The Market Ticker - Canceled
What 'They' Don't Want Published- Category [Covid-19]
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
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.

The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.


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.

2021-08-02 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 2955 references
[Comments enabled]  

I warned everyone.

Now even CNN is on it, although they (like SAGE) think we're smarter than nature -- and evolution.

They write that some variants that have emerged over the past few months "show a reduced susceptibility to vaccine-acquired immunity, though none appears to escape entirely."

But they caution that these variants emerged "before vaccination was widespread," and that "as vaccines become more widespread, the transmission advantage gained by a virus that can evade vaccine-acquired immunity will increase."

In a word: Duh.

I know I've been banging on this drum since Covid-19 started but it is no-less important today, especially in the context of holding people accountable for killing several hundred thousand Americans and the economic destruction they brought upon the nation.

To be sterilizing a vaccine must prevent infection.  Since you never get infected you never replicate the virus and thus do not shed it.  If you do not shed it the potential path of the viral life-cycle for that particular infection ends with you and thus you cannot pass on or cause a mutation. You are sterile against that disease; from the point of view of the virus you are a lifeless rock.  Among commonly-used sterilizing vaccines are MMR (measles, mumps and rubella), Varicella (chicken pox), OPV (oral polio) and others.  The only time that such a vaccine fails is when you do not build immunity (such as due to immune compromise.)  This is extremely rare and the protection from such vaccines tends to be either decades-long or lifetime.

A vaccine that is not sterilizing permits the virus to infect you and replicate and as a result you can infect others.  Technically it is not a vaccine at all (which by definition prevents infection); it is a prophylactic therapy.  Such a "vaccine" instead acts to reduce or eliminate symptomatic disease.  You don't know you're sick and you don't get sick.  You don't go to the hospital and you don't die.  Unfortunately since you don't know you're sick but are infected and the virus is both replicating in you and shedding you are more-likely to spread the infection to others.  All of the current Covid jabs are in this category and so is, for that matter IPV (injected polio vaccine -- the original Salk discovery.)

During the original vaccine trials in the summer and fall of 2020 they deliberately did not test any of the recipients for asymptomatic infections.  Only a person who developed a significant illness was tested.  This has continued post roll-out with the CDC specifying that a close contact of a known case who was vaccinated did not need to quarantine or be tested until and unless they became symptomatic.  They knew damn well, in other words, that the jabs were not sterilizing but did not want that data up for public debate because then those who have read history would be likely to make the connection to the present day and thus they did their level best to hide it.  That has now blown up in their face with it being conclusively known that jabbed people in fact not only get infected but spread the virus to others.

The problem with non-sterilizing vaccines is simply this: There is no safe means of mass-use of non-sterilizing vaccines so long as transmission within the community does or is likely to exist.

Ever.

There are no exceptions.

This was known to public health officials and virologists seventy years ago and is why the United States used both IPV (injected polio vaccine) and OPV (oral polio vaccine) in sequence for polio until the 1990s.  OPV produced sterilizing immunity but IPV did not.  OPV had a very small (but non-zero, about 1 in a million) risk of causing polio because it was a codon-deoptimized live virus which, on rare occasion, would mutate back to its virulent form in the human body.  So to mitigate that risk you got IPV first in the US (to prevent systemic infection; this was non-sterilizing), then OPV which is sterilizing -- that is, it prevents not only getting sick from polio but also replicating and shedding the virus, thus giving it to others along with preventing the promotion of mutations that WILL eventually escape the vaccine.

Had we done with polio what we're doing now with Covid -- IPV (non-sterilizing) use only with virus circulating in the United States -- it is very likely the virus would have mutated, escaped the vaccine and killed millions in America.  Every single so-called expert knows damn well why we didn't do that with polio and how dangerous it is to attempt it.  Indeed where polio still circulates but money is scarce they use OPV only (which is sterilizing) and accept the risk of the rare but possible active case it can cause for this exact reason.

Again: This is not a "new idea"; it was in fact the only rational path of action and known decades ago, forming the very basis of our polio vaccination strategy.  This combination strategy was necessary for polio but not for measles, for example, as the measles vaccine is sterilizing.

ONLY A STERILIZING VACCINE IS SAFE TO USE ON A MASS POPULATION BASIS WHEN A PARTICULAR PATHOGEN IS CIRCULATING IN THE ENVIRONMENT.

THIS IS NOT THEORY -- IT IS DECADES-OLD KNOWN MEDICAL FACT.

In addition natural infection with Covid-19 is sterilizing.  Being infected and recovering conserves the nasal and respiratory mucosal response which is where the virus enters the body.  Natural infection also conveys both "N" (nucleocapsid) and "S" (spike) antibody knowledge and T-cell recognition but the "N" knowledge is much stronger as coronaviruses have evolved to evade the immune system with the "S" portion through millions of years.  This is why they can infect you in the first place.  The "S" portion undergoes mutation at a quite-rapid rate while the "N" portion is conserved.  It was thus expected that prior infection would lead to durable (years to decades) of resistance and indeed that's exactly what we have found thus far.  Indeed in a small study it was found that this recognition extended to the bone marrow in a large percentage of cases and in those people is likely to confer decades-long if not lifetime protection.  This is not true for "S" induced immunity as it wanes rapidly and, far worse that is where the mutation is taking place and thus where escape risk lies.

It was acceptable to issue EUAs for potentially non-sterilizing jabs to be used only by very high-risk individuals -- such as those in nursing homes -- with the understanding that they will fail to provide anywhere close to complete protection and might, over time potentiate worse outcomes.  But with actual informed consent and on a limited, not population-wide basis, that was defensible.  This, of course, leaves aside the adverse event risk -- which we also know is much higher in these jabs, by a factor of 100x or more, than we have ever tolerated in any mass-use shot before.

It was ridiculously and grossly negligent entering into the territory of depraved indifference to mass-vaccinate the population with non-sterilizing jabs.  We knew very early on that eradicating Covid-19 was impossible; there are animal reservoirs, specifically felines (of all sorts), ferrets and likely others (now believed to include deer.)  We have never eradicated rabies and never will for this reason; as long as there are animal reservoirs you cannot eradicate a virus as it always has a host and a means of transmission outside of human control.

As such there was never, and will never be, a safe means to use non-sterilizing vaccines against this virus or any other coronavirus and the more jabs we deliver and attempt to compel the use of the worse the problem will get.

Eventually we are very likely to get a mutation that entirely evades the jabs.  That mutation will be caused by those who are jabbed since they are the only ones placing such mutational pressure on the virus.  An unvaccinated person who gets infected places no such mutational pressure on the virus where a vaccinated person not only does they provide the exact pathway that virologists use to intentionally select for more-transmissible, virile or both mutations -- serial passage through cells that does not kill the host.

What is potentially worse is that there is a developing body of evidence that those who previously had Covid and then get vaccinated may destroy their "N" protein recognition by doing so, ruining their previous nearly-perfect immunity.  That we did not specifically prove that this did not happen before giving these shots to anyone with prior infection is outrageous.  While the data on this is quite thin at present that there is a higher breakthrough rate in persons with prior infection than those who were infected but did not get vaccinated is what the data currently shows, which strongly implies that vaccination after infection actually screws you.

The people who did all of this did so intentionally either by willful blindness or worse, with actual knowledge -- and the so-called "public health" authorities who continue to push this instead of banning it are intentionally doing so as well.  Vander**** is just one example of this insanity but hardly alone -- Johns Hopkins, Harvard, Mayo, Cleveland -- they all know this is true, never mind the researchers at Ft. Detrick, the CDC and NIH.

Until and unless we prove a vaccine against Covid (or anything else that is circulating) is sterilizing it cannot be safely used on a mass-population basis.  That's the beginning and end of the discussion.  There are no exceptions, ever, period.  This was not even attempted to be demonstrated in the summer and fall 2020 Covid vaccine trials as the time period was too short to do so.  We now know, factually that in fact there are zero sterilizing and effective options among the vaccines in use -- whether here in the US or otherwise.

The only means to combat a pathogen absent sterilizing vaccination is to hit infections early and hard with whatever you have for the purpose of reducing viral load so as to produce durable, sterilizing immunity via infection.  If you reduce viral load you reduce both the risk of pathology seriously injuring or killing the infected person and also reduce the forward transmission rate, Rt, of said virus. 

Only sterilizing immunity cuts off mutation and exerting mutational pressure via non-sterilizing vaccines not only promotes mutation by removing the signal an infected person has to self-isolate and reduce transmission risk (since you don't feel ill) it nudges the virus toward codons that will escape the protection in whole or part.

In small groups of particularly high risk a non-sterilizing vaccine may be worth it but any use of one raises the risk of mutational escape and thus while attempting to protect that small group you may screw others.  Attempting to accurately determine who "deserves" to get protected while someone else gets screwed is a discussion that damn well ought to take place out in public as it is the public at large that is the recipient of the screwing if it occurs!

There remains a risk that drug resistance may arise which is why multi-drug regimes are important.  As an example HCQ+Ivermectin which was formally registered as a trial and then never actually run, is (among other options) one such potential approach.

When it comes to respiratory viruses as was the case with polio you need immunity via whatever source to take hold at the point of both entry and emission by an infected person.  This is why OPV worked on a sterilizing basis for polio where IPV did not.  IPV was injected; OPV was consumed.  As a result OPV produced mucosal immunity in the gut and thus prevented both colonization and forward transmission.  IPV, on the other hand, prevented symptomatic disease in the person immunized but did not express sufficiently in the gut mucosa to prevent infection, shedding and transmission.

THE SAME APPLIES HERE WITH THE COVID JABS AND FOR THIS REASON THEY ARE AND ALWAYS WILL BE DANGEROUS, PROMOTING MUTATION AND ULTIMATELY VIRAL ESCAPE.

If you get Covid and beat it since the point of entry is your respiratory mucosa you have strong and broad resistance focused there.  That's sterilizing in more than 9 out of 10 persons and far more-durable than jab-based immunity as well.  That is what the data tells us. 

It is wildly superior to a non-sterilizing vaccine because you are not only very unlikely to get the virus again you are also nearly-certain to be unable to infect anyone else if you do.  This and only this is what cuts off mutational pressure.

It's too late now; we're stuck with the stupid, particularly all the screaming harpies who went out and got jabbed despite being at very low risk of serious outcomes themselves, turning themselves into literal gain-of-function labs for the virus.  If you took the jab, in short, unless you were at very high risk and thus it was justified on a personal mitigation basis you are, in fact, part of the body of individuals that are placing evolutionary pressure on the virus to evolve and ultimately evade the protection and screw not just others but you as well.

Those who are claiming "well, I got jabbed, I got infected, but it would have been much worse if I didn't get jabbed" are the worst of the psychotics.  First, the majority of Covid-19 infections are asymptomatic according to the CDC itself.  Indeed they claim at least six people get infected for each detected infection.  You may well have moved yourself from "I sneezed" to "I got pretty damned sick" by taking the shot.  You don't know.  But worse is that by taking the jab and then getting infected anyway you have now not just become a potential mutational factory you are one of the people causing what will ultimately become viral escape and the screwing of yourself and others because by definition if you got sick after vaccination the virus got into your system, it has now proved whatever occurred in you evaded the protection you had and then was emitted back out where others can catch it from you after that evasion took place.

You were either the mutational factory or an intermediate host that screws the next person you share the love with!

Not only did your protection against fail but, much worse, it's possible that said screwing will be enhanced by whatever residual antibody titer you may have since binding antibodies, if present (and which you intentionally put into your system) will still be present.  Even more-seriously you put the spike protein and thus the antibody response not in your nose and throat but in your blood vessels and other organs where they can cause the exact disease progression that occurs when Covid-19 kills people.  If you get a "break though" infection I hope you have your d-Dimer levels immediately checked because if not you may be a walking heart attack or stroke somewhere in the not-so-distant future with no other warning as a direct result of intentionally loading your body full of "protection" in the wrong place.

This, and only this, is why I will not consent to such a jab under any circumstances until and unless there is hard science showing that a sterilizing option exists.  That one, assuming the risk profile is reasonable, is one I might consider.  Said jab today does not exist anywhere in the United States and I'm unaware of any scientific work showing that any of the current jabs are sterilizing irrespective of where they are manufactured and sold.

Without sterilizing immunization against this disease the only sane approach is to attempt to interdict the progress of disease at first suspicion and evidence of infection instead.

I am capable of reading both history and scientific papers, I know I'm right, the CDC, NIH, Vander****, Mayo, Cleveland and Johns Hopkins also knew for decades that I'm right and they have either all turned what formerly were scientific organizations into politically-driven soy-boy pieces of worthless and even harmful crap or, much worse, they're deliberately lying.

If you were among the conned the only remaining question is what are you going to do with and to those who conned you?

Stay tuned for the next exciting episode of "You're ****ed, fool."

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2021-07-31 10:13 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 1524 references
[Comments enabled]  

That's about all their scheme has left, which is why the screaming and threats now.

Note that I got jailed by Twatter for wishing that organizations mandating jabs go broke and starve when, in point of fact, they were advancing the very same thing toward their staffTake a drug or be fired, go broke and starve.

Why is this option for them about to expire?  They're about to get lynched and they know it.

In another dispiriting setback for the nation’s efforts to stamp out the coronavirus, scientists who studied a big COVID-19 outbreak in Massachusetts concluded that vaccinated people who got so-called breakthrough infections carried about the same amount of the coronavirus as those who did not get the shots.

The problem here is profound: The public was sold on these jabs as a solution; you will neither get seriously ill nor will you spread the virus to others if you get a "breakthrough", therefore if you take the jab you get your life back.

The problem with this premise is that the public should have never accepted it in the first place.

Why, you ask, when we have "mandates" to attend school for other vaccines -- MMR and Polio, to name two?

Have you ever been asked for evidence of up-to-date immunization for any disease at your job -- or to enter a pub, concert or sporting event?

Never.

I'm approaching 60 rotations around the flaming ball of death and never once have I been asked for that in my adult life.  I will point out that was I never asked for it in college either, and I was an adult when I matriculated and did it myself.  Both the community college I went to part-time in High School and the university I attended for a while (before telling them to go straight to Hell and quitting) never asked for a single bit of medical evidence, nor an exam, of any sort.  I never saw a nurse, doctor or other medical provider in either setting.

was asked for evidence when my daughter started kindergarten that her "childhood" series was done, but never again.  Not once.  Now is it possible that the school had some "back door" access?  Maybe.  But never was I specifically asked to provide it beyond original enrollment for kindergarten.  Never.  I also refused to provide her SSN to the school system as well since I did not trust their information security, so they had no "single access" key to use to dig it up either.

It would have been stupid, however, for me not to have her get those shots.  Why?  Because there I can (and did) look at the data and it was trivially obvious that (1) the protection from them was durable, lasting decades if not life-long, (2) the disease(s) in question were in fact truly dangerous to healthy people and (3) the risk of a bad outcome from the jabs were trivially small.

That makes the decision easy and you have to be somewhere off into crazyland to have a serious debate otherwise.  We can debate on the sequencing and timing, but not on a serious statistical level as to the rest.

I argued before the first jab went into the first arm that none of this was true for this specific jab.  There simply was no data to support the first point; three months is not enough time to determine durability and no amount of arm-waving can change that.  The disease, by that time, was proved to be of trivial to statistically zero risk when it comes to healthy individuals, especially young healthy individuals, and there are effective and immediate treatments you can choose to use if infected (despite the screaming of many.)  And third, the risk of adverse outcomes from the jabs was wildly higher, by several hundred times, that of other commonly used vaccines and this was with active interference in reporting the adverse effect rate.

Those who point to "flu shot mandates" in certain occupations are lying about their effectiveness too.  We know that the morbidity and mortality profile from influenza has not been materially altered with the widespread use of flu vaccines.  Yes, the CDC claims otherwise, but systemic review has repeatedly found confidence intervals that cross null.  Cherry-picking results when statistical significance is not demonstrated with a strong "p" value is fraud.

In other words the "mandates", which in other than health-care workers are all "soft" and always have been (recommendations rather than actual mandates) all stand on the basis that statistically-speaking the flu shot has a vanishingly small risk of doing harm; therefore you can argue that since it's almost never dangerous there's no argument against it.  That's very different, however, than making an argument for it.

Finally, the history of attempting coronavirus vaccination is that it never works.  We have tried before in both men and beast.  We've never succeeded.  Coronaviruses are notorious for both evading vaccination attempts and with their vaccine candidates being non-sterilizing, which in all viruses put evolutionary pressure on them and result in mutations that evade the protection.  The problem with viruses in this regard is that their replication is exponential; while mutational evasion of protection for bacteria with antibiotics typically takes years or even decades to occur because bacteria replicate in a binary fashion, that is 1 becomes 2, which becomes 4 and so on with viruses 1 becomes 1,000 and if that one winds up in recombination due to cross-infection with something else at the same time then while the odds of a productive mutation are no higher than they are with any other the outcome when you get a productive mutation is much more-likely to result in escape and transmission because the replication factor is so large.

We knew this nearly 70 years ago and it is why the polio vaccine in the US was actually two vaccines; IPV which is non-sterilizing followed by OPV which is sterilizing -- that is, which blocks actual transmission and not just symptomatic infection.

Viral evasion with polio would have been a disaster given the very high odds of paralysis or death resulting from said infection once you reached childhood or beyond.  Ironically it was our city dwelling and transition to attempts at sanitary waste disposal that led to polio becoming a serious problem in the first place.  Infections in infants very rarely lead to serious outcomes beyond a mild to moderate flu but sterilize the person infected.  However, infections in childhood and beyond frequently get into the central nervous system lead to paralysis or death.  As we started to literally get "**** out of the gutter" infection was delayed and thus morbidity and mortality become problematic.  Today both water and sewage supplies are sufficiently "safe" that even without vaccines widespread outbreaks are unlikely, but the IPV/OPV combination is very safe.  In third-world nations OPV is used because it is cheaper and sterilizing, where IPV is not sterilizing.

Now we are seeing the stupidity of what we did.  Note that while Delta is allegedly as contagious as Chicken Pox I am not concerned about going into a room full of people who might have it because I've already had it and thus are presumptively immune.  Likewise my daughter, who was immunized as a child once it became apparent that natural infection was not going to happen, has no reason to be concerned.

This is clearly not the case for those "vaccinated" with the Covid shots as the above article points out.

The White House and others are still clinging to the "we need more people to get jabbed" mantra despite the overwhelming evidence that it cannot work.  I remind you that if the CDC claim of Delta have an R0 of somewhere between 5 and 9 is accurate (which I don't believe by the way) then to suppress transmission you need somewhere between 80% and 89% of people to have actual effective protection against both illness AND TRANSMISSION -- that is, STERILIZING immunity -- to suppress the infection.

The data is that the jabs are not that effective even with 100% coverage which is impossible since some people cannot be vaccinated and even if eventually approved for children you can't get there from here.

Only infection confers sufficient protection, well into the 90% range, for sterilizing immunity.  Vaccination does not by the CDC's own data and claims.

Without being able to drive Rt below 1.0 you cannot cut the disease off.  It is not possible.  This is mathematics and is truth whether the government, Fauci, governors or mayors like it or not.

Further and of critical importance note that there is no way to cut off infections in skilled nursing facilities given the data on effectiveness from the CDC itself:

VE of mRNA vaccines for any infection (including asymptomatic) was 65%–75% in different locations and platforms during December 2020 – May 2021

Without getting to 90% even with 100% coverage you cannot suppress Rt below 1.0 and thus you cannot prevent outbreaks and forward transmission.

This, by the way, was suspected to start with because the trials did not enroll enough Seniors to know how badly age compromised their immune response.  Did the manufacturers deliberately under-enroll said highest risk people on purpose lest the data show that their jabs were unfit for purpose in that population since they were incapable of producing sufficient immune response even if mandated and at 100% coverage to protect a skilled nursing facility?

That is a question that nobody in the mainstream media or so-called "medical experts" will ask, but it's a damned good one considering how many Grandmothers we slaughtered by refusing to segregate the workers in such facilities in March of 2020.

Indeed that 65-75% was against original strains.  The "Beta" variant, which is less transmissible than Delta if you believe the CDC, showed that it was only 61% protected in LTCF by vaccination which is wildly insufficient to suppress Rt irrespective of any other protective measure and thus, on the data, the jabs are basically worthless to prevent spread and, as a result, only a personal protective measure of limited use even in such facilities where the need is greatest.

It's worse.  Their "98% of deaths are unvaccinated" is a knowing lie.  Again, from the above:

 

Again, this is not my data.  It is the CDC's data.

And since the CDC has now also admitted that aerosol transmission is real masks are not an answer either.

As I said back in the start of this thing: We either all have had this virus or are going to get it and only that process, natural infection, is going to eventually cut off this pandemic.  The more we attempt to tamper with that the worse it gets due to evolutionary pressure, with non-sterilizing actions being the worst of all as they promote mutations that will escape the measures taken.

Evolution is real and no amount of screaming and arm-waving will change it.

The only rational action is to attempt to interdict infections early and fortunately we have identified multiple agents that have shown at least some measure of effectiveness in doing so.  Even the WSJ now admits it -- and that the government has intentionally attacked doing so.

The screaming knob has been turned up to "10" for one reason and one reason only: The government and so-called "experts" all know that, on the data, they're about to lose their audience; trying to tell people who took the jabs that they just bought a subscription of indefinite duration that will never end is going to lead to a revolt.  They know this, and they also know that the odds of persuading someone who hasn't yet taken the jabs given that fact, which is now out there with Pfizer itself saying that these will be required on an indefinite forward basis are also about to drop to a statistical zero.

The government and so-called "experts" are all in a valley and staring at the "peasants" on the ridges surrounding them, knowing damn well what's on deck and that the simple passage of time -- and not much time either -- makes the outcome inevitable.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2021-07-22 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 5651 references
[Comments enabled]  

I hate it when I'm right.

This is about it when it comes to the jabs for me, since we're now at the point that you can pull a Hillary Clinton: "At this point, what difference does it make?"

For those who took it out of stupidity, coercion, to belong or whatever: Too bad, so sad.

To those who used their heads and deduced that between the lack of long-term longitudinal data (zero) and known, documented risks along with deliberate sandbagging by the our government and media of all sorts in reporting the bad effects that rapidly showed up, including deaths, they've made up their minds.  All we have left there is whether, if attempted to be coerced instead of cajoled, they will consider that attempted murder and destroy not only the person coercing them but everything that individual loves as well, living or not.

You can only die once and only be damned once too.  Once either happens its a very liberating thing; you now are simply evaluating whether you're going to let some SOB get away with it or whether he or she is going to Hell in front of you, even if only by a few minutes.

I am not linking source papers in this treatise, so don't ask -- go do the looking yourself this time.  I've done it for a year and a half and, frankly, you still let these ghouls mask your kids, demand you stay home and then con you into taking jabs they lied about, let them lie about "no effective treatments" and deliberately not make reasonable inquiry as regard adverse effects of the jabs despite there being plenty of scientific evidence published before they were rolled out.  I'm laying out facts here; the science is, at this point, old enough and visible enough that if you gave a crap there would have been a revolt months ago.

A real one, not some LARPers crap.  If 500,000 corpses aren't enough what is?

If you remember very early on we knew that ventilators didn't work.  In fact we knew before Trump's HHS issued their order that paid (and still pays; the Biden administration just extended the "emergency" authorizing it) hospitals nearly $40,000 to shove a tube down your throat.  Trump then upped the ante by ordering tens of thousands of them under the DPA, despite the data being on the table that they were worthless.  That was a deliberate act that was all about the money -- damn those who were killed.  This nation sat back and allowed that to happen, and still is allowing it 18 months later.

Not long after, when the first few dead were autopsied, we found out why: Covid-19, when it goes badly, is not just a viral, inflammatory disease.  It causes thrombosis (clotting) in various organs, most-particularly the lungs.  That's what kills you most of the time.

The "spike unit" that the jabs are all constructed around, it has developed, something known to the NIH and the pharmaceutical companies before Covid-19 was claimed to exist in January of 2020.  There is a transfer agreement from the NIH to a university dated prior to that time, and some evidence that the exact spike configuration found in Covid-19 was being discussed in scientific papers long before that.  How can you have a scientific discussion, write papers on and transfer technology related to something that isn't known to exist yet?  Fauci was grilled on this the other day by Congress, asked directly if the spike in Covid-19 was identical to that in said paper, and refused to answer with a yes or no.  He knows damn well what the answer is and if he lied that would be proved perjury and a criminal offense.  If he tells the truth then the etiology of Covid-19 is conclusively known to wildly pre-date the so-called "discovery" and now we must start asking all sorts of other questions; said questions degenerate very rapidly into criminal culpability on the part of many including a whole bunch of people right here in the US.  Fauci looked very nervous in that hearing -- exactly like a man who has been caught bull****ting since the start, there's a half-million bodies piled up as a result and his neck is itching.

When the jab trials started, in short, we knew that severe disease from Covid-19 was primarily a thrombotic event.  We also knew that roughly 80% of the population had decent if not excellent resistance and would get nothing more than a mild or moderate cold or flu from it.  That proof goes all the way back to Diamond Princess.  Hell, a couple reasonably well-known to me got hit by the 'Ro in the early months, both elderly and quite morbid.  He was dead in five days while she never even sneezed, a flat impossibility for two people who are married and sleeping with each other if everyone is susceptible as we were told.  We investigated and learned why that has repeatedly happened; the science was published in June, peer-reviewed by September and published in Nature -- long before the first jab went into the first arm.  These are facts.

We also knew, from decades of trying, that coronavirus vaccines had always failed in the past.

We deliberately did not look at the thrombotic profile of the trial participants in the vaccines; specifically, we did not pull d-Dimer and troponin tests (both cheap) on the participants before the jab, and then sequentially on intervals (e.g. 3 days, 1 week, 2 weeks) to detect whether we were in fact inducing damage similar to the disease.  The drugmakers did not look because quite-obviously they did not want to know; if that showed up in the trials in any sort of statistically relevant percentage of the enrollees it would have instantly shut down the trials and freaked out the thousands in said trials who put themselves at riskI remind you that in September of 2020 the first scientific paper was published indicating that the "Spike" was quite possibly the direct cause of the serious damage and virtually all Covid-19 deaths.  Several papers followed starting in December of 2020, prior to mass-distribution of the jabs, confirming that the spike was directly capable of causing pathology -- that is, severe damage -- without the rest of the virus being present at all.

Failing to halt the roll-out to prove that the vaccines, which all cause production of said spike in your body, would not cause the same effects was criminally insane and grossly negligent given the science at the time.  This was not an "accident" since the studies were published and known -- it was deliberate blindness undertaken in the interest of speed and money before human safety and indeed human life.

We also were told that the jabs produced a "robust" antibody response, which, on the data, is true.  What either wasn't looked at, or was known and intentionally not discussed is that the sequencing of IgA/IgM/IgG in a vaccinated person was wrong for someone who had no immune system knowledge prior to vaccination.  This is now out in the public, at least on a preliminary basis, and it shows that the jab adverse effects may in fact be a form of ADE!  If so that's extremely bad.  The original studies either developed this information and it was hidden or they deliberately did not look; what we do know is that it was not run down.

Now there's potentially worse evidence showing up that the jabs may be destroying existing coronavirus T-cell recognition.  That, if confirmed, is profound because natural infection preferentially builds "N" protein T-cell reactivity.  The spike on a coronavirus evades immune recognition; that's how you get infected in the first place.  That more-severe infections had higher IgG antibody titers to the spike would appear counter-intuitive (after all, you'd think the more-severe the infection the less your immune system was able to respond) but it makes sense once you realize what's going on with a severe infection; you are in fact having a thrombotic problem caused by the spike, and thus you get the higher titer.

That should have raised all sorts of eyebrows and alarms in that it strongly implies that all the vaccine formulations were at best backward and at worst directly harmful but, again, it didn't.

So what we have at this point appears to be the following:

  • The jabs are quite worthless in preventing either infection or transmission.  We knew that after Diamond Princess 80% of the population, approximately, was resistant before Covid showed up and either couldn't get infected at all or if they did had almost no ill effects.  There were multiple instances of couples where one person got a symptomatic case and the other did not get infected at all despite being quarantined together in a 10x10 room for a month.  That means if you have 10% of a vaccinated population that gets symptomatically infected when the base risk of symptomatic infection is 20% at best the jabs are 50% effective in preventing infection and transmission, and perhaps less than that.  So much for the "95%+" claims; that was always bull**** and now we have widely-diverse proof from all over the world that the jabs are non-sterilizing and thus effectively worthless in preventing infection and transmission of Covid.  The entire premise of "protecting others" by getting vaccinated against Covid-19 is now scientifically known to be complete and utter bull****.

  • There is now emerging evidence of another mutation against which the jabs are almost entirely worthless.  Expect the fear porn to get cranked on that soon even though for infected and recovered persons who are not vaccinated they remain almost entirely immune to that mutation just like all the others.  Even worse is that the data includes some people who recovered and then were stupid enough to take the jab anyway and it increased their risk of symptomatic disease over the other cohort which recovered and did not get vaccinated.  In other words they didn't get more protection by taking the shot after recovery they destroyed a large part of their existing protection, specifically, existing nucleocapsid recognition.  I have warned people repeatedly of this exact risk; there was never any scientific evidence that the jabs were useful if you had previously been infected and now we factually know they're harmful.  This is a very strong marker of what is called "OAS" ("Original Antigenic Sin") or ADE as described scientifically above as to mechanism.  It looks to be very real and accelerating as mutation continues.  The "vaccinated" symptomatic case line should be expected to cross over the "unvaccinated" line soon as mutation never stops and if it does all Hell will break loose as the shots will actually make symptomatic infection and thus transmission more likely compared against unvaccinated persons.

  • The jabs may continue to provide some protection against severe and fatal disease from Covid-19 specifically but the duration of that protection is unknown.  If you're at severe risk then on this basis they may be a good bargain.  I say may rather than "is" for the below reasons which, if they turn out to be true in your case means on balance you got ****ed more than protected, and now they're a bad deal for basically everyone.  We do not yet know the answers to the other questions but they are on the table and were deliberately not investigated before we jabbed 150 million Americans.  Some if not all of this was discoverable if anyone cared to look during the summer and fall 2020 trials, but nobody looked on purpose.

  • There is evidence that roughly half of all persons jabbed may show evidence of clotting disorders caused by the jabs.  Whether this is temporary or does permanent damage is not known.  It explains, however, the heart attacks, cardiomylitis, strokes and cognitive changes (e.g. microclotting in the brain) shortly after being jabbed.  I remind you that the "associated but not proved cause" death rate from these jabs is running roughly four hundred times on a per-million-persons jabbed that of the flu shot -- and climbing.  The bad news is that endothelial damage of this sort may well be permanent.  It also raises the very real risk of PAH if some of that damage is in the lungs; there is no non-invasive way to know and by the time you become symptomatic for that your heart has been critically damaged.  To be fair some small percentage of people naturally infected get the same sort of damage but to risk same from infection which is not certain is different than taking that risk on a certain basis from being jabbed.  This could have been quantified before the EUAs were granted as a trivial test would have disclosed the problem in the Phase 1 and 2 trials and was not done or explored.  Given that by summer of 2020 we knew how Covid killed people that failure is only reasonably characterized as intentional.

  • There is now evidence that the jabs destroy some part of your existing immune system T-cell recognition, replacing it with "spike" recognition.  The scope and impact of that is not yet known but the potential impact is horrifying.  The induced spike recognition is Covid-19 specific and, we now know, mutationally specific at least in part.  What is destroyed is not specific to either Covid or mutation and therefore what you destroyed was almost-certainly worth more than what you gained.  This looks very much like "OAS" and the bad news is that it may well impact across other coronaviruses such as OC43.  If that proves up then the increase in susceptibility to severe disease on balance and in whole from circulating viruses has been increased rather than decreased by getting jabbed.

All of this has come to light in about a year from the first trials of these vaccines.

I remind you that it usually takes 10 years or so to qualify a vaccine.  These sort of risks are why it takes 10 years and, let us not forget, coronavirus vaccines have been tried in the past and have universally failed, either due to adverse effects (including OAS and ADE) or they simply proved to be worthless over time with the virus evading them.  That was the history against which these jabs were developed and that we had the arrogance to believe we had magically overcome that which nature had previously thwarted without multi-year evidence may well wind up proving to be one of the most stupid undertakings ever in medicine and public health.

Yet even with this data now on the table the manufacturers are demanding "expedited" full approval reviews!

Oh, and don't start with "well, its knocking down the incidence of infections."  Is it really?

How is it that India has seen a 90% collapse in case rates with only 6% of their population vaccinated?

It clearly wasn't the vaccine over there, was it?  Gee, maybe its Farr's Law that caused that.  Just like the infection rate here in the US peaked and was falling before we had any meaningful vaccinated immunity.  That which happens before you do something cannot have been caused by the something.

This also bears on the current case rate.  Look at last summer; seasonality is real.

We'll see how bad #JabbersRemorse gets in the coming months, and whether the 150 million Americans who took the jab thus far decide they made a good decision or a critically bad one that winds up blowing up in their face -- and if the latter, what those who get screwed, which is about half the adult population at this point, decide to do about it when it comes to those who deliberately failed to investigate what we knew were serious risks that needed to be excluded.

Those who are true believers cannot be reached at this point since they've already committed to their course of action.  As a result I see no further point in writing on this in the general sense, and thus probably won't.

Right up until I wave the "Told You So" flag sometime around late fall, assuming the pattern holds.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2021-07-19 07:13 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 2278 references
[Comments enabled]  

Plenty of people have tried to discredit "hesitancy" with the Covid shots.

Calling people "uneducated hicks" and similar slurs is unlikely to lead anyone to believe those pushing the shots, of course.

Never mind the other lies.

Oh yes, lies.

The CDC famously testified before Congress that a mask was better than a vaccine in September of 2020.  Had that been true there would have been no winter surge; compliance rates were higher than vaccine herd immunity requirements by far in basically every part of the nation.  Yet the surge happened.  The claim was false and there was zero accountability for that lie despite being an act of perjury and the hundreds of thousands of corpses generated by it.

That wasn't the only false claim.  Psaki falsely claimed the other day the shots were "approved" by the FDA.  Nope.  They have EUAs, but not approvals.  Yes, the makers want approvals (obviously) but the President, through his spokesperson, directly lied.

How about Remdesivir?  Claimed to help.  Debunked in a very large trial ("RECOVERY"), peer-reviewed, found worthless.  Then another study that found it worse than worthless; this one found it actually doubled the time in-hospital and provided no survival benefit.  Gee, you don't think the hospitals would love that, do you?  No wonder it hasn't been pulled off the market by the FDA and Biden hasn't demanded it be thrown in the trash!  Never mind the $3,000 price tag.  In any honest world continuing to use a drug that doubled the time during which you were seriously ill and was worthless toward enhancing survival would get the drugmaker and everyone involved in using it thrown in prison for both felony assault and grand theft!

We've been told everyone is highly-susceptible to Covid.  False.  We knew this conclusively in March of 2020 after Diamond Princess.  We discovered why in June, scientifically, and it was peer reviewed a couple of months later and published in Nature.  80% of the population never was highly susceptible.  That's why the entire crew and passenger manifest on Diamond Princess didn't get deathly ill.  This doesn't mean you can't get it, any more than it means you can't get a coronavirus-caused cold if you had one before.  You can because the virus mutates and your immunity is not perfect.  But it does mean that only a small percentage of the population was ever highly-susceptible to severe disease.  The bad news is that there's no reasonable way to know if you're in the 20% or the 80% as a "starting point" for personal risk assessment since testing for is slow, expensive and nobody has been doing it on a mass basis -- nor will they.

Incidentally if you take the alleged "SEIR" models published all over the place which claimed 2 million corpses would occur in the US, all of which presume everyone is 100% susceptible with no pre-existing resistance and divide by five you get..... just about the number of people who got turned into corpses.  This is a very inconvenient mathematical fact because it proves all the mitigations were either worthless or harmful.  Isn't it interesting that elementary school arithmetic is studiously ignored?  Gee, I wonder why?

We've been told the shots were fully and extensively tested.  That's a lie.  There's a slide in the FDA slide deck that was "fast-skipped" through, on the screen for less than 2 seconds.  It lays forth a whole plethora of risks that are unknowns and the studies were underpowered on both time and people to catch them.  Again, we've been lied to.

It is a fact that a coronavirus has never been successfully vaccinated against in the past.  This is not singular in terms of viral family.  RSV has never been successfully vaccinated against and neither has HIV.  Infamously, fraud was committed in a study of the latter; gp41.  A prison sentence resulted from that.  This isn't the only failure; another trial blew up in 2020.  Do remember that Fauci has promised us an HIV vaccine for nearly 40 years.  None has been forthcoming; the either didn't work or caused serious problems.

These trials have taken years to detonate in people's faces.  Not all cause harm; some just prove worthless.

But some have caused harm and it has frequently taken years to find out.

This isn't just limited to vaccines.  As I pointed out Vioxx was given full approval.  It took five years beyond that point before the fact it was killing people in size was recognized and it was pulled from the market. 60,000 additional Americans had fatal heart attacks.

A drug is typically designed to have a relatively short half-life in the human body before it is broken down and eliminated.  A vaccine, on the other hand, is designed to produce a durable response that remains in the body for years, decades or a lifetime. The reason it takes 10 to 20 years to qualify a vaccine is that once you take it you can't un-take it and the risk is, in many cases, life-long. As such you need to follow trial subjects for a very long time, and in detail, to make sure you didn't screw them up.  In short mistakes are intolerable in the realm of vaccines, far more-so than with common drugs.

From the data we had prior to the rollout I pointed out that there were very serious concerns of not only failure due to viral mutation, making the shots basically worthless or even enhancing a future infection, but in addition there were markers of serious harm that were not being looked into.  The most-serious of these was the fact that the spike protein standing alone, along with the S1 subunit standing alone, were identified as likely to be harmful in humans -- yet all the vaccines being developed at the time caused your body to produce exactly that.  Rather than investigate this fully before proceeding it was glossed over.

As just one example show me the data in a small group for d-Dimer and troponins in vaccine recipients both before and after the shot.  That's a pair of markers for the very-specific risk of clotting disorders and cardiomylitis.  200 people, 100 controls and 100 get jabbed, d-Dimer and troponins pulled before and then on one-week intervals for two months.  Simple lab blood test; they run about $10 each at retail; the cost to run them between reagents and staff time is typically $5-6.  Where is it, given the reported cardiomylitis incidents and the allegedly "not connected" heart attacks and strokes?  This association could be moved into the "extremely unlikely to be caused" bin very easily and at low cost -- it hasn't been.  It is only reasonable to conclude that they're not looking on purpose; they know damn well that if you find a statistically-valid signal in a small group like that the game is over and the shots not only have to be pulled a whole lot of people's heads get served up on plates.

Given that do you believe the adverse effects are rare -- and less-likely than the virus is to seriously injure or kill you?  That depends on how morbid you are.  But if you're healthy then even on the data that is trivially available to the public the answer is conclusively no -- remember that if you get take the stab you're guaranteed the risk where you are not guaranteed to be infected.  I was personally exposed well over a dozen times during the last year and didn't get the 'Ro; I know I didn't get it, even with a low or no-symptom infection because I had antibody tests and checked every couple of months.  I did use nutritional prophylaxis -- and will continue to.  Why not, when it's zero risk and nearly zero cost?

There was also a mechanistic concern raised early on with potential protein "misfolding" and the possibility, however remote, of causing prion-type disease.  There's no good way to conclusively eliminate that risk other than moderate-sized samples of volunteers and a year or more of time with close study of all of them.  Finding volunteers with true and full disclosure could be problematic; who would volunteer if they knew one of the risks being excluded are Parkinson's, ALS and Alzheimer's, never mind CJD which is invariably fatal.  How strong is this evidence?  Not very at this point but any risk of this sort is unacceptable and the burden of proof is on the person proposing the mass-use therapy or prophylaxis, not the other way around.

Oh, on that note -- what changed in a part of Canada that suddenly, starting in March, a cluster of cases of this sort showed up?  We didn't change anything in how people live starting early this year both in the US and Canada, did we?  Is not the reasonable first-level presumption that this may well be the cause?

Now we have a new chorus in the media -- those who got the shot won't get seriously sick and die, the rest will.

That's bull**** and everyone with more than 2 firing neurons in their head knows it.

Never mind the evidence from other nations with very high vaccination rates -- and vertical Covid-19 case counts that occurred after vaccination and in many cases are still occurring.  The evidence is especially damning in Israel and England because both are socialist medical systems and thus have all the data on everyone.  But it's not confined to those two nations; Malta has taken a monster spike, and, sadly -- so has India shortly after they started mass-stabbing people.  Except..... notice how India disappeared out of the press?  Why?  Their case rate has collapsed by nearly 90% yet they have managed to vaccinate only 6% of their population!  Oops -- looks like jabs don't actually do anything to change the trajectory; there are other factors involved.

In short the evidence is piling up fast that the jabs don't work and, if that becomes evident here (and odds are it will; witness the "fully vaccinated" Texas delegation that just got hit) what little remains of the CDC's, FDA's and NIH's reputation, never mind all the local medical folks and screaming harpies in the media, will almost-certainly be binned and the dumpster into which they're deposited set on fire. 

If you believe the CDC then 33 million, roughly, Americans have been confirmed infected with Covid-19.  More to the point the CDC says that somewhere between 6 and 24 people (best guess 11) have had the virus for each reported case.  The median, of course, means everyone had it and we know that's false.  But even at the lower boundary 200 million Americans are presumed previously infected.  The data coming from both the NHS and Israel is that prior infection is 6-7 times as good at preventing a new infection as a vaccine; ergo, giving a vaccine to someone who has previously been infected is stupid, and that applies to the majority of people in the US whether they know they had the virus or not.

Then there's the fact that if you have no underlying illness, and we know what they are -- they're listed on the NYC Coroner's pages -- you are not at material risk at all.  The variation is astounding. 

What is the most-common morbidity?  Obesity.

You've had 16 months to get rid of the extra 100 lbs.  A 500 calorie deficit a day would do it, and that is entirely within anyone's capability.

If you didn't do it, who's fault and responsibility is that?

You've known damn well that this virus is dangerous if you've got these conditions and most of them occur due to personal choice.  Not all, to be sure, but most.  That's a fact.  It's also a fact that you can alleviate or even remove many of them given a year's time, which you had.

So what's the answer instead?

Take a potentially-dangerous jab instead of not eating pasta and bread so you can continue to be a fat-ass?

Well, time's up folks.  Yeah, it's summer.  But I see data that tells me that you've likely been had with these stabs.  You've also been told there's no means available to interdict an infection and mitigate it; that's a lie.  Virtually everyone, for example, that has died of this virus and was tested was severely Vitamin D deficient.  Does this mean not being so would have prevented it?  No.  But it's cheap, it's easy, and it has no real risk to resolve that via nothing more than a soft-gel with your morning coffee.

So why didn't we strongly recommend that when it had no potential for harm and plenty of potential for good?  There are other possibly-effective personal mitigations -- some nutritional and some in the pharmaceutical cabinet which we've all been told are "misinformation" despite dozens of scientific studies showing that they do, in fact, work.

Let's not kid ourselves.  If the media and "public health" people are telling the truth about Delta being as transmissible as claimed there is no way to reach a vaccination level that will suppress it.  There are actually people claiming it has an R0 equal or even greater than measles.  This is probably a lie, but the problem with lies such as this is that they preclude solutions you then put forward as you'll never get there.  In short we have what I pointed out originally: You either had Covid now or will get it, like it or not.  It is as certain as winter.

Further, if Delta arose it won't be the last one.  Worse, we now know, conclusively that these vaccines are not sterilizing, which means every vaccinated person is a viral mutation factory and won't know they have it in many cases.  We also know it does not block transmission, as was just demonstrated on the HMS Queen Elizabeth and in the Texas Delegation.

You cannot out-vaccinate a mutating virus; the reason is quite simple as the virus passes through people and mutates faster than you can modify vaccination formulas.  I warned early on that the use of non-sterilizing vaccines was known dangerous back when IPV came out for Polio and is why Sabin's OPV formula, which is sterilizing, was universally used in conjunction with IPV in the US until polio was no longer circulating here.  In fact we kept using OPV in the United States for another 20 years after the nation was declared polio-free.  Why?  Because not doing so -- using non-sterilizing IPV alone when polio was still circulating in the population -- was damned dangerous as it placed evolutionary pressure on the virus that could cause more disease rather than less and we knew it.

There are no sterilizing Covid-19 vaccines and no evidence we can develop one.  The manufacturers admitted their trials were not intended to prove that originally but now we have the data and zero of the shots produce sterilizing immunity.  That's scientific fact at this point.

Every single one of these jackasses at the CDC, NIH and FDA knew what they were doing was dangerous as Hell and did it anyway.  All of it was and remains intentional. What is likely to come from that stupidity, which you sat back and not only allowed but in many cases cheered on, you deserve.  You could have told every single one of the jackwads involved to stuff it and meant it but you didn't.  That was stupid and if you win a stupid prize for your acts of stupidity then so be it.

In short we have no choice but to drop the bull**** and accept that we have to live with Covid-19.  It will never go away.  It has become an endemic virus like the cold or flu viruses and will be with us forever.  In addition eradication was always doomed to fail because it has animal reservoirs, specifically at least cats and ferrets.

We have no choice in this matter.

Within a very short period of time if Delta is what they claim in terms of infectivity you're going to see a dramatic shift here as we have in Britain and Israel.  The data from Israel says natural infection is 6-7x as effective in preventing a future infection as the jab.  The virus will shortly run out of non-jabbed people to infect and the vax-vs-nonvax numbers showing up in the ER will shift dramatically.  The bad news is that those who got a "hidden" adverse effect, especially thrombosis of any sort, are at a very high risk of getting monkey-hammered if and when their immunity fails and they get infected anyway because that pre-existing damage will be synergistic with the virus effects.

Lockdowns, masks and mass-jabs will not solve the problem and in fact will make it worse due to the adverse effects.  For the healthy 18 year old who is screwed by cardiomylitis what do you tell him or her?  They were at an effective zero risk of death in the first place; the number harmed by the shots in that cohort exceeds the number saved.  Jabbing such people is an unconscionable evil, and this presumes the risks are confined to what we know which is almost certainly not the case, and that evasion by the virus never occurs, which is ridiculously improbable.

Good luck folks.

Oh, yeah, that flag I was talking about.

No, not the American one you burned when you didn't' revolt immediately as soon as they started with their lockdown bull**** which, I remind you, did nothing.

This one.  The one I hope I'm wrong with this time because if I'm right hundreds of thousands or even a few million Americans are going to be severely and permanently harmed or die, and many of them will be young and otherwise healthy.  It won't be Covid that gets them either -- it will be their own or their parent's stupidity.

smiley

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2021-07-16 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 1535 references
[Comments enabled]  

This is an interesting article in Medpage Today but, like so much about the Covid-19 outbreak and our response to it, misses the essential point.

Here in the U.S., there are also metrics that need to be met before we contemplate widespread dosing of hundreds of millions of people with booster shots. Specifically: show me the data! I have no doubt that a third mRNA shot will lead to higher neutralizing antibody titers. For that matter, I would guess six shots would outperform three on that metric. But the burden of evidence to accept boosters is not simply a change in antibody titer -- or even demonstration of improved titers for rare variants.

We must show that boosters improve clinical endpoints before we ask Americans to roll up their sleeves again. A large randomized trial of vaccinated individuals powered for reduction in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 or (better yet) severe COVID-19 is needed to justify the harms and inconvenience of boosters.

No.

Before we do anything further we must establish all of the following for the existing shots.

  • We must force the existing manufacturers and FDA to prove that giving someone a vaccine if they have pre-existing resistance has value to them in reducing serious or fatal outcomes, and by how much.  80% of the population had known resistance to Covid-19 before the virus got here.  The study establishing this was first published in the summer and then, peer-reviewed, was released in September before the first jab went into the first arm.  We knew this had to be true all the way back to Diamond Princess and I reported on that fact but we did not know why; June told us why, and September scientifically established both the fact and the reasons for it beyond reasonable challenge.  If the companies and FDA, whether through malice, speed or incompetence destroyed the ability to collect and analyze that data by polluting the data set it all must stop now because there is no way to easily detect if you're in that 80% and if, by January, you hadn't gotten seriously sick the odds are very high you are in that resistant and cannot become seriously ill with Covid-19 simply because the odds of you having being exposed by then are overwhelming.  The very first element of evidence for any medical intervention of any sort is that you can personally benefit from it.  This must be established with scientific certainty -- not that you get antibodies from the shot but that you actually get a material benefit in excess of where you were in terms of risk before you got jabbed.  It is wildly unethical, immoral and constitutes gross malpractice to advise anyone to take a medical treatment from which there is no reasonable possibility of benefit.  This was intentionally not done before we issued EUAs due to "Warp Speed" -- that is, speed (and profit) came before proof of benefit.

  • We must force both pharma and the regulators, along with our government at all levels to account for now-apparent, clear and outrageous failure of the existing shots along with the flat-out lies being told today as regards their efficacy.  Specifically, 100 out of 700 (1/7th) of the crew on the HMS Queen Elizabeth have become infected with Covid-19.  Every one of the crew was fully vaccinated and thus any attempt to blame this on "plague rats" that aren't vaccinated is obvious bull****.  I note that this rate of infection (14%) is within statistical spitting distance for population pre-existing resistance as documented in June of 2020 (80%) which strongly implies that the jabs are very close to worthless if not completely worthless in preventing both infection and transmission.  Through March of 2021 just 24 military personnel in the US have died allegedly from Covid out of nearly 170,000 cases, or a rate of approximately 0.014%; as such "serious and fatal" events on the HMS QE are unlikely even if nobody had been vaccinated.  In short the British Military jabbed everyone and put them at risk of severe or fatal adverse effects for zero benefit; the existing shots have no statistically-material benefit in preventing either infection or transmission of the virusIn addition we have known since the polio vaccine development that using non-sterilizing vaccines during an active outbreak causes mutational adaptation and escape and thus is dangerous.  It is for this reason that IPV (non-sterilizing) was followed by OPV (sterilizing) in the United States until well after there was no circulating polio in America.  There is no longer any scientific dispute in this regard and anyone claiming otherwise is a lying sack of crap.  All alleged "public health" justification for the existing shots has been conclusively and scientifically destroyed by this event and, in addition the shots have now been conclusively identified as placing the population at severe and direct risk of mutational escape.

  • We must identify and publish detailed, de-identified associated harms from the jabs and norm them to the population segment and existing morbidities as a whole.  Every health insurance company in the private sector and CMS (Medicare and Medicaid) have this data and, since the vaccine rollout is in fact not "free" if you're insured (it's billed to your insurance company) the firms know conclusively what events coincided with or were closely associated with these shots and how that compares with their last five years of data in the same population and morbidity segments.  In short the data across over 150 million Americans does exist to show what, if anything, is happening and at what rate.  This excess forms the denominator of harms from the shots.  This is not a function of nor can it be dismissed as "clinical judgment"; there are many reports of doctors refusing to make entries into VAERS or otherwise dodging that the jabs are related to new illnesses, hospitalizations and concerns.  I don't care what a doctor thinks; I care very much about who's getting paid to do what and how that has changed over the last eight months.  Until that data is released to the public under penalty of life in prison if falsified or otherwise misrepresented there must be no further activity with regards to these shots.  THE PEOPLE MUST HAVE THE DENOMINATOR -- THAT IS, THE ADVERSE EVENT NUMBER, AGAINST THE NUMBER OF VACCINATED PERSONS BOTH FOR DEATH AND ANY OTHER SERIOUS CONDITION INVOLVING A HOSPITAL ADMISSION OR TRIP TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM.

  • We must have full, free and open access to inexpensive and known safe drugs for early interdiction as an option.  This means Ivermectin, Budesonide and HCQ + Doxycycline or Zpak for starters.  All of these are drugs that are known to be quite safe, they are all off-patent and inexpensive and it must be the choice of the patient whether to use them if suspected or confirmed infected.  It is their ass, not the doctor's, and thus their choice.  Any doctor who refuses must lose their license.  Any medical group that promotes or enforces a policy adverse to this must be destroyed, literally and to an individual employee, director and officer, as they have and are killing people for money.  This is especially true when there are no approved treatments under full FDA protocol and Remdesivir, which is under EUA, has twice proved worthless in formal studies, a third now shows it causes harm and yet the EUA is still there and it is still being recommended and used.  Whether said drugs are inferior, equal or superior to a vaccine is immaterial.  It is the patient's decision.

  • We must have full debate on the apparent fact that out of Israel the data is that you are almost seven times more likely to be infected with Covid-19 if you got vaccinated as opposed to having recovered from the infection naturally.  This feeds directly into the point above; even if the above drugs have some effect but are less effective than a vaccine if the result of infection is seven times the immune resistance to a subsequent infection then the better option is to treat early and fast rather than vaccinate for all but the most-seriously morbid.  That's the math.

  • We must hold the media and government accountable for the repeated lie that "all the deaths (and hospitalizations) at this point are unvaccinated people."  No they're not.  Fact: Massachusetts accidentally told the truth; about 20% of the recent Covid deaths have been in vaccinated people.  This sort of repeated bull**** isn't an accident it's a flat-out lie promulgated for the explicit purpose of convincing you to do something dangerous.  This wasn't a mistake or accident, it's intentional with actual knowledge of falsity and thus must be treated as manslaughter.  We are well-past the point where the deceased's families and friends should insist on blood for these lies.

  • We must have the data on the spread of adverse events between the first and second jab for two-dose regimes and, before anyone proposes a third, prove, scientifically, that there is no expansion of risk ratios with subsequent jabs.  If that cannot be done then any such attempt must be denied until and unless it is.

  • We must norm the denominator of risk of the shots against the base risk you accept if you get infected.  Johns Hopkins has put up an online calculator for the latter.  How accurate it is I do not know but it makes clear that there's no argument for a non-morbid person of under 50 to take the vaccines as on the VAERS data we have now they are more-dangerous over a year's time than infection is, and we know VAERS, being voluntary, understates the true adverse event rate.  Remember, this calculator is from the same people who claim to be "the experts" and it documents that the school's own vaccine mandate is not only stupid it's criminally insane and constitutes proof of intentional attempted manslaughter on the part of the school in that the risk of the shots exceeds the risk of the virus for virtually every student on campus.

This last point, standing alone should result in an immediate revocation of the EUA for anyone under the age of 50 unless the person in question has one or more serious morbidities that grossly raise their risk.  To jab people with a profile of risk that exceeds that of getting the disease itself is outrageous.

The HMS Queen Elizabeth incident proves the shots are entirely ineffective and statistically worthless to prevent either infection or transmission of the virus.  That standing alone ought to be enough to immediately withdraw them for anyone who is not at materially-elevated risk of serious or fatal outcome from infection.  To continue to claim they're effective in the face of this scientific proof of failure is fraud and, to the extent people rely on it and die, it is manslaughter or even depraved indifference leading to death, that is Murder 2.

Further, we must demand the FDA, CDC, State Health Departments and media stop lying about the overall risk.  The CDC publishes hospitalization data in very close to real time (one week delayed.)  There is no surge.  We have repeatedly been told "wait 2 weeks" -- first with Florida, then Texas, and on and on.  In exactly zero cases has the projection come true.  Pandemic viruses always become endemic and continue to cause mild and moderate illness along with a few serious and fatal outcomes -- the key word being few.  It has happened with every single pandemic virus through history; exactly zero have wound up being a permanent source of mass-death.

"Cases" are meaningless, even if symptomatic.  We don't shut down society or scream at people over a symptomatic cold or flu.

What matters is serious disease and death.

I have repeatedly pointed out all the way back to the start of this thing that we must accept and live with this virus.  It is not leaving and due to having animal reservoirs we will never be rid of it.  That's a fact, like it or not.  That we have never successfully vaccinated against a coronavirus is also a fact, like it or not.  We are now finding that the virus is escaping the vaccines and the evolutionary pressure we are putting on it via them is exactly as I and a few others expected to happen based on history; we went down the wrong road.  We must stop with the panic porn, severely sanction those who continue it, and live with these facts and this virus whether we like it or not.  If, as appears to be the case, we, meaning multiple actors including those in the US, EU and China, released this thing into the wild through a series of negligent and outrageously stupid actions those who did so must be held to account but none of that changes the fact that Covid is with us, like it or not, for what is likely to be all of eternity from here forward.

We know how to interdict serious and fatal outcomes for this virus and we will continue to get better at it over time.  We give out Tamiflu for influenza and indeed even use on a prophylactic basis in some cases, especially in nursing homes.  Why aren't we doing the same thing with Ivermectin and Budesonide (Pulmicort) in this instance?  Tamiflu is widely known to "not do much" but we use it anyway.  Even if Ivermectin and Budesonide do little they carry such a low risk of adverse events that not using them is stupid.  I am not concerned with the adverse side effects of these drugs.

I am very concerned with the adverse side effects from the jabs as the data is being intentionally concealed and nobody ever tries to hide good news.  When something is being concealed there is only one reason for it -- you wouldn't like it and might even string someone up if you knew about it.

We're 18 months into Covid-19 and seven months into jabbing people; there is utterly no excuse for failing to present hard data which every health insurance company and CMS has.  The only reason not to present it is that the data makes clear that the jabs are causing significant harm and nobody wants to talk about the actual denominator and put it up against, for example the NY Coroner's data as to your relative risk of Covid-19 killing or seriously injuring you if you get infected.

Yet that is the only basis on which a decision to take a vaccine or not -- say much less any other medical treatment -- can possibly be made on an intelligent basis.  You would never take a cancer drug unless you had cancer since you can't benefit from it.  You don't take HIV PrEP unless you are engaged in activity that has an enhanced probability of contracting HIV because the drugs can cause harm and without a reasonable expectation of benefit taking the drug is stupid.  You don't take high blood pressure medicine unless you have high blood pressure for the same reason, even though said medicine is typically well-tolerated.

Likewise you should never take a Covid-19 vaccine unless you have an enhanced risk of being seriously harmed or killed by Covid; if you are in the 80% that we've known since March of 2020 has resistance or you already had it and thus are presumptively immune you're stupid to take said shot.  Doing stupid things sometimes kills or seriously injures you and this is no exception.  Since determining whether you're in that 80% is not possible via a cheap and easy test this decision must always be a function of personal choice informed, in the main, by your risk profile of a bad outcome from infection based on your personal medical status exactly as we do not try to force everyone to take HIV PrEP.  We instead strongly urge it for those who engage in anal sex, use injected street drugs or are sexually involved with someone who does either of those two things.  This is true even though HIV is contagious, you can get it without knowing you have it, you can spread it to others unknowingly, you could be raped and thus be exposed through other than consensual conduct and if you do get it there's no known way to get rid of it; you're stuck with it for life.

If the data is intentionally withheld that would support the Covid-19 jabs, and it is being intentionally withheld, then any reasonable person is forced to conclude that the reason it is withheld is that it does not support the action the government and medical "experts" are arguing you should take, universal acceptance of said jabs, because if it did support the case they'd run the data on the front page of the NY Times and Washington Compost daily instead of making TikTok videos with bubble-headed young music stars devoid of any data whatsoever, instead appealing to "feelzincluding the use of sexual attraction which I remind you is the same sort of hucksterism found in ads attempting to sell sports cars. boats and Peloton exercise bikes.

I strongly support vaccinations that are in turn supported by scientific, publicly-disclosed data without evidence of fraud or concealment.  There are myriad vaccinations where this is the case; measles, polio and even Chicken Pox.  The latter, I remind you, took twenty years to develop said scientific evidence to a sufficient level and authorize it for use in children, despite the known fact that if you got Chicken Pox not as a child, but as an adult you were 25x more likely to wind up in the hospital or die.

These "vaccinations" lack said scientific and publicly-disclosed data.  In fact there is evidence of intentional concealment and lying related to the said data, along with deliberate coercion to not report adverse events.  There is further evidence in the slide deck presented to the FDA prior to the EUA approvals that these adverse effects were known risks and investigation to determine the scope and scale of said risks (e.g. close monitoring via blood work in the study participants) was not undertaken.  Since the risks are now documented (via the "fraction of a second" slide since uncovered during said presentation) to have been known this refusal to investigate was deliberate.

In addition the reason it takes so long to qualify a vaccine is that only with an extended period of time do you learn whether actual protection against infection and transmission occurs.  The presence of antibodies is not sufficient and neither is very small absolute risk changes; the former has zero scientific proof of efficacy and the latter has no statistical power; to otherwise state is fraud.

Now we are learning that not only are the adverse effects real evidence is emerging that as with every other attempt at vaccinating against a coronavirus transmission is not interrupted nor is infection, meaning that all you have left is potential personal reduction of serious or fatal outcome risk.  For people without significant morbidity factors it appears, now that we have solid data emerging on same, that the absolute risk reduction compared with the adverse effect risk is profoundly unsound on a statistical and medical basis for  both healthy young people and healthy adults.

"Strong urgings" without facts that the government and private industry both have at this point and are refusing to disclose must be met with a stern "NO."

If said "strong urging" is attempted to be turned into a mandate via any form of coercion whatsoever, including employment or educational sanction or disability that attempt must be met with whatever amount of pre-emptive force is necessary to stop it, as at that point we've gone from attempting to convince people to do a dangerous thing by intentionally refusing to disclose the evidence what is proposed is dangerous to actual attempted manslaughter or worse and that, my friends, is just cause for whatever must be undertaken to put a stop to not only the demanded action but those attempting to enforce it.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)