How To End The Covid-19 Threat, Right Now
The Market Ticker - Commentary on The Capital Markets
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.

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.

2020-11-14 11:33 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 2031 references Ignore this thread
How To End The Covid-19 Threat, Right Now*
[Comments enabled]

Ed note: Please see the bottom; error on row pickup from Statista has been corrected as of 14:35 ET 11/14.

If you recall back in February when Covid19 first started and I was splitting my coverage between impeachment and the virus I noted several dislocation-style events in the claimed Wuhan data coming out of China.  I noted that these events were statistical impossibilities for a virus and indicated that China was lying.  One can infer the reason for said lying, but you can't prove it.

But that it was happening was clear.  After the third or fourth one I simply gave up and stopped reporting on the "cases" because the data was clearly being tampered with and reporting on something you know is bull**** is the very definition of fake news.

Through the late spring and into the summer a very clean formulaic view of this disease became apparent, and pieces of what were conjecture were conclusively validated.  Basic epidemiology tells you that herd suppression happens at 1- (1/R0); this is the point at which, statistically-speaking, each infected person fails to find a new victim during their infectious window.  This does not mean the disease disappears, but it does mean that the sort of spike we have seen repeatedly cannot happen any more.

For an R0 of 3.0 this is ~66%, and for a R0 of 2.5 (the current CDC estimate) this occurs at 60%.  For all intents and purposes these are statistical best friends, since R0 is always an estimate with a confidence interval -- which, you'll note, nobody publishes.  Gee, I wonder why?

We know that pre-existing immunity, likely due to exposure to some other coronavirus, exists in the population.  Fauci keeps denying it but there is not one study that shows this number is zero.  In fact every single one of these studies has come back with values between 30-50%.  These are small studies because this sort of testing is expensive and slow, so a large-scale survey is impractical both in terms of time and money -- but the results are what they are.  As a result this means that somewhere between 35% and 15% of the population has to "get" Covid-19 in a given area before suppression is reached.

Again, this does not mean that the virus "disappears"; it does, however, mean that the threat of overload in hospitals and similar is over.

At the start of this mess I talked about serological surveys, which are an essential part of understanding how a virus has spread and where you are, particularly where some infections are of low or no symptoms in the infected person and thus will not be caught by testing those who seek care.  These tests are worthless as a diagnostic as they tell whether you had the disease, not whether you have it.  But they're ridiculously cheap and very fast; an IgG linear paper chromatography test costs under $2 and reads in 10 minutes, requiring only a simple finger-stick much as does a blood sugar check for diabetes.  When this bug started here in the US there were a handful of these surveys run in various places, including out in Colorado.  This ceased over the summer; I am aware of ZERO of them being run on populations since that time.

But... in other places they have been run.  Including Japan.  As I noted recently Tokyo appears to have nearly 50% seroprevalence.  When they reached the low 40% threshold which is exactly where it should be if their pre-existing immunity is on the lower end of the range case counts fell apart.  This is clearly population immunity suppression and validates both pre-existing immunity and that the R0 estimates are pretty-much bang-on.

Why did they stop doing these surveys in the US?

A reasonable hypothesis is that public health officials, including both state and federal (such as Fauci, Vanderbilt, Harvard, etc) knew the PCR testing was fraudulent and that serological surveys, which are extremely cheap, fast and easy, would expose the fraud.  So they stopped doing them.

That was a hypothesis that gained credence when we had "bubbles" in various sports which were supported by random testing; we have seen sporadic reports of "positives" that were later proved false by re-test.  But that this occasionally happens with a single test does not tell you how prevalent it is, and note that nowhere did anyone publish a denominator; that is, "Football team X took 50 tests, got five positives and all five were negative on re-test."  That would imply the error rate was 10%.  That's horrible, by the way, because it means if you have an alleged "10% positivity rate" in a population the actual positive rate may well be anywhere between ZERO AND TWENTY PERCENT and there is utterly no way to know where in that confidence interval it is!

But then yesterday Elon Musk showed up.  He wants to be in the NASA control room, a very reasonable desire, when his Dragon capsule is launched with real people in it.  NASA requires a negative Covid test to be there.  That seems somewhat reasonable too; this is a high-security area and the people in there are very important to NASA, so if they want a swab up your nose, well, here it comes.

He popped positive.  No soup for you, sir, says NASA!

Except.... Musk is richer than God and he also doesn't give a **** about shoving government bull**** right up their ass.  So he demanded a re-test, right there, right now.  I assume he offered to pay for it too; the privilege of not caring about money helps in a situation like this, you see.

And, because he's not stupid and, as I said, he's perfectly happy to shove bull**** up their ass, he didn't just do this once.

He did it three more times.  All on the same day, same nurse, in sequence.

He got two positive and two negative results.

Now Musk is either positive or negative, obviously.  But whichever way it is he just dropped a nuclear weapon in the middle of the Covid19 testing industry and blew it to beyond the orbit of Mars.  Exactly nobody in the media is reporting that, but that's what he did -- conclusively.

You see, Musk proved that the error rate is not 2%, 5% or even 10%.

Elon Musk conclusively proved that the test is nothing more than a coin toss that has no relationship to the actual state of a person being tested. It is purely a scare-mongering tool to return big numbers and thus drive more $100 million day collections of money by the testing companies for a literal worthless test that is not diagnostic of anything.

In any reasonable legal environment such a result would lead to the instant revocation of authorization by the FDA for all such testing as Elon has now proved that said testing is literally worthless.  It doesn't have an error band it is nothing more than a criminal racket exactly as would be some preacher collecting money in exchange for prayers that, he says, will make someone's "Gay" go away.

I had every reason to believe, given the crazy CT settings of these tests (typically 40) and the fact that no viral cultures have been successful in other than ICU patients with a CT over 35 -- even Fauci himself has said that CT values over 35 do not represent actual infections -- we know we were reading a materially high percentage of people who were not actually both infected and able to, or would become able to, transmit the virus as "positive.

But I had no idea that in any situation you'd have results that were a literal coin-toss and that would be proved up.

So why have there been zero serological survey done since late Spring?

It's simple: If they kept running them they'd have proved months ago that the testing we're doing by RT-PCR has no relationship to actual infections and is nothing more than a scare-mongering technique that is siphoning off $100 million a day, supporting by printing big false numbers and now "warnings" by ****heads like Fauci that "you better listen" while we cancel both Thanksgiving and Christmas.

Well **** you Fauci, Birx, Lightfoot, Cuomo and the rest.  You just got ****ed up the ass by Elon Musk who was willing to drop a grand for the purpose of disproving your bull**** -- with irrefutable results displayed to the public -- and your little scam that destroyed income and lives has been blown to bits.

We're seeing this all across the various states where utterly-implausible "positive" numbers are racking up by the day. Note that Japan has proved that if you do not interdict infections in young people by doing things like closing schools and such you get nearly 100 infections or even more for each legitimate positive illness.  Think I'm crazy?  Look up Japan's positive test count and the results from Tokyo and tell me how many people had the bug .vs. how many are reported "positive"!  It's more than 100:1.  Further, would anyone be excited if our national daily death count was about 30?  Remember, Japan has about one third our population and yet despite their alleged "mask compliance" it did exactly nothing to stop half the people in Tokyo from becoming infected anyway!

So the 10:1 CDC figure isn't a "guess", it's wrong.  Their new "best estimate" at 4:1 isn't a guess either.  Both were and remain frauds created out of whole cloth by reporting "positives" that really aren't.

This is not just an academic exercise; every single one of those "positives" results in a quarantine order against a person, which not only restricts their freedom it cuts off their income.  But whether that person actually is positive, in the absence of definitive symptoms (e.g. loss of taste or smell) is a literal coin-toss.

ELON MUSK PROVED THIS ENTIRE SCHEME IS NOTHING OTHER THAN A MASSIVE RACKETERRING OPERATION THAT IS NOT ONLY MAKING $100 MILLION A DAY FOR THE TESTING LABS IT HAS ALSO SCREWED MILLIONS OF AMERICANS OUT OF THEIR INCOME WITHOUT CAUSE.

I guess I shouldn't have been shocked by this, given the depth of depravity in the medical system and its "up yours" refusal to follow 15 USC Chapter 1 for the last 30 years, backed by a refusal of the government to prosecute that.

But what came with that in the context of Covid19 is that I cannot compute actual seroconversion estimates from the positive test figures any longer because the "test" figures are literally worthless. A couple of months ago I stopped reporting these and expected thresholds as I suspected shenanigans with the "test positive" figures, but couldn't prove it.

Now it's proved, which means that other than hospitalizations (and maybe deaths -- those are polluted too, as "magically" death-by-influenza has basically disappeared) I have no way to know what the actual prevalence is of Covid in a given community and without some sort of baseline, which can only be reliably determined with serological surveys which are not being done, neither I or any of the so-called experts have any idea exactly where the population of a given area is in regard to herd suppression.

THIS ALLOWS THEM TO MAKE "POLICY" WITHOUT ANY SCIENCE BEHIND IT AT ALL, NOR CAN YOU CHALLENGE THEIR ALLEGED SCIENCE BECAUSE THEY HAVE DELIBERATELY DESTROYED THE DATA INTEGRITY AND IN ADDITION HAVE DELIBERATELY REFUSED TO UNDERTAKE THE VERY INEXPENSIVE AND RAPID STEPS TO OBTAIN ACCURATE SEROLOGICAL SURVEYS IN ANY AREA THAT WOULD JUSTIFY -- OR NOT -- THEIR CLAIMED STEPS.

Further, the continued screaming about "masks" is flat-out stupid.  There is no evidence they work; in all of the states and other areas that implemented them, including mine, continuing case spikes occur.  Or did they?  Nobody knows because the tests are worthless.  But the claimed test numbers say, if you believe them, that masks are worthless.

In short our so-called "authorities" have deliberately destroyed the data integrity required for both them and everyone else to make decisions and justify said decisions based on science.  That this has been going on for months and has not been corrected, and those authorities have much more granular and rapidly-updated data than I do, proves that this is intentional.

So trying to figure out suppression rates has become worthless as the government and health care system have intentionally made any honest analysis impossible.  This leaves us with one more strategy in the toolbox, and since the governments and health authorities are the ones who have both implemented "mandates" and destroyed data integrity on purpose we have no choice but to follow that last option and force them to do so by whatever means are necessary -- and yes, I mean exactly that.

Here is the math:

 

Note that exactly zero of this is my information; it is The CDC's current best estimate of facts.

And the population segregation data is found here, which is "best available" since the 2020 Census tables are not yet done.

They show the following:

  • There are approximately 60.57 million Americans, or 18% of the population, below the age of 20.
  • There are an additional 129.61 million Americans, or 40% of the population, between the age of 20 and 50.

From the table if we infected every single one of these 190 million Americans we would take (60,570,000 * 0.00003) + (129,610,000 * 0.0002) or 1,817 (0-19) + 25,922 (20-49) casualties or a total of under 30,000 dead people.

But -- we would have 58% immunity across the population and it would be over.  However, given what we know about T-cell reactivity -- that there is 30-50% existing immunity it works differently.

At the most-pessimistic estimate of 30% pre-existing immunity from other coronaviruses, which is the lower boundary of all the studies done on populations world-wide thus far (50% is the high end, incidentally) we get:

60.57 * .30 = 18.17 million of the under 20 are already immune; we can only manage to infect 42.4 million.
129.61 * .30 = 38.9 million of those between 20-49 are already immune; we can only manage to infect 90.7 million.

The same 30% applies to the ~120 million older Americans as it does for everyone else, so to this "firebreak" we add 30% of everyone older, which is roughly 120 million * .3 = ~36 million older people who are immune already as well.

If we were to deliberately infect all of the susceptible people in those two "least likely to die" cohort we would take not 30,000 casualties (the presumption in an IFR is that you can be infected) but rather (42,400,000 * 0.00003) + (90,700,000 * 0.0002) = 1,272 + 18,140 or just under 20,000 casualties in total.

We would have ~70% penetration, that is, herd immunity, in the population.

This exceeds even the most-pessimistic rate which is 60% for the CDC's "best estimate" R0 of 2.5.

We would already be well into suppression, which means the current spikes would not happen at all.

Some people over 50 are eventually going to either get it one-at-a-time or be immunized, and they die at a rate of .0005 (0.05%) which is 25 times greater and sort-of sucks.  God forbid people 70+ get it; they die 5.4% of the time, which really sucks.

And by the way -- this presumes we still kill people on purpose who get it by sending them home with no treatment on initial symptoms.  We know that's stupid and yet there are multiple individuals in this immediate area with dead loved ones who all report that "do nothing" was what happened until the victim had one foot in the coffin.  That's nuts considering that we have a wide variety of safe medications, all of which may work and exactly zero of which are being routinely offered to people who are obviously symptomatic.

But leaving the stupidity of refusal-to-treat aside these statistics mean we must demand that:

  • ALL schools be in-person only, period, with the only exceptions being for individual students with a documented immune dysfunction that places them at high risk.  No other exceptions.  No masks, no constraints, the lunch room and recess are as usual, etc.  Any teacher who refuses to teach under this paradigm is immediately fired and replaced.  **** those who refuse and **** their unions too; PATCO the lot of them.  If a parent doesn't like this then they can withdraw their kid and homeschool them.  If the people of a given state, city and district have to drag school board members, governors and mayors out of their offices by their short hairs if they refuse then so be it.  We want the maximum number of 3/100,000 risk category people to get the bug and yes, we understand this will result in a very small number -- about 1,200 people -- of deaths.  We accept this.

  • ALL Colleges and Universities are in-person only, period, and all constraints on dorms, keggers, frats and similar are preempted.  If you have to send in the National Guard and shoot college provosts and others who try to make it otherwise, do so.  Why?  Because that cohort also has a near-zero risk of death.  We understand and accept that a very few people will die this way -- a few thousand more.  We accept this.

  • ALL nightclubs, bars, social gatherings, concerts and other venues are open 100%, no distancing or masks, immediately and permanently.  Place signs at the entrance to all of them that persons over the age of 50 are strongly recommended to not enter and that Covid may be contracted inside; entry is at "own risk."  We understand that about 10,000 or so people will die as a result.  WE ACCEPT THIS TOO.

  • Rapid paper chromatography IgG tests must be made available at retail and at rational cost, no more than $2 each nationwide.  This is not optional because without them mixed households have no idea what their individual risk profile is.  To deny that knowledge on a cheap and fast basis for political reasons is cause for an immediate revolution and we must insist, under whatever penalty is required to make it happen, that these tests be made available right here and now over the counter.  These tests have existed since April; don't try any bull**** about that as I sourced them myself.  The FDA either issues an immediate authorization for individual retail sale or they get overridden by whoever has to do it with whatever force is necessary to do it.  Any cock-blocking on this is mass-murder.

In other words we leave people under the age of 50 alone and rescind all mask and "distancing" orders immediately because we will accept roughly 20,000 deaths but in doing so we protect everyone who is older.  Those who are older are urged to stay away, to wear N95s or better when out in public as those might provide protection (nothing less does or will) and to keep away from the people who are living their normal lives.

In other words instead of repeatedly tolerating lies by the Federal Government, Governors, Mayors and a plethora of so-called "expert" who are presumed to be able to do algebra and, by listening to them we have over 220,000 people who are dead we tell everyone the truth and let all rational adults decide for themselves with the result that many fewer than 20,000 additional people (since some who would have by doing this already have gone to meet God) die -- and it's over.

In fact were we to do this today the number of additional deaths would likely be fewer than 10,000 IN TOTAL given that some base of immunity due to infection already exists.

Those under 18 are at no particular risk anyway so there is no "save the children" argument you can make; any such attempt is fraud.

With $2 10 minute IgG tests over the counter anyone in a mixed household with seriously comorbid and/or elderly people can know if all residents in the household are safe.  If all the younger persons are safe then the older person(s) are at no material elevated risk provided they stay home.  If this is not the case then those households can take whatever steps they deem appropriate; perhaps the kids go live with an aunt, uncle, or neighbor friend (who everyone trusts) until the kids seroconvert, which they will.  This will resolve within a few months on its own as all the younger people will seroconvert and become safe.

If an older person had the virus and didn't know that same IgG test will tell them that it's safe for them to be out and about as normal too.  There is utterly no reason for us not to make that knowledge widely available to anyone who wants it for no more than the cost of a cup of coffee.

Folks, I had my daughter in my early 30s.  By the time I reached 50 she was of age!  This is true for most, but not all parents.  There is exactly no reason for the vast majority of kids, young adults and parents who have dependents still forcibly present due to their age to do anything to inhibit this virus from infecting them.  THEY ARE VERY UNLIKELY TO BE SERIOUSLY HARMED and they will build immunity in the population.  For those who are not in that situation we must make available on an individual basis the capability of determining individual risk in any given housing unit at near-zero cost.

Thus ends, immediately and permanently, the risk of Granny "at home" dying while immunity builds the remainder of the distance to suppression with near-zero additional deaths.

The problem continues to be hospitals and nursing homes in that we are still seeing roughly 40% of the deaths coming from nursing homes, yet nursing home residents are less than 1% of the population of the country.  That's outrageous, particularly given that we know damn well how to stop nearly all of those infections and deaths.

Here is how you keep the infection away from those 50+ to the maximum possible extent for however long it takes.

  • Hospitals and Nursing Homes are split into "seroconverted" and "not seroconverted" units.  All persons are screened for IgG antibody titer before entry into the "non-seroconverted" ward using a finger-stick $2, 10 minute test.  A positive result is good for two months after which it must be repeated.  No person other than a patient or person entering to be a resident or patient in the case of a hospital may enter into the "not seroconverted" hospital or nursing home   No exceptions.  You violate that constraint you get charged with attempted manslaughter and go to prison.

  • Anybody can work in or enter the "seroconverted" side, but no patient or resident shall be admitted into the seroconverted side if they are not seroconverted without a written waiver explaining that doing so means they are waiving all Covid19 risk mitigation.  This is an individual choice; a married couple, for example, might choose this if one of them gets Covid, converts and the other does not.  Why would you do this?  Because the non-converted side bars other than proved-seroconverted visitors or workers and also bars leaving the grounds if ambulatory for shopping, etc.  If a non-seroconverted senior is willing to risk their own ass they can do so but what they can't do is screw others who did not likewise consent.

  • On admission (as a resident or patient) to the non-seroconverted side you must be isolated for at least 48 hours in a negative-pressure room.  You must have two negative 35-CT (NOT CT40!) PCR tests, one at entry and another after 48 hours, then one every 24 hours for the next three days.  There is no isolation area on the seroconverted side since it does not matter.

Absolutely no cross-contamination sources are allowed.  If you cannot have separate wings with separate laundry facilities, maintenance staff, food supply, etc. then the entire facility has to be designated as either seroconverted or not.  Some care homes have separate buildings or can otherwise be successfully split, as can some hospitals -- but by no means all of them.  We must stop accepting the idea that non-seroconverted seniors will be exposed in these homes and hospitals.  It's mass-manslaughter and we've known how to prevent that bull**** from happening for 100 years.  I'm tired of excuses and people who keep allowing this need to be held to account for Murder 2, depraved homicide, because that's exactly what it is.

This is the precise sanitarium model I have advocated for since this started becoming a problem in March and April.

It instantly stops nosocomial transmission into nursing homes and hospital patients, all of whom are at significantly elevated risk.  EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE DEATHS IN A NURSING HOME WAS A NOSOCOMIAL INFECTION. We take over 100,000 of those a year and rather than stop it we let these *******s who we parade around as "heroes" rack up another 100,000 on top of the usual toll this year alone.  That's outrageous.

Doing the above will immediately collapse the death rate while the immunity level rises to suppression across the US.

Now if and when one or more vaccines are available priority should be given to those in these high risk groups, starting with those over 70 years of age.  It should be explained that as a lightly tested vaccine with unknown long-term safety this is a gamble; if there is an ADE or immune dysregulation reaction you're screwed but for those in a very high risk category that risk is likely worth it.  Upon vaccination and the expiration of the time involved you are seroconverted and will so-prove by IgG test, so you become eligible to live and work in the non-seroconverted areas without constraint or waiver.

This also means we wind up with no need to vaccinate the majority of the population; only those over 50, ultimately have any reason to take it at all, and realistically those without material comorbidities have no reason to take it prior to age 70 or thereabouts.  But, as people age the risk of said comorbidities goes up, so their individual desire will vary.

THIS ENDS THE SCREAMFEST AND "PANDEMIC" IMMEDIATELY AND PERMANENTLY WITH NO LOCKDOWNS, NO CONSTRAINTS ON THE GENERAL PUBLIC, NO WORTHLESS MASK ORDERS AND NO MORE BULL****.

Any government or "public health" official that refuses to go down this road immediately must be boxed up and sent to The Hauge for trial as a genocidal maniac who has participated in the murder of over 200,000 Americans thus far -- and punished accordingly.

After all buzzards and worms need to eat too.

I'm done with this bull**** folks.

Ed 14:27: Error from Statistia on the age bracket pickup corrected; it makes the math even more-compelling, not less.  In fact what it says is "infect everyone who can be under 50 on purpose and fewer than 20,000 die -- and the game's over as we have population immunity.  Granny didn't need to die -- our government killed her."

View with responses (opens new window)