The Foolishness on 'Warp Speed'
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.

2020-11-21 09:04 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 252 references Ignore this thread
The Foolishness on 'Warp Speed'
[Comments enabled]

Folks, there are simply too many questions that can only be answered through time when it comes to vaccine development.

I wish that was not true but it is true and has nothing to do with money spent; thus, trying to speed up the process by spending more money does exactly nothing -- except potentially waste money and, if you vaccinate people on a mass-basis prior to that time expiring you may severely injure or even kill them if something goes wrong.

This is not to state that something like that will happen, because I have no way to know.  But the reason it takes 5-10 years to license a vaccine is that there are certain risks, specifically ADE, which can show up with any vaccine, that this length of time is required to generate sufficient safety information in modest-size (a few thousand to a few tens of thousands) groups of individuals in order to to know if it is going to happen.

Further, with a disease that rarely does serious harm to healthy people in the original study groups it usually takes 10 or more years to know if the vaccine actually works to prevent those serious harms along with preventing transmission of the virus to others.  A vaccine that does not prevent the serious or fatal cases or does not prevent transmission is worthless; nobody cares if all it does is prevent you from feeling crappy for a day or two and if it does that and doesn't block transmission it may increase infection rates since the persons infected and capable of passing the virus on don't know that they are.  That's worse than worthless; such a vaccine can in fact be harmful!  This is why the varicella (Chicken Pox) vaccine, while invented in the 1970s in Japan was not licensed in the US until 1995.

Chicken pox has almost the same lethality profile for serious outcomes in children as does Covid19.  It is roughly 25x more dangerous in adults.  But because it is so rarely dangerous in children knowing if it stops most infections from becoming symptomatic does not tell you whether or not the vaccine actually works to prevent serious outcomes in the target population.  The reason is simple: Those serious outcomes occur so rarely that until you have many years of experience you do not know if you blocked only the "ordinary and not-dangerous" infections or whether you also blocked the dangerous ones.  You cannot presume -- and yet that's exactly what we're doing.

With varicella it took roughly 20 years to know whether this was true and thus whether licensure was appropriate.  We found that it was, and thus the vaccine was licensed.  But remember that varicella is a one-time deal; you get vaccinated and you're done.  Covid19 vaccination is not a one-time deal; the calculation is thus more-akin to the flu shot than it is to measles or mumps.

Do not buy the bull**** running around about people being "re-infected" in weeks or months or that asymptomatic transmission is a material part of the whole picture either.  That's crap; there is no scientific evidence of that happening.  None.  We've known for a couple of decades that coronaviruses tend to run in 3-4 year cycles.  This means immunity is likely present for a couple of years, not a couple of weeks or months.  There is more to immunity than antibodies; T-cell recognition is also involved.  The burden of proof that one coronavirus behaves differently than all the other ones is on the person making the claim and zero such evidence, thus far, exists.

With Covid19 if we stopped transmission into nursing homes and hospitals by enforcing a sanitarium model as I proposed in March of this year would have had perhaps 10 or 20,000 total deaths in the US.  This is less than the seasonal flu.  The reason is while Covid19 kills old people as does influenza it almost-never kills young people, where seasonal influenza does kill children at a materially higher rate than healthy adolescents and adults.

This means that had we adopted that path it would have become a nuisance to moderate risk, as is influenza, within 12-18 months and essentially would have become part of the ordinary seasonal flu outbreak every year -- and thus all the screaming and hollering, plus all the money spent on vaccines, would have been wasted.

Do not think for a minute that "routine" seasonal flu vaccines are a simple thing everyone should take either.  That's flat-out wrong.  There is scientific evidence that annual vaccination from childhood or adolescence forward for the seasonal flu increases the risk of getting the flu when you're older -- roughly doubling that risk!  That is, you may well trade a few non-dangerous but inconvenient cases of the flu for a risk of a dangerous case when you're older and sicker.  Yes, it took ~30 years to figure this out.  Gee, I wonder why?  I guess some people would have to take the shot for all those years before you started to get the data, eh?  Uh, yep.

That doesn't mean nobody should take the seasonal flu shot, or that nobody should take the Covid19 shot, even if the latter is not fully tested.  The former is likely a really good idea if you have serious co-morbid conditions that materially elevate the risk of dying or being hospitalized from the flu, and ditto for the latter.  With Covid19 the risk is over two hundred times higher if you are over 70 as opposed to someone under the age of 50 and compared against someone under 20 it's well over 1,000 times higher.  That's a big difference but it is exactly why closing schools, demanding masks, banning keggers, closing bars and similar is flat-out stupid; you want younger people to take their naturally-larger percentage of the infections since statistically-speaking the virus will not hurt them significantly and if you inhibit those infections in any way then on a "share of the whole" basis more grandmothers get infected and as a result 10 or 100x as many people die.

Never mind that if you have IgG antibodies there is exactly zero reason for you to take the vaccine at all; you have had the virus and you have the very same antibodies that the vaccine is supposed to promote your immune system creating.  Taking the shot in that circumstance is all risk and no reward, which is flat-out stupid no matter who you are.  Paper chromatography tests to ascertain this status do exist and cost a couple of dollars each.  The FDA will not approve them for general consumer use and the reason why is obvious; if you could buy one for $2 at WalMart and use it would you take the vaccine if you were positive?  Of course not.  Would you wear a mask, social distance or otherwise engage in any mitigating strategy if you are positive?  Of course not; all of them are worthless since you can neither get or transmit the virus.  What percentage of the population is positive?  Depends on where you live, but in many parts of the US I bet its over 20% -- and in some places may be higher.  Exactly nobody should consent to a shot until and unless you can ascertain that status first for a couple of dollars privately without disclosing the results to anyone.  If they want people to take this vaccine they can authorize the damned IgG tests for OTC sale at a cost comparable to a pregnancy test.

So why is it that we're being denied the ability to have this information on our personal IgG status any time we'd like in the privacy of our own homes?  There is no valid scientific or public health reason to do so; there is only a desire to exert control.

This refusal to allow these tests to be sold OTC everywhere for less than a cup of coffee is directly contrary to public health and those responsible should be arrested, indicted, tried, convicted and swing.  NOW.

Denial of this knowledge is killing seniors directly by forcibly isolating them in nursing homes when there is no reason for them to be afraid as they've already had the virus but don't know it and in addition not performing such tests on a routine basis for caregivers is directly killing vulnerable people by allowing non-seroconverted individuals who are mixing in the general public to come into such places and treat said vulnerable people when we could preferentially hire and use seroconverted individuals to provide that care.  Nine months into this "novel" virus that is intentional and is in fact both medical malpractice and mass-manslaughter.

Would you deny the sale of pregnancy tests and force a woman who misses her period to go to the doctor?  Is it not more important that she be able to know in the privacy of her own home if she thinks she might be pregnant?  Does not that knowledge learned early and inexpensively positively correlate with said woman altering her behavior to protect someone else -- specifically, the fetus?

WELL?

There is also a non-zero risk that a hostile and powerful state actor (cough-China-cough!) might ban our vaccines in their nation and then develop a bug that targets them specifically.  Do note that "gain of function" research, which Dr. Fauci funded at the Wuhan lab to get around Obama's ban on same in the US can be perverted in exactly this way.  Biological warfare in general is stupid as it has a high probability of killing your own people but that concern disappears as soon as the population you wish to kill tags itself with something unique you can have your engineered bug key on.

Well?

Second, when will we stop diagnosing someone who is obviously ill, has all the differentiating signs that it's Covid19 (e.g. loss of taste and/or smell) and send them home with no treatment or mitigation until they're literally choking to death?

That's insane; we know how to treat the potential bad effects of this virus; we've had eight months of clinical experience with it!  We know what those bad effects are and in most people, with appropriate medical guidance, we can intervene to offset at least some of those effects in most of those people.  For example we know this virus produces both immune dysregulation and clotting disorders in some people, and that this is the mechanism by which it kills.  We have mitigating drugs that are extraordinarily safe we can use to try to interrupt this process and we further know how to detect and treat those disorders, specifically clotting disorders, if they occur.

There are some who have other conditions that make some of the mitigating strategies dangerous to use and as such the art of medicine absolutely comes into play but in the vast majority of persons at least some of those strategies are safe and should be used.  If a strategy is safe then there is no material risk and only potential benefit to be had.  Potential benefit doesn't mean it will always work just as we have no medical science anywhere that always works for any disease.  Eight months into this our so-called "medical professionals" are still committing both malpractice and outright manslaughter.  I see that pattern right here in my county and I'm pissed.  God help any of those so-called "medical professionals" who ever want anything from me.  If I see one of them on fire and have a cup of water in my hand I'm drinking it and watching them burn.

People ask me why I'm trying to "buck the system" when it comes to this disease and what our government has done.  The answer is simple: I will not sit back and allow what appears to be at first blush insanity but is very likely nothing more than manslaughter-for-profit to take lives by the tens of thousands while remaining silent -- and neither should you.

View with responses (opens new window)