And no, that's not tied to age bracketing (therefore who got it first either); some of the worst have average age distributions that are less than lots with lower adverse event rates.  It is also not tied to when used either since one of the "better" lots has a first-AE report right at the start of January -- as do the "bad" lots.

The only thing all three of these vaccines have in common is that all three of them rely on the human body to produce the spike protein that is then attacked by the immune system and produces antibodies; none of them directly introduce the offending substance into the body.  The mechanism of induction is different between the J&J and Pfizer/Moderna formulations but all exhibit the same problem.  The differential shown in the data is wildly beyond reasonable explanation related to the cohort dosed and the reported person's average age for the full set of events (not just deaths) does not correlate with elevated risk in a given lot either so it is clearly not related to the age of the person jabbed (e.g. "certain lots all went to nursing homes since they were first.")  While the highest AE rate lots all have early use dates so do some of the low-AE rate lots so the attempt to explain the data away as "but the highest risk got it first" fails as well.

In other words the best-fit hypothesis is that causing the body to produce part of a pathogen when that part has pathological capacity (as we know is the case for the spike) cannot be controlled adequately through commercial manufacturing process at-scale.  This means that no vector-based, irrespective of how (e.g. viral vector or mRNA), not-directly-infused coronavirus jab will ever have an acceptable safety profile because some lots will be "hot" and harm crazy percentages of those they're given to with no way to know in advance.  The basic premise used here -- to have the body produce the agent the immune system identifies rather than directly introduce it where you can control the quantity, is a failure. 

The entire premise of calling something that does this a "vaccine" is bogus and in the context of a coronavirus this may never be able to be done safely.

Something is very wrong here folks and the people running VAERS either aren't looking on purpose, know damn well its happening and are saying nothing about it on purpose -- never mind segregating the data in such a fashion that casual perusal of their downloads won't find it -- or saw it immediately and suppressed reporting on purpose.

If these firms were not immune from civil and even criminal prosecution as a result of what Biden and Trump did the plaintiff's bar would have been crawling up assholes months ago.

This ought to be rammed up every politician's ass along with every single person at the CDC, NIH and FDA.  They know this is going on; it took me minutes to analyze and find this.

What the HELL is going on here?

THESE SHOTS MUST BE WITHDRAWN NOW until what has happened is fully explained and, if applicable, accountability is obtained for those injured or killed as a result.  If embargoing of reports is proved, and its entirely possible that is the case, everyone involved must go to prison now and the entire program must be permanently scrapped.

THERE IS NO REASONABLE EXPLANATION FOR THIS DATA THAT REDUCES TO RANDOM CHANCE.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)