Isn't that interesting.... the media admits it discredited and even banned people for talking about the virus coming out of the Wuhan lab?
"Yes, I think a lot of people have egg on their face," Karl said. "This was an idea that was first put forward by Mike Pompeo, secretary of state, Donald Trump, and look some things may be true even if Donald Trump said them. Because Trump was saying so much else, that was just out of control, and because he was, you know, making a frankly racist appeal talking about Kung Flu, and the China virus, he said flatly this came from that lab, and it was widely dismissed ... but now serious people are saying it needs a serious inquiry."
So facts don't matter if the wrong person speaks them?
What other averred facts has the media -- and big tech -- done the same thing with?
Masks? Lockdowns? PCR Testing? Asymptomatic transmission? Droplets .vs. Aerosols?
All of these have had hard science published showing that what the media has run were bull**** at the time they did so, and not one retraction has come. Even now when the data is conclusive; lockdown .vs. not and the curves in both places, the CDC itself documenting less than a 2% transmission difference by their claims for masks across eight viral replication cycles, which means the efficiency of the policy in preventing someone from getting infected was less than 0.3% (1.003 ^ 8), we knew RSV and other respiratory viruses were nearly all in aerosols five years ago and we also know on the base physics that unless you have a 100% seal aerosols go right around the edges of whatever you're wearing -- and because when you exhale you pressurize the interior volume source control cannot work as the seal is broken with each exhale. Never mind the meatpacking plant in Germany where everyone was masked and the masks did nothing -- reported out in formal study in the early summer of 2020!
How about early treatment and intervention?
All have shown some efficacy. Remdesivir, on the other hand, only usable in a hospital, has shown none in a very large trial (Solidarity.)
Whadda 'ya mean there are no studies? What do you call those three links above and why were they not offered to patients every single time? Why doesn't the person who has a disease get to choose?
There is highly-credible evidence behind early treatment which began in the first few months of the outbreak; Florida near Palm Beach with Ivermectin, Michigan's Henry Ford Hospital System with HCQ, a doctor in Texas with Budesonide, a confirmatory study on that run out of Australia and then very large populations that have used them such as India and Mexico City with several nations and provinces within nations telling the ghouls to stuff it over the last few months when the other path, relying on vaccines and expensive on-patent drugs like Remdesivir in the hospitals, did not stop the infections and death.
You want to know why Twitter doesn't like people talking about those things?
Ever look at their ads on their mobile app? Half of them are from pharma companies advocating this or that brand new, expensive drug. Gee, no problem there, right?
Watch TV? How many pharma ads do you see there?
Ever see an ad for an off-patent, cheap drug for something?
You never have and never will -- there's no money in it.
Why to know why there's a sub-area under https://market-ticker.org/nad, on which this article appears? Because Google's Adsense throws a piss-fit whenever I publish an article on Covid-19 that isn't cheerleading for everything they want, so in order keep from having to completely suppress those articles off the "top page" of The Market Ticker I set up this second area where there is no advertising at all. Isn't that rather Orwellian of the so-called "media"?
What if the truth is that these new-fangled things we're doing now had exactly nothing to do with the virus abating in the US? You do know that's a reasonable hypothesis, right? After all the vaccines never went into enough arms to do anything until the case rate had peaked.
It takes 2 weeks after the second dose before you're "protected." The peak was on January 8th. The first doses went into arms on December 14th, so zero people had received two doses by the 8th of January and had it become effective, and more-damning was the beginning of actual vaccination in real people on a national basis was right around that time -- yet no vaccine is effective instantly.
The peak here in this county for cases was in fact on the 14th of December. A literal zero persons had been vaccinated before that day; the case rate was collapsing by the end of the month, down by more than 50% over those two weeks, yet not a single person was immune by virtue of vaccination on January 1st 2021.
What's the truth about epidemics like this -- respiratory viruses -- all through history?
Never has one been trouble in any material size for more than a handful of years - like two, occasionally with a "gap" in the middle.
All are characterized by two waves or less, the second frequently more-severe. 1889-92, which looks to have been HCoV-OC43 (unproved), also a coronavirus, was two waves. 1918 was two waves. The 1957 pandemic was two waves, both roughly equally severe. 2009 H1N1 was two waves but, contrary to expectations, was mild.
There is no evidence -- zero -- for any of the ten for which reasonably-contemporary records exist showing any deviation from this pattern. Every single one for which such records exist has burned itself out within two years and/or two phases or waves.
Repeat: Covid-19 was over in the United States in December before the first stab went into the first arm. The first wave was in early 2020 and the second came in the winter which peaked before anyone could be vaccinated.
If this time it's different it will indeed be the first time it's different. That, by the way, would be very strong evidence we made it different, not nature. Like, oh, perhaps by using leaky vaccines in the middle of an outbreak?
Oh by the way in 2009 they stopped the swine flu vaccines when a few people died. Literally a few -- under 50. That was enough to slam the door on them in the US. Europe used a different formulation and there is some evidence it caused narcolepsy. There's scientific debate about causation, but what's not debatable is that narcolepsy, if you get hit by it, is permanent. It can be managed but not cured.
The full stories with regard to the benefits and harms of these vaccines have yet to play out. They may have benefited some older, morbid people. They also might not have; those who could be harmed may have already died and the rest got the virus and had no symptoms or were resistant and would not be harmed. While we will likely never know on the benefits side we will find out over the next few years if we've condemned some number of people to death or permanent disability by using lightly-tested technology on a population-wide basis that we had no scientific evidence was safe and in fact there are plenty of questions on safety. It's possible we will get lucky and other than the immediate adverse effects, many of which are being reported including some that can be permanent or kill you immediately nothing further will materialize.
But we might also kill 1% or more of those who took the shots over the next handful of years just as we did with Vioxx, which took five years to recognize was killing people and pull from the market. If that sort of thing happens this time as a result of accelerating testing time lines a couple of million more Americans will die and only God knows how many will be disabled for life as you cannot un-take a shot. Whatever you're going to get and whatever will come is yours -- for good or bad -- once that sleeve is rolled up.
There's always a debate to be had on risks and benefits of anything but the evidence is that the shots came too late to help because there was no way to get them developed and in arms -- which would have had to happen in September or October 2020 at the latest to make a material difference in the outcome. We got the winter surge anyway and in the interim and through the winter we killed a crap-ton of people by not just ignoring but deliberately denouncing therapeutics which we had at least some reason to believe would work.
No risk is acceptable if there is no benefit.
We didn't look at the alternatives -- early, inexpensive off-patent drugs at the first sign of infection -- on purpose because if any of them had shown widespread effectiveness and undeniable valid options the EUAs could not have been granted at all; doing so would have been illegal.
Were the other options perfect? No, and in fact what we've learned has evolved over time, with some demonstrating more benefit than others and, in addition, some common drugs we originally believed might be harmful (like aspirin) were later shown to be potentially beneficial (e.g. as a mild counteraction to clotting disorders.) Would running all of this down and using it have saved everyone? Of course not.
Nothing works for everyone -- not even vaccines when they harm nobody. There is no such thing as a drug that always works and never hurts anyone -- and there never will be.
But we deliberately blocked and banned people for discussing believed-to-be-working drugs that were available now, were in common use and known safe, and had very little cost in order to enable and promote a flawed process for vaccines that, on the facts, showed up too late to make a difference.
We got nothing in exchange for those 500,000 lives that were spent as a result of the outrageous collaborative hubris of dozens of entities from government agencies to media outlets to hospital networks and corporate physician overlords.
If we'd used those drugs aggressively and kept half the people out of the hole would that not have been a wild improvement over what happened rather than stabbing people after the peak -- by the historical records and every rational expectation, the last peak -- had already passed?
I have been banging this drum since the spring of 2020 and really got loud about it in the summer and fall because it was obvious what was going to happen and that we could cut the second peak of death off. We knew masks didn't work, the CDC lied in front of Congress telling us masks were better than vaccines and then winter came and a crap-ton of people died. In my own county 2/3rds, roughly, of the people who went into the hospital with this virus came out in a box and the entire medical industry in this state refused to give anyone anything at all until they were literally choking to death. When I started raising hell here in September before the County Commission thirteen people had died of Covid. At my last attempt, in early November, the county stood at 24.
There are now 174 people who died in this county allegedly from Covid-19 and the last 150 of them had every reason to be given a fighting chance to live -- a chance that cost almost nothing and was deliberately denied to them.
Who hangs for this stupidity -- and, quite-arguably -- malice?
Let's have that debate but it clearly starts with Donald Trump, the NIH, the CDC and its leadership along with the media, including both traditional and "new (social) media" that even today are refusing to let anyone talk about the stunning successes that are being seen with early treatment. Indeed FLCCC was just censored and de-platformed again and this time PR Newswire has said they won't even carry their press releases!
There are still places in the world that have not had their second wave play out. They will not benefit from vaccines if they're getting hit now and there will be no benefit down the road because their second wave is also their last one, just like ours.
We either save lives now in those places or they are lost.
That's the choice, and we damn well ought to make the ghouls in the government and media own what they did and make them eat it.