Covid-19 -- A White Paper - To @RealDonaldTrump and @CDC
The Market Ticker - Cancelled - What 'They' Don't Want Published
Login or register to improve your experience
Main Navigation
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Sarah's Blog
Full-Text Search & Archives
Leverage, the book
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.


Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility; author(s) may have positions in any firm or security discussed here, and have no duty to disclose same.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must be complete (NOT a "pitch"), include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. Pitch emails missing the above will be silently deleted. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2020-12-02 15:48 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 1475 references Ignore this thread
Covid-19 -- A White Paper - To @RealDonaldTrump and @CDC *
[Comments enabled]
Category thumbnail

Come and get it!

Note: This is a PDF with hyperlink footnotes; you need PDF reader software to be able to view it.  The preview is of course worthless since the blog code sees each page as an overlaying "layer".  Click the image to get the actual PDF file.

Note: Latest revision is 12/22/2020; if you have read the paper before this date grab it again.
Go to responses (registration required to post)

Comments on Covid-19 -- A White Paper - To @RealDonaldTrump and @CDC
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Page 1 of 5  First12345Last
Asimov 150k posts, incept 2007-08-26
2020-12-02 16:35:57

Is that available to anybody with the URL, regardless of membership here?

It's justifiably immoral to deal morally with an immoral entity.

Festina lente.
Rporth 126 posts, incept 2016-09-28
2020-12-02 16:36:05

Holy Cow.... I need to print and review this - I've just skimmed so far...
It appears to be some pretty decent work!
Thanks TG
Asimov 150k posts, incept 2007-08-26
2020-12-02 16:36:13

We have an alleged 5,121 cases, or 50,000 true infections

Even though you state just above there 10:1, maybe you should clarify where 50k true ones come from in this statement.

It's justifiably immoral to deal morally with an immoral entity.

Festina lente.
Toddmeister 163 posts, incept 2009-08-10
2020-12-02 16:36:36

Typo in middle of page 11:
"I shall deal with these of these in turn."
Tickerguy 202k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2020-12-02 16:37:06

Fixing that now -- thanks.

@Asimov -- The Ticker page, yes. The DOCUMENT, not by direct outside link; you have to hit it from this page.

"Perhaps you can keep things together and advance playing DIE games.
Or perhaps the truth is that white men w/IQs >= 115 or so built all of it and without us it will collapse."
Jadedamber 125 posts, incept 2019-07-30
2020-12-02 16:57:20

It looks like a good read, as usual, Mr. Tickerguy. Thank you for the link. Will read as thoroughly as possible!
Erroldo 691 posts, incept 2013-09-12
2020-12-02 17:16:33

A nice summary of the whole debacle since Jan'20.
I will be sending it to others for reading, if they care to read.
Freakydutch 3 posts, incept 2009-08-24
2020-12-02 17:17:52

Good stuff. Thank you for all your work putting this together. On a slightly different note regarding asymptomatic transmission not occurring what do you make of this research letter documenting a case of it?
Tickerguy 202k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2020-12-02 17:19:08

Really? Cite something out of China with no controls and no means of verification? "Documented"?

Don't think so, especially considering it is now a documented fact that they knew they had a problem in December, and said nothing.

"Perhaps you can keep things together and advance playing DIE games.
Or perhaps the truth is that white men w/IQs >= 115 or so built all of it and without us it will collapse."

Asimov 150k posts, incept 2007-08-26
2020-12-02 17:46:31

Since you're not on there, I reposted it here:

You said something about parler being written by a bunch of monkeys and hitting sources over and over or something? Is that the reason for the market ticker error there?

It's justifiably immoral to deal morally with an immoral entity.

Festina lente.
Tickerguy 202k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2020-12-02 17:47:26


They "re-fetch" the header information EVERY TIME someone looks at their timeline; the software here sees that as an attack since the same IP address is repetitively hammering the **** out of the server for the same document, and when it detects it it drops a permanent IP ban on the source address.

Since I have no idea what IP address they're coming from I can't go look for and remove it either, not that it would do me any good since it would just go right back as soon as they do it again.

What they're doing is complete horse**** -- the correct approach is to grab it once when the post is composed and store it on THEIR END. If they want to check it once every hour or every day to see if it's changed and update it, that's fine. But to hammer the source on every VIEW is obscenely abusive and were I able to send a W88 back down the wire to them I would. The load they are putting on other people by doing this ought to get them blackballed by content providers EVERYWHERE.

The way the AKCS code is written one of the very first things it does is check that table which is VERY fast; if it finds a blackball entry you get bounced immediately before it even attempts to figure out what you want.

I gave some contemplation a while ago to modifying the code to instead stick a blackhole entry in the IP forwarding tables. That would reflect the abuser's bull**** back on THEM in that it would hang the process on their end for 30 seconds or so for each attempt until their SYN times out; if their code handles that sort of thing poorly it could conceivably cause the abuser's machine to hang or become unusably slow. I decided against it, but it's not very hard to do; I'd just have to write a small wrapper to handle it in a secure fashion with some guards in the code against it doing bad things because access to that table is privileged.

"Perhaps you can keep things together and advance playing DIE games.
Or perhaps the truth is that white men w/IQs >= 115 or so built all of it and without us it will collapse."

Dontezuma 46 posts, incept 2009-09-10
2020-12-02 18:04:27

@tickerguy - Given that the tests are 90+% false positives, and they're counting cases based on that, that should affect the math of getting from 5200 to 50,000 in assumed infections. I'd wager that the 5200 cases are more like 1500, unless they're counting cases based on symptoms.
Tickerguy 202k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2020-12-02 18:06:54

@Dontezuma -- that's the exact point. We have ~137 hospitalizations so I'm willing to bet there are no more than 1,500 ACUTAL positives, which means the ACTUAL prevalence is 15,000 people who have had it, and with 30,000 pre-existing immune we're below suppression -- thus the spikes.

The problem with this is that it means we ****ED 3,500 people, quarantining them for 10 days to 2 weeks depriving them of income and the ability do what they wish without any legal justification or cause.

If even a small number of those 3,500 figure that out the lawsuits will RUIN everyone involved, especially when they conclude (justly so) that this is a 42 USC 1983 and Racketeering suit, which the plaintiff's bar will shove so far up the government's ass they'll taste it.

"Perhaps you can keep things together and advance playing DIE games.
Or perhaps the truth is that white men w/IQs >= 115 or so built all of it and without us it will collapse."
Maurevel 1k posts, incept 2009-06-14
2020-12-02 19:17:19

Thanks a lot for putting this together.
Reformedhippy 4k posts, incept 2020-07-01
2020-12-02 19:18:41

Is there a potential "gain of function" tag in this Covid that may be targeting a certain segment of the population over others? For instance, a disproportionate number of Latin countries top the deaths per million list. Also, locally, there are whole families that are being taken out. Is there something specific the virus may be latching onto? Example: In a nearby town, four siblings die in less than a month.
Tickerguy 202k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2020-12-02 19:28:32

@Reformedhippy - I sort of doubt it, but it's possible.

More-likely is what there's reasonably strong evidence for -- Vitamin D deficiency.

There is POSSIBLY a genetic link but there's no reasonably-sound scientific evidence for it as of yet. One other thing that was noted is that there's an association with flu vaccine use last year and getting hammered, but the problem is that's an association at best and thus weak on the science side, and you got to be careful there as those who took that vaccine likely have other confounding things in common (e.g. less time outside, other morbidities, etc.)

I've been looking for some sort of reasonably-defensible evidence of this type of difference all the way back to the start of the outbreak and have yet to find it. Plenty of people think blood type may be involved, but I'm not so sure and there is certainly not enough to even qualify that as association evidence. What I do know is that during the 1918 pandemic a number of bloodlines were literally extinguished, but whether that was due to socio-economic factors or otherwise nobody knows for sure. Then again that bug DID get 500,000 people in the US - which would be equivalent to 1.5 million today.

Ironically most of them died from bacterial pneumonia, the risk of which is greatly enhanced by...... wearing a mask, which was ordered in many areas and had no discernable effect on infection rates over the entire course of the disease. As with mask orders this time many places that thought they beat the virus with masks turned out to be VERY wrong a bit further down the road. Of course at that time there were no antibiotics so if you got hammered with a bacterial infection you were usually ****ed and done; there was very little that could be done medically to help. Your body either fought it off or it did not.

"Perhaps you can keep things together and advance playing DIE games.
Or perhaps the truth is that white men w/IQs >= 115 or so built all of it and without us it will collapse."

Pahick67 58 posts, incept 2018-12-30
2020-12-02 20:29:28

@Tickerguy Very well written piece. Thank you. Also do you think businesses mandating vaccines could be sued if a person would die from it?
Tickerguy 202k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2020-12-02 20:31:48

Absolutely @Pahick67; it is very, very difficult to go after the government for THAT but a private business has exactly ZERO shield if they were to mandate it, you got the shot and got ****ed by it.

Actually, getting Guillain-Barre might be even worse if it paralyzed you. Dead has a defined dollar amount. Permanently disabled can be a defendant's worst nightmare as your visage will forever be plastered in their potential customer's eyes.

"Perhaps you can keep things together and advance playing DIE games.
Or perhaps the truth is that white men w/IQs >= 115 or so built all of it and without us it will collapse."
Zappafan 6k posts, incept 2007-11-30
2020-12-02 21:29:51

Wow, quite a tour de force. I particularly enjoyed the way you dismantled the vaccine hype. Could you elaborate a bit on this part:

Covid-19 vaccine trials generate hypothesis rather than conclusions yet this has
never been mentioned by either the media

I've been hammering people about these trials as being not conclusive and I could use some more ammo.
Eleua 23k posts, incept 2007-07-05
2020-12-02 21:30:01

I've only looked at this for a few minutes, and plan on taking a deeper dive at a later time.

USSC has held that you can be exempt from an employer mandating the vaccine if you have a sincerely held religious belief to the contrary and/or there is a reasonable accommodation that would allow you to operate without it.

I dont have the case in front of me, but there is something out there. I don't know if it has been modernized, but the quick glance was that the USSC held that being a vegan was a sincere religious belief, and the chicken aspect of it got you around it.

It will be a tough boulder to push up hill, since the default position will be that everyone needs the shot, unless you are a vegan, Muzzie, part of the Ruling Class, etc. Whites, males, Christians, gun owners, etc will have to get the shot, or be denied the right to buy, sell, or hold employment, unless you have your paperwork. Damned Trump voters need to be rounded up and eliminated, or so some editors of liberal magazines have recently opined.

Thought I read about that in the Bible somewhere...toward the back of the book...I remember Vincent Price reading aloud from it for an Iron Maiden album...hmmm...better hit the Sunday school again.

Diversity + proximity = WAR

-The facts do not care about your narrative. The "GREAT NOTICING" continues apace.
Zappafan 6k posts, incept 2007-11-30
2020-12-02 21:55:03

Karl, To explain a bit, the first part says:

Random Controlled Trial (RCT) these produce strong to moderate evidence in both
directions. A random controlled trial distributes two or more groups of people or events
controlled for various expected confounding factors and gives one or more of the groups
different test agents or events, while keeping the other free from same. Assuming the trial is
large enough and control of outside events good enough, these provide excellent scientific evidence

Yes we know this is how the phase 3 trials worked for the main vaccine candidates in the West (Pfizer, Moderna, etc.) Are you saying that they generated evidence to support a hypothesis, but nothing further?

I'm not even getting into the part about how the "95% effective" statement only covers endpoints where infection with symptoms was present, not serious disease.

I keep telling people that these results have not been peer-reviewed either.
Tickerguy 202k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2020-12-02 21:54:37

@Zappafan - That's directly from the study linked in the footnotes, and yes -- it's simply a function of the power of the study, which is a function of events, time and participants -- and how you define the endpoint.

In short you can define an endpoint that is supposed to show a given thing but if you get that endpoint you can only infer that anything ELSE will happen from what you showed; that is, you can only generate a HYPOTHESIS, not a conclusion.

The issue is that with a disease that causes relatively little severe disease, and often presents as an asymptomatic infection it is not possible to get statistical significance on actual infections and outcomes, especially on sub-groups, from a short trial and thus you cannot obtain anything more than a hypothesis.

Further, since the endpoint is overall infections in controls, at which point we stop and call it good, there is no effective control because there are too many confounders and worse, when it comes to subgroups in the population, such as (for example) elderly people where we REALLY care if works, we simply don't get the data to KNOW if it does. There's not enough of them and not enough time to generate statistical significance.

A vaccine that prevents people from getting a clinically-detected flu but does not stop someone from being killed by a severe case is functionally worthless. Nobody cares if you run a fever or cough for a day or two yet distinguishing between that and severe or fatal cases simply cannot happen given these trials because there is not enough data generated. So the best you can do is generate a hypothesis, that if the reduction in "cases" is X% then they should distribute ratably across outcomes -- but that is nothing more than a hypothesis.

Consider this -- a healthy young person has an alleged risk of 3/100,000 of death from infection of Covid-19. So you would need to have roughly 33,000 healthy people to get infected before ONE person would be expected to die, statistically-speaking. So when you have a study that terminates when 150 people get infected as regards severe and fatal outcomes you learned exactly nothing. All you got is a hypothesis, but no evidence beyond that because there are simply not enough events to generate even one expected death. It will be years before there are enough events to generate enough statistical power to know if the vaccine works to prevent those events and there is no possible way to short-circuit that process.

It took 20 years to license the chicken pox vaccine in the US because, as with Covid-19, severe and fatal cases are VERY RARE, especially among kids. In fact among kids chicken pox is about as serious and fatal as Covid-19 (roughly 3/100,000 death rate.) It simply took THAT LONG to get the data to know that severe and fatal cases - as opposed to nuisances - were prevented.

(There is also a serious problem with the data from one of these candidates, in that it appears there was co-mingling of results. This is the one where the "half-dose" thing happened -- I've seen some very disturbing data from that which strongly implies that they have literally nothing that would survive any sort of peer review at all at this point.)

"Perhaps you can keep things together and advance playing DIE games.
Or perhaps the truth is that white men w/IQs >= 115 or so built all of it and without us it will collapse."

Zappafan 6k posts, incept 2007-11-30
2020-12-02 22:11:39

Thanks, I made it thru most of the footnoted paper but with these things you have to read slowly and with focus.

Of course there also were zero children or pregnant women in the trials, so we know absolutely nothing about those sub-groups. You listen to the idiots in the press and you would think that they're going to be giving this to everyone. It will probably be several years before they can even get enough data to tell if there are serious long term side effects.

So tell me then how some airline (or movie theater) is going to have a leg to stand on if they try and mandate the vaccine? No kids allowed on planes? Oh you want to exempt them? Fine, now you just screwed the pregnant lady in row 23, seat D. You're gonna have to kick her ass off the plane too!
Tickerguy 202k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2020-12-02 22:23:59

@Zappafan - That's the other problem; if you read the rest of the paper the data we have at this point says that if you are healthy irrespective of age your risk of death is 3/100,000! The NY Coroners data is utterly STUNNING in its implication in that it proves, across a large sample of dead people, that age is not a dependent variable in terms of risk; rather, it is associated with the conditions that increase risk.

The CDC and other "public health" people have outright LIED about where the risk lines break down. It is not age at all -- AGE IS STATISTICALLY IRRELEVANT. Rather it is specific medical conditions that cause the escalation of risk and MANY of them are due to lifestyle decisions!

In other words if you don't have any of those conditions irrespective of age then there is no reason for you give a **** about this virus at all as you're MUCH more likely to be killed by any one of a number of other things you have utterly no control over.

Further since everyone who has one or more of those conditions knows it this also means they can take precautions themselves while the rest of us should tell everyone in the government to go **** a goat since for the rest of us this thing is less dangerous than the flu, and not by a little either.

That's something NOBODY is talking about and yet the statistical power is in the data at this point to make that statement and back it up with the math. What this means is that since we've been testing these vaccines on healthy people in order for it to be "worth it" it has to have a lower risk of damage on a permanent basis than the virus does in that population. It will take years to KNOW if this is the case unless, God Forbid, we give the damn thing to 10 million healthy people and suddenly a couple of thousands of them get some sort of serious "**** you" out of it.

So now you got two problems -- we are assuming that the risk of bad side effects is eventually distributed too. That's just a flat-out assumption; there's no evidence. And at the same time we hypothesize that since we gave it to healthy young adults and it appears to prevent infections it will also work equally well in people who are NOT healthy, which we have no evidence for AT ALL.

"Perhaps you can keep things together and advance playing DIE games.
Or perhaps the truth is that white men w/IQs >= 115 or so built all of it and without us it will collapse."
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Page 1 of 5  First12345Last