The Market Ticker - Cancelled
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.

2022-01-25 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 781 references
[Comments enabled]  

I hate being right.

Sometimes.

But this time you are going to hate it if I'm right, especially if you got jabbed.

I predicted when the jabfest started that evasion was extremely likely and VEI (Vaccine Enhanced Infection), whether through OAS, ADE or some related mechanism was so likely that I expected it; not "more likely than not", but "I wouldn't take the bet the other way even with a decent odds multiplier."

By the time Delta came through it looked like we had a lot of fading of effectiveness -- enough that for non-high risk people the math no longer worked, because the jabs were not protective enough to counterbalance the risk from the side effects -- but not VEI.

But there's a reason we usually need five years to qualify a jab, and this sort of risk is part of it.  Viral mutation is a constant thing and it takes time to know whether the pattern suggests trouble.  If it does you stop during the trials until you sort it out, because if you don't you screw a huge number of people, likely permanently, instead of a few volunteers.

Unfortunately Omicron showed up.  It has a mutational pattern that does not make sense as a natural event, which instantly raised my eyebrows as its closest ancestors were seen nearly two years prior.  But the real problem wasn't there -- it was that the data almost immediately showed negative effectiveness in those who were jabbed.  That is being jabbed made it more likely that you'd get infected rather than less.

The original data was quite thin but it quickly got fleshed out -- in Denmark and Israel, to name two places to start.  It has since shown the same pattern everywhere else that has high jab rates.

If you think about that for a minute it has a number of implications and all of them are nasty.  VEI in any form can lead to wildly-elevated rates of severe disease and death because any mechanism that improves infectivity likely also increases the viral load (and damage) before the immune system can clear the infection.  Thus if you find negative efficiency you ****ed up and must instantly stop any inoculation process as it is a near certainty you are doing severe harm.

This same negative impact has not been seen in people who were previously infected; while Omicron does indeed appear to get through prior infection immunity in some people prior infection remains partially protective against Omicron and significantly attenuates the virus, unlike vaccination.  In other words if you had Covid and did not get jabbed while Omicron may well "get" you you're likely to not even recognize it as anything different than a cold.

Fortunately Omicron is much less replication-competent in the lungs on a base level, while still being very replication competent in the nose and other parts of the upper respiratory tract and, on the data, it appears to be much more-transmissible than prior variants as well, which is why it has out-competed Delta within the space of weeks.  Specifically it appears that the wild variation seen with earlier strains, where most people weren't contagious at all while a few were wildly so disappeared: If you get Omicron you're contagious for the first couple of days to the point that anyone susceptible who gets near you is likely to get hit.  It's not measles -- but it thinks it is.

This elimination of the crazy, random variation in communicability on a per-person basis also exposed the insanity of "masks" as a countermeasure.  They never worked but you might think they did because the person who got Covid was one of the "very low spread" folks, thus they didn't give it to you!  Voila -- masks work.  Uh, actually they don't and now since Omicron doesn't behave that way you wear one, the other person wears one and you get hosed anyway.  Thanks for playing; told you they were worthless among the general public.  The response?  Let's send everyone N95s!  Yeah, they work great (NOT!) in the general public who doesn't understand the rules and couldn't follow them anyway given the various constraints, but heh, we gotta do something rather than simply admit we lied, masks were useless, virus will virus and now the virus has proved it to everyone just like influenza did in 1918.

There is some dispute over exactly how much less harm Omicron does in the lungs but its not a small difference -- it's a huge one and that's very, very good news.  This is probably the luckiest draw (assuming it wasn't engineered this way, and it might have been) we've had to date with this virus because if it hadn't been anyone vaccinated would have been at wildly increased risk of death irrespective of whether they had Covid before or not.

In other words we dodged a serious bullet here that could have easily led to a Philippine Dengue-style disaster -- except instead of a few kids getting killed we could have easily lost five percent or more of all vaccinees -- that's at least ten million Americans alone and unlike the "blame the virus for everything" fest the first two years these really would have all been virus-caused and wildly enhanced by our jabfest.

Unfortunately with the wild potentiation of infectiveness by the jabs and that Omicron has outcompeted Delta based on what we know to date means there the balance of harms is not currently known.  We may well take a very significant hit death-wise from this anyway among vaccinees simply because of wildly potentiating the virus in those people and if the negative effectiveness multiplier overwhelms the less-damaging-to-lungs aspect it's going to whack people in size and those who got jabbed are statistically at higher rather than lower risk -- and quite-possibly by a lot.

At present we do not know.

There is pre-existing evidence (all the way back to the fall, before Omicron) that being jabbed may inhibit induction of natural immunity if you get the virus after you take the shots.  Whether that's temporary or permanent we have no idea but it showed up in the data, as I pointed out, both here and in the UK by the summer months.  That should have instantly stopped the jab-fest but of course that would have required people admitting they advocated for (and even tried to mandate or did mandate) a stupid thing.  Instead, in the US, they stopped reporting the data and hid what was becoming obvious.  If the negative efficacy of the jabs against Omicron includes the same suppression of natural immunity that appears to be in the data for other strains, which we will not know for several months, those who got jabbed will be able to get continually reinfected with Omicron until the cumulative damage results in a severe or fatal case.  If it happens this will be insanely ugly and effectively prevent Omicron from fading off with the circular firing squad repetitive victims being almost-exclusively comprised of vaccinees.

At present we do not know and we can't know if that suppression is in play with Omicron for several more months.

Its also possible the next mutational twist may restore some of the missing Omicron virulence in the lungs.  I will note that this is not likely simply on the basic principles of entropy but our continued jabbing is putting a massive finger on the scale.  If it happens and, as Israel has shown the 3rd jab is nearly worthless against Omicron then even a tiny increase in lung virulence could easily kill a million or more vaccinated Americans and again, given the negative effectiveness the most-seriously screwed would be those who took the jabs.

AT PRESENT WE DO NOT KNOW AND WE CANNOT PREDICT EVOLUTIONARY PATHS NOR, IT APPEARS, ARE WE VERY GOOD AT STOPPING INTENTIONAL HUMAN ACTIONS EITHER.

Note that the Federal Government has just pulled the EUAs for monoclonals.  These are drugs that are, effectively, the "final product in the body" of being jabbed.  They know damn well what the risk is -- not just that the drugs are worthless against Omicron but could end up boosting the infection, making it worse.  Since these drugs are, basically, the product of the jabs the obvious risk that the same thing has or will happen with the jabs either with Omicron or what may evolve from it should be clear to anyone with an IQ greater than their shoe size.

At present we do not know.

Its possible that the negative effectiveness of the jabs will wear off.  That would be excellent but it will only wear off if people stop taking jabs.  If you keep trying to play for another month or two of "protection" that is followed by six months of enhanced infectivity you are eventually going to lose on that dice roll and get screwed.  Of course all the pharma CEOs (who's primary purpose in life is to make money) plus the government agencies (who's primary purpose in life at this point is to keep you from hanging them for conning you into doing something stupid) are telling you to play for that extra couple of months.

At present we do not know and there is no way to find out for an extended period of time.

Anyone who tells you they know any, say much less all of these things and thus can compute this out and make a recommendation based on a reasoned evaluation is lying.  The first of these conditions is bad enough and over time we will learn more about it, but by then Omicron will likely be gone, having infected damn near everyone.

Omicron and the vaccine negative effectiveness against it, which is now in full evidence, is a warning.  A warning that included a wildly lucky draw from the evolutionary deck in that materially less virulence in the lungs doesn't provide much in the way of evolutionary advantage, never mind that the curious absence of visible precursors in public data, even though everyone has been looking for the last two years, strong suggests that it wasn't an evolutionary accident at all in the first place.

Whether the risk bucket for those who can get screwed will shrink to any material degree with time is not known.  Only time with no more jabs will answer that question.  Since coronaviruses have animal reservoirs the odds of this virus entirely disappearing approach zero.

We can't go back and un-jab those who did it.  If what happened turns out to be a permanent enhancement in infective risk and the short straw comes up in evolution there's nothing anyone can do about it now.  This could easily prove, as I warned might happen, to be the most-stupid public-health set of actions and worst public-health disaster in human history.

You have to be insane to deliberately expand that risk pool given the warning signal we have on the table today until all of the above questions can be answered with certainty, and there is just no way to do that other than time which we damn well should have taken in the first place.

smiley

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2022-01-19 21:59 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 2183 references
[Comments enabled]  

During the Delta wave of Covid....

Prior infection, vaccines provide best protection from COVID

In that order.

And it wasn't close either.

By early October, compared with unvaccinated people who didn’t have a prior infection, case rates were:

— 6-fold lower in California and 4.5-fold lower in New York in those who were vaccinated but not previously infected.

29-fold lower in California and 15-fold lower in New York in those who had been infected but never vaccinated.

— 32.5-fold lower in California and 20-fold lower in New York in those who had been infected and vaccinated.

So being infected and recovered was anywhere from three to nearly five times as protective as being "vaccinated."

There was no statistically-significant improvement if "vaccinated" after infection.

I put "vaccinated" in quotes because from this data it is clear that these are not vaccines at all; they do not induce immunity, sterilizing or otherwise, at anything approaching that which occurs if you get infected.  By any rational set of analytical standards they are defective products and grossly unfit for purpose.

What's even worse for the jabs is that when Delta hit there were no jabs more than six months old, approximately, yet there were many infections that occurred more than a year prior.  Therefore being infected was not only three to five times as protective it was protective over a much longer period as well!

So if you were infected and then talked into or even coerced or forced into taking the jabs you were conned.  You got statistically nothing out of that jab of value but you took risk -- maybe very serious risk and permanent harm.

This isn't my claim or data this is the CDC's data.

Time for lawsuits against every entity that deprived someone of a liberty or privilege, or who successfully coerced you and then you suffered a side effect from the jab.  Not only has there never been a viral disease, ever, for which being jabbed was defensible on the premise of immunity after being infected in the past this one is no different.  As for all of those who coerced, urged and now, since it is now proved they lied as they had no scientific basis whatsoever for their claims it is my sincere hope that every one of them are brought to justice in this life and I am certain they will be in the next.

Again this is not my data, these are not my claims, these are official study results from the CDC itself who has now documented that in fact prior infection is anywhere from three to nearly five times as protective as vaccination. 

The comparison isn't even close and I hope the landsharks chew off all of the responsible parties asses.  They all have it coming and deserve every bit of evil served upon them.

You think the UK's actions were taken not knowing this was about to land?  Like hell it wasn't.

Having had Covid-19 and recovered from it I will never take your damned shots and no, I won't sit for or tolerate any bull**** restrictions either.  You're lying now, you were always lying, the CDC now admits THEY and YOU were both lying the entire time and I will be more than happy to **** UP YOUR LIFE and take every single ****ing thing you have, reduce you to penury and worse if you try any of that crap on me.

**** AROUND AND FIND OUT YOU LYING SACKS OF ****.

And no, I will NEVER forgive OR forget what every single person and organization that pushed this bull**** has done, nor excuse the harm they have inflicted across the board, particularly those who at the same time they pushed this crap denied therapeutics which, if and when they succeed as they did in my individual case, lead to said more-durable and superior immunity.

EVER.

smiley

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2021-09-24 05:03 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 12722 references
[Comments enabled]  

... in a not-so-tiny nation called Spain, a nursing home had a nasty virus get into it.

It was March of 2020.  The nasty virus was called Covid-19.  And this nursing home, like so many others all over the world, was full of elderly, morbid people.  The mean age of residents was 85 and 48% were over 80 years old.  It was a killing field, like so many others.....

Within three months 100% of the residents had caught the virus.  Not presumed to have -- proved to have.

How do we know this?  Because almost every one of them seroconverted.  All but three out of 84 of them, to be precise.

Think about that last sentence for a second.

Almost every one of them seroconverted.

How's that possible?  Many of them died, right?  You can't seroconvert if you're dead.

No.  Not only did nearly none die none went to the hospital either because they rapidly figured out how to stop the virus from killing people -- and did exactly that.

You would have thought this would have been all over the news.  In point of fact not one mention of it was made.  Further, not one write-up was made in medical journals either until January of 2021, which I missed.  My bad -- out of the several hundred medical journal pieces, I missed this one.  It was brought to my attention on my forum and my jaw immediately hit the floor.

The jab train must continue, you see.  So must the ventilator train.  So must the money train, the mask train and the rest of the BS we have endured for the last 18+ months.

So must the slaughter for money, the fear, and the lies.

So what did these few nursing homes do that nobody has done since and nobody reported out at the time?

1. Early start of treatment, regardless of the severity of patient symptoms.
  - Antihistamines every 12 h: dexchlorpheniramine 2 mg, cetirizine 10 mg or loratadine 10 mg.

2. Patients with mild or recent-onset symptoms (cough, fever, general malaise, anosmia, polymyalgia):   
   - Azithromycin 500 mg orally every 24 h for 3 days if there is rapid improvement, and for 6 days if the duration of symptoms is prolonged.
   - If pain or fever, acetaminophen 650 mg/6–8 h.
   - Nasal washing and gargling with sodium bicarbonate water (half a glass of warm water with half a teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate).

3. If symptoms of severity (dyspnea, breathing difficulty, mild or moderate chest pain, with SpO2 <80%, heart rate >100 beats per minute at any time of the process):
   - Antihistamines + Azithromycin (see mild treatment management)
   - Levofloxacin 500 mg/12 h, up to 14 days of antibiotic treatment from diagnosis.
   - Mepifilin solution, 50 mg/8 h as a bronchodilator, until subjective improvement. Patients with previous lung disease (asthma or COPD) used their usual bronchodilators.
   - If the patient experienced increased breathing difficulty, prednisone 1 mg/kg/day divided into two doses until clinical improvement, and then it was slowly tapered down.
 
4. Prophylactic treatment for close contacts, including all asymptomatic residents:
  - Antihistamines at the same dose as symptomatic patients.

Ed 9/25 11:30 - Reformatted the cut section; it got mangled by the forum.  Still not what I'd like in terms of formatting, but at least it's readable now... and one typo corrected.

Look at that top line.

Cetrizine is otherwise known as Zyrtec.  Loratadine is otherwise known as Claritin.  Dexchlorpheniramine is not often-used in the US anymore, but it used to be.  The other two core drugs were Azithromycin and Levofloxacin, both common antibiotics with the first being the infamous "Zpak" from the HCQ+Zinc+Zpak combination that a fraudulent study was used to discredit.

Both of the first two antihistamines are available over the counter in most nations including the United States.  The dosing they used is twice that on the label.  The two antibiotics are both available anywhere for little money.

Before they started treating people three residents died.  The entire group of them had the common maladies of old age -- hypertension, diabetes, COPD, cardiovascular disease.  Most were using a huge range of existing drugs for their conditions (5 or more.)  

As soon as they started treating people the following happened:

All of our patients evolved satisfactorily and were recovered at the beginning of June. No adverse effects were recorded in any patient and no one required hospital admission. At the end of June, 100% of the residents and almost half of the workers had positive serology for COVID-19, most of them with past infection.

Not one adverse event occurred among these residents and staff and no hospitalizations were necessary either.

In pooled data 28% of the residents in similar nursing homes over the same time period died.  In these two, once they started treating with cheap drugs, leading with those available over the counter in the US, ZERO -- I repeat -- ZERO had a bad reaction to the protocol, ZERO died and ZERO were admitted to a hospital for treatment.

ZERO.

It was one hundred percent effective.

Yes, it's a small sample.  Go do the statistical math on the CI for that size sample and results if you insist.

According to the mechanisms of action described, these drugs would act synergistically in the early stages of the disease, which is why we consider it essential to start the treatment as soon as possible. Once the virus has colonized the respiratory system, the effectiveness is probably more limited, and hence the failure of these treatments in more advanced stages of the disease, when hospital admission is necessary. In our experience, early double antibiotics were effective to control the process in cases with moderate symptoms.

Nobody cared.

Nobody reported on this.

Nobody duplicated it either.

I didn't even realize this study existed; had I known of it guess what I would have added to my protocol when I got Covid-19 the first week of August of this year, since it happens to be in my medicine cabinet already for seasonal allergies?  Uh huh.  Two 60ct bottles of generic Claritin equivalent costs about $12 at WalMart.

Folks, think about this long and hard: In the worst-case scenario for those who this virus should have killed -- it killed nobody.  It should be killing statistically nobody today -- right here, right now.  How to prevent it from doing so was discovered in March and April of 2020 and intentionally ignored worldwide.

It is still being ignored today.

With these numbers there is no reason to fear a Covid-19 infection.  There is no reason to take a vaccine.  There was never a reason to develop a vaccine, especially the ones we have today; infection that does not produce severe disease is sterilizing and thus wildly superior to vaccinated immunity which is now proved to be failing worldwide.  There is no reason to wear a mask.

Every single one of these residents seroconverted and became immune with mild or moderate symptoms consistent with seasonal colds and flus and not one of them was put into the hospital or killed. The treatment is so ******ned cheap and available there's no excuse to not use it instantly on suspicion of infection and prophylactically among everyone else in your household at first sign of trouble.

You think the entire load of BS around HCQ and Ivermectin is bad?  This is a thousand times worse.

Those who died did not do so due to a "novel coronavirus"; we knew how to treat that infection successfully for pennies in March and April of 2020.  Yes, in the first month or two people died because we did not know.

Beyond April of 2020 people died because we let the medical system and governments murder them for profit and they're still doing it today.  We, the people, have allowed this.  We have failed and refused to rise up and hold accountable, personally, every single hospital, doctor, so-called "hero" nurse and every single politician across the globe.  They willfully and intentionally slaughtered millions on a global basis.

The answer to the problem -- to Covid-19 -- was known in March and April of 2020 and yet not published until January of this year, and even then not one single bit of media attention nor a single mention from Fauci, the CDC, the NIH or FDA has been made, all in the interest of Moderna and Pfizer's stock prices and the power-mad jackasses on an international basis -- at the cost of your loved ones' lives.

That wasn't an accident and it still isn't one.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2021-08-21 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 3272 references
[Comments enabled]  

Now the CDC wants everyone to line up for a third round of clot-shot lottery.

Note carefully: The Israel data says this will fail and kill lots of people.

Aran’s message for the United States and other wealthier nations considering boosters is stark: “Do not think that the boosters are the solution.”

That's right.  They're not.

Delta may be more-transmissible but if you're immune it does not matter how transmissible a virus is.  You either can or cannot be infected.  It's binary.  If you're immune then you're immune.  If you're not then you're not.  If you have had Chicken Pox (I have) you'd look at anyone telling you to take a chicken pox shot as if they had six heads because such a suggestion is flat-out bat****-crazy-level insanity.

The idea that somehow Delta "can" break through immunity because it is more transmissible is flat-out scientific fraud and everyone who says that and has any knowledge of viruses and immunity knows it.  They're lying, on purpose, and every one of them deserves to be locked up in GITMO as a ****ing terrorist and waterboarded to within an inch of their lives.

The reason Delta is "breaking through" is either due to OAS or the fact that the vaccines never did work worth a crap in the first place to prevent you from getting infected.  Their "efficacy" was a lie but whether its due to mutational reality or the fact that we claimed "effectiveness" simply due to herd effects with the existing circulating strains at the time does not matter.

My suspicion is that there is a blend of both going on here and there is science to back that up; the mutational pattern that we have seen and the science behind it says that evasion is happening.  The "wild coding" used originally and to this day for the jabs is long-extinct; there is basically zero of that circulating anymore in the population.  It has all been subsumed by ordinary mutational process and we had every reason to believe this would happen when Covid-19 first showed up because it has happened with every other coronavirus we have studied through history -- including the closest analog SARS-1 which mutated itself out of transmission and being a threat to people.

This is much like what happens with the flu shot every year: They have to guess which specific flu strains and mutations will show up in advance.  They're never right.  Their match varies in effectiveness but is basically never 100%.  Get it (sort of) right, you get decent protection.  Get it wrong you get little or nothing.

Except: Every coronavirus in history has mutated at a high rate in the spike domain.  All of them.  We knew this and we ALSO knew before the first shot went into the first arm the strain against which the vaccines were developed -- all of them -- was extinct in the wild, having been out-competed by said mutations.

We lied about the effectiveness by taking advantage of a peak in infections for the circulating strains last winter that was already in the past.  It was a knowing, intentional lie used to get 150+ million Americans to do something with waning toward worthless effectiveness but with 100x higher risk than the ordinary flu shot or, for that matter, any other vaccine in history.

The match has continued to degrade; it is biologically impossible to win that "arms race" as the virus will continue to change, and attempting to jab people with repeat inoculations as the match gets worse and worse over time simply adds to the risk of serious adverse events including clotting, strokes and heart damage.   Note that despite knowing this there has been no change made to the formulations.  What are you going to do -- throw all the existing doses and pipeline for them in the trash every time a new mutation shows up?

What we did was fight a war that cannot be won by the means employed and any honest person knows it.  The entire ****ing government and medical apparatus knew this, lied about it and continues to lie today.  All of them.

They KNOW they're full of ****.

Rather than accept this fact and focus our attention on determining the most-effective ways to interdict infections early in people with a goal of allowing the infection to course its way through the population while not killing the victims or sending them to the hospital we instead took an utterly insane approach that focused on the idea that we could prevent people from getting the virus at all.  Whether that was masks (worthless since the virus is a tiny fraction of the size of the filter media and goes right through it), lockdowns (pointless; all you do is delay the inevitable) and now vaccines we keep being beaten around the head and shoulders by the virus which follows the laws of physics and undergoes natural mutation whether we like it or not.

I believed I might have had Covid-19 in January of 2020, even though I tested negative for antibodies several months later.  As it turns out my later antibody testing (negative) was correct and not a defective test; whatever I had in January of 2020 it was not Covid-19.

But now having had Covid-19 (almost-certainly Delta too) and knowing damn well it was Covid-19, and surviving it, it is a clearly-distinct infection that I could not possibly mistake for anything else.  That I was infected with Covid-19 is known scientific fact as I was previously IgG negative as of a couple months ago but now, following recovery from said suspected infection, am IgG positive.

Having had the infection and now having found IgG antibodies by test I am now known robustly immune to any and all variants; the immunity built from natural infection is conserved across the various epitopes of the virus in all cases because the "N" portion of the virus, which has to remain more-or-less intact for it to be able to be a virus, forms the backbone and bulk of the immune response built following natural infection.

I am not afraid of Covid-19 at any level any longer.  I am the exact person you want to employ to work in a hospital or nursing home full of very high-risk persons for severe Covid-19 because I am sterile to the virus; I can neither get it or give it to anyone.  Of course we would have to negotiate terms; money is not, I suspect, among the ones hospitals and nursing homes would have trouble with.

This is not true for any of the vaccines, it was a critical error in what we did and it is why we are now seeing escape.  It is not breakthrough folks, it is escape due to mismatch between the coded antibodies and circulating virus and it will both continue and accelerate as the match inexorably continues to degrade between what circulates and the original "wild type" out of Wuhan, which is what's coded in ALL the jabs and which is long extinct.  What's worse is that if OAS or ADE really come out to play on top of it then if you have not been naturally infected and have been jabbed you are in for a world of **** if you get challenged by the virus in the wild.  Even very, very small enhancement percentages from ADE-style reactions can completely overwhelm any sort of treatment possibility at all.

We do not yet know if this is happening as we are deliberately not autopsying and investigating cases where someone was vaccinated, got infected anyway and then rapidly crashed going from being moderately ill to in an ICU or dead within 72 hours.  There are multiple reports of this happening already.  If this was someone who had a defective immune response then that's very unfortunate but it does happen.  We had damned well better prove that, however, and we're not going the pathology work to do so.  If it turns out that said person did in fact build a proper immune response then these cases are either OAS or ADE-enhanced disease and while this outcome is clearly not universal in those who got jabbed if it is happening even once in a while we had better figure it out right ****ing now or there is going to be a pile of dead bodies this fall and winter and it will be the direct responsibility of those who advocated for and in fact are trying to, in many cases, FORCE mass-jabbing of the population that caused it.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2021-08-02 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 42674 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)