1. How confident can we be about the variants claim? Not “do they really exist as separate, infective species”, but “in this population of people, some of whom get a positive PCR test, how confident are we that they’ve really got variant X & not Y?” I don’t think the PCR tests have been edited such that positive results are only possible if a particular variant is present. They’re surely relying on a 3rd party running full sequencing on a proportion of samples. I’m not sure every country can do this. The greatest capacity for this expertise is in UK, so it may even be the case that public health depts ‘contract out’ to labs in UK that sequencing.
2. In order to determine a case rate, don’t we need to know the number of tests run as well as the conditions of how the tests are run? Yet we rarely see “positive test results per 10,000 tests” or similar or “operational false positive rate was shown to be <0.1%”. I know we’ve come to depend upon the Our World In Data etc, but how many people know that the operators of such databases are the perpetrators themselves? For example, one of the two most-used global databases is Johns Hopkins University, who are lavishly funded by you know who philanthropaths.
Not that any of this is a surprise, I’m outing myself as a total non-believer in the reliability of these data series. They might be being made up as far as I’m concerned!
Thank you, Gato, for your indefatigable work. In asking the above, to be clear, I am not gratuitously throwing doubt on your hypothesis-making. 🤗
cases are a tough series to use, esp as some countries (esp in asia) were using much lower Ct's and some others get bad "salting" from rapid tests that only get counted when positive (which makes % positive challenging as a metric.
the sample rate issue has been a real hobbyhorse of mine and the fact that it's basically never adjusted for led to some wild over-estimation of case counts in the past.
testing tend to be down a lot year on year now.
this is actually leading to the inverse: case rise is currently being suppressed.
hoping to do some test rate adjusted series on EU shortly
The thing is, if we look at it from sampling theory (the math behind the math) if you don't know the false positive rate then you don't know anything about the reliability of the test. Which makes test data unusable. What am I missing?
Perfectly stated. People often don’t realise that there’s not a single value for operational false positive rate (OFPR). It certainly can vary according to the true prevalence, Becs yaw cross contamination might be the main route whereby false positives arise. We don’t know. No one ever ran blinded, known negative swab samples through the entire chain of custody.
I’ve been in touch with at least a good handful of self proclaimed PCR experts. Their opinions range from “this test is so reliable & the OFPR is so low that it need not be measured” to “as repeatedly told by its Nobel prize winking creature, it cannot be relied upon as a clinical diagnostic test”.
Fortunately. I can prove that the entire event is most likely an entire fraud, without mentioning PCR or, indeed, respiratory viruses. Please listen to any interview I’ve given this year.
Isn’t it medical malpractice to use a non-diagnostic test on Humans and use the results to make a clinical diagnosis?
I understand someone successfully sued the Govt in Portugal, and I heard a case had been brought in Germany, but I don’t know it’s outcome - the mainstream media are shy about reporting such things.
But what has surprised me, particularly in the litigious USA, why there are no cases brought for vaccine injury/death or for misuse of a lab test as a diagnostic test, plus of course medical treatment without informed consent.
UK Gov site which deals with testing for travel, recommended that if a lateral flow test showed positive, then have a PCR Test. That to me suggested lateral flow is more likely to show false positive.
It seems the case that with free testing now no longer being offered, most people self-test with cheap lateral flow kits.
The reliability of test results was always in question, but I wonder if now that most are lateral flow self-tests they are even less reliable these days?
And if not vaccination, what has made a seasonal virus perennial?
Walgreens (RX-USA) has been reporting their C19 test results for months. The data isn't as granular as needed, but they do provide a denominator (all ages) for their date range, and it appears they are sequencing some of their samples. They are using both PCR and antigen tests, but they don't distinguish them in their data.
Walgreens (81,489 tests) positivity rate by vaxx status 06/18/2022 through 06/24/2022:
24.9% Unvaxxed
32.5% I Dose
33.5%. 2 Doses > 5 months ago
19.8%. 2 Doses <= 5 months ago
36.0% 3 Doses > 5 months ago
24.8%. 3 Doses <= 5 months ago
=========
78.9% of the people who tested positive had at least one jab.
47.2% of the people who tested positive had three jabs.
68.0% of the people who tested positive age 65+ had three jabs.
Unvaxxed comprise 25.7% of the tests and 21.1% of the positives.
Wow, I hadn’t appreciated the enormous positivity rates!
A couple of comments. With such a high proportion of tests being positive, a huge premium is placed on extraordinarily careful technique in testing labs. Given the amplifying power of PCR cycling, I feel even more that I need to know the oFPR. Cross contamination is by no means the only source of false positives but at positivity rates of this order, there’s got to be a big question mark about that.
i suspect that to actually go into walgreens for PCR now vs taking a home test you need to feel pretty poorly/have some strong reason and that this is injecting some kind of bias. (or perhaps people are using it as a second pass screen after a positive antigen test)
Potentially. Where I am in Australia, it's pretty accepted that even if you get a negative RAT, and have symptoms, most will go get a PCR as well. Usually testing positive. So a lot of people ARE using both tests as confirmation either way.
That's a classic sampling bias - you look only at a subset that has symptoms and you find more sick people. Any generalization made from such biased data is invalid - commonly done, but invalid no matter how popular.
Anecdotally a lot of people get tested because it is required to travel. So this would include people testing independent of symptoms. However recently US and Canada have dropped testing requirements for travel. This may reduce the number of people getting tested without health motivation. Which logically could cause an increase in the positive/total tests ration.
To your point, my triple-jabbed brother got the 'ro last week. His antigen test was positive. His double-jabbed wife developed symptoms after a few days, and her antigen tests are repeatedly negative. I should note that she used the government issued garbage tests that the US government bought from China.
Ok so we have a test that has an extremely high false positive rate AND an alarmingly high false negative rate? In engineering the term is "useless" (but "garbage" is good 'nuff).
I wonder about Walgreen's data collection. My sibling in AZ got PCR test from local Walgreen's and I saw nothing about vac status in the paperwork. Is this not reflected on test results (i.e., is the data on a separate thing with no record of what the person tested reported to Walgreen's)?
I imagine it goes down something like this ... the PR Team when faced with a situation that they cannot spin their way out ... the supervisor says - ok well f789 it... let's just stop releasing the data and that solves the problem -- off to the pub now....
You do make a totally valid point Mike.By now the indisputable fact is, that everything we are told is a lie,Thanks for pointing that out 👏🏻👏🏻If only I had found you before my Pfizer clot shot😳
Initially, I eagerly awaited official recognition of mistakes made,and a retraction of the vaccines.
How naïve I was 😢 The wonderful statisticians on Substack do manage to pull some useful proof of obvious manipulation of the data.That then reinforces the fact that we can’t believe anything,but doesn’t help us prove there is something…..
So here we are, fighting for LOCAL Not GLOBAL,I’m 10 years older than you I hope I live to see the success of LOCAL.😊I check you, Robin and Cory, on Telegram daily.THANK YOU.
In the New Forest we have a large awake community, building new health alternatives, PHA and supportive community groups.We have all written to our MPs, WHO, UKGov petitions etc, They have little effect 🙁there are many unseen warriors in the UK.We will not comply.
I recall during the so-called 2nd wave, when England was reporting positivities in the northeast of 25% or so, speaking with a well known professor of immunology & epidemiology.
I asked the professor what % of ambulatory people they’d expect to be positive for influenza during an epidemic. “2% maximum”, they replied. When I pointed out the SARS-CoV-2 positivity data from walk in people, she gave what is best described as a hollow laugh. “You don’t believe these numbers?”
“No,” came the reply. “Completely absurd. Everyone will have been infected in a month or so. Does anyone believe this?”
Well, I never have. I’m not personally an expert in PCR but I’ve hired people who are. The way bulk testing is being done, it’s not possible to avoid cross contamination. They’re not running blinded negatives right through the chain of custody, as far as I can tell, anywhere in the world. It’s fraud. You must measure & subtract operational false positive rate each large run. Never done. Ok, then I discount all the results to worthless.
I wonder if some of the "new more evasive variant!" news is to push the "future framework" disaster ... (?) (Yet it's similar to what Geert VDB predicts, right?)
NYC went from long, long lines to get covid tests, to more covid test pop up tents / vans than Starbucks. Some blocks are alternating marijuana edible vans / stores, and covid test sites / vans (with no one there besides a young person on their phone .. (sometimes, friendly and receptive / aware of the FLCCC docs ...)
: (
Thoughts on if it's evolving to affect the lower lungs more?
Thanks, Mike. I like your healthy scepticism in these matters.
I will admit to a similar general scepticism about epidemiologists, whom I regard as the "economists of disease". Economists (economics is a "discipline" closer to my original profession) are in my experience wrong in their predictions about 80% of the time.
How come, quackcines didn't work their miracles yet? Time for a booster!
This is what they say in Canada today: will need a fall round to fend off a seasonal wave; others are saying "that's too late" and "we need to get a head start". I think they mean one round immediately and another one in 3-4 months? I think that will be when we start seeing the really spectacular results. Like, "You haven't seen nothing yet!"
this makes it look like 5.1 was ramping up pretty aggressively in spain by late may which generally ought to be enough time to start to see a death signal, but perhaps not.
This analysis is very good for an ordinary person.
A few bullet points is how we communicate with the average Joe. The numbers speak for themselves. People are people, there are small confounders in comparisons, but in general this type of analysis is going to hold up.
They don't want to get in the weeds on studies, chiefly because they don't understand how to interpret them.
The reports that are summarizing the situation over the last week are those with the title "Raport saptamanal..."
Tomorrow they will publish the report on the week 20-26.06, I'm really curious to see how the percentage of infections vaxxed vs not-vaxxed are looking. In the preceding week it was 65% vs 35%, after a very long period when it stayed around 55-60% vs. 45-40% (bad enough for the narrative).
We already know that during the week 20-26.06 cases went up by 50% and the main trigger is BA5 - which results from the reports with the title "Sx - Informare Cazuri etc.".
We had stratified data regarding the general age of the infected (vaxxed and no-vaxxed together) until March, when it became obvious that, overall, vaxxed people where infected much easily than the unvaxxed.
The figures are still available here: https://datelazi.ro/ , the big chart with the title "Cazuri per categorie de vârstă, în timp". But this website isn't updated anymore.
In general they started little by little to hide information as soon as data putting in danger the Bruxelles' narrative started to appear. Today we have only those very laconic PDFs.
Great article! We do not quite know yet why some variants prefer some countries and not others. So far ba.5 spreads nicely and seems to be doing "great" in Portugal, UK, Germany, and seems to be progressing in USA also.
Lesser mortality may be a mirage if each Covid infection takes our immune systems down 20% (a number thrown just for example) and some people are reinfected often (and will be reinfected MORE often as their immunity is worn down).
I am expecting more bad things than good things to be honest.
some of the all cause mortality data is looking really worrying.
starts to make you wonder about outcompete scenarios.
eg. if repeated jabs are cumulative in terms of immune suppression and/or vaccine induced injury we could be seeing a big rise in non-covid deaths that do not look directly associated to vaccines like an AE but are the ultimate effect of immune degradation.
i feel like that hypothesis is still a work in progress, but the data is kind of ominous.
how outrageous that we have to do all this sleuthing when we are 19 months in the vaxx campaigns and could simply have large scale epi studies on all cause, heart related deaths, cancer etc, all broken out by vaxx status. to me the most damning single fact is that we don't (outside that nordic study). anyway, thx for the sleuthing.
well, i mean, sure, it's pretty disappointing in terms of public health function, but, OTOH how cool is it that we can and that such work has becomes so widespread and collaborative?
It is good. It does give us purpose and it is productive. I think there is hope when we can communicate and work together. It is very disheartening to feel alone. Fortunately, these platforms show that we aren’t alone. They help us combat the weapon that Evils are trying to use against us, especially isolation. So we pitch in!
hear! hear! The isolation and (for myself, anyway) wondering if I was somewhat insane, was disheartening before I found these forums of thinking people. I was beginning to seriously wonder if I saw/experienced a different world than everyone around me. Thank you all for sharing and debating these issues. Hugs for everyone!
You touched on a concern of mine: how much longer will we have internet access? What are alternate forms of contact that we could/should be sharing? Do we need to go back to landlines?
We have this amazing access that allows us to learn, inform and collaborate, worldwide. How much longer will “they” tolerate that?
Many hands make light work, I’ve been told. While I don’t always concur with that sentiment in every context, it appears that many citizen sleuths have successfully and effectively taken up the challenge in the covid-data context. Who ever you are, I appreciate you and your selfless efforts.
Keep it simple like invektor. We don't want to fib, but we're not going to be perfect. Who cares if we're off by a degree? It'll be a helluva a lot better than the force-fed data-crimes the public health authorities are pushing.
The average person can not handle conversations like this.
A few bullet/talking points and that's it. We need to distill those talking/data/bullet points down.
If we do it this way, it's much easier to communicate and it doesn't come off as an indictment.
Plus this shit is just WRONG. A good portion of our country knows this, but they don't have the intestinal fortitude to say out loud what they know in their hearts.
We need to make it easy for them at the water cooler.
If I had a stack (which I never will), I could post something everyday about these tactics. Messaging and the Audience are the key.
Why don't you create such a stack? At this stage, addressing and convincing the general public of what is going on is much more important than the detailed analysis of small increases in mortality, new variants and the general bs that the official story is wrapped in. More and more articles like this are just preaching to the choir. We are all convinced of what is going on and don't need additional data points. When shtf in terms of mortality the public will figure that out without all this analysis. If we are to turn the tables we need to reach the average Joe and make him understand why that happens before it happens. Otherwise they will swallow yet another explanation given by the propaganda machine. How do we do that is the key to all this.
This is categorically unavoidable. Community wide immunosuppression, incident to coerced injecting of a biologic which we absolutely know causes this, is naturally going to result in more disease and harm.
Yes! It really works for me. I have never taken supplements before, and I eat a mostly carnivorous diet (- Dene ancestry may give me good genes for living without veggies perhaps?). I started taking Vitamin D and zinc when this started and I haven't had so much as a sniffle since then. Surprised myself even!
p.s.: virtually no pharmaceuticals either, except recreationally.
This is purely anecdotal and a gut feeling more than anything else but I am seeing what seems like an acceleration in disease state progression for a wide swath of conditions in a large percent of my patients, many of whom are middle aged and older. The effects of lockdowns? The effects of worsening poverty? The effects of Covid? The effects of the vaccine? I can't say...
Sorry to interject. I know you two are talking to each other about data.
I would like to point out the following, so that people on these stacks' can communicate to average Joe's
We are seeing waves of re-infection, multiple variants, with less time between reinfection - while at the same time each subsequent vaccination provides less time of protection, correct?
That's rhetorical, but my point is that's tangible, backed up by facts and easy to communicate.
Has that happened in the history of mankind?
The vaccines provide none of the following:
1. Prevention of infection
2. Transient infection with control of c19 replication
3. Amelioration of disease process
4. Decreased transmission without effect on the infected individual.
If you had a two or three extra common colds per year, let's say, over ten years, wouldn't there be cumulative damage to you're immune system? You just can't spend an extra 15-20 days/year in bed without a cumulative effect.
We trying to "win" the debate with the average person. It must be easy to understand, and the take-away is that the vaccines are a failure and MIGHT be making things worse.
Ominous scares people. Just talking out loud, but food for thought. Typing on phone, so not as well thought out as I'd like, but does it sort of make sense?
As I wrote at: https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/testable-hypotheses-on-ba4-and-ba5/comment/7055316 these rises in cases and/or hospitalisations in countries well north of the equator in the last few months is a serious concern since it is occurring when average 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels are rising towards their summer peak around August.
This happens even when the average 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels are still well below the 50 ng/mL 125 nmol/L needed for strong innate and adaptive responses to viral, bacterial and fungal pathogens and to reduce the risks of wildly dysregulated inflammatory responses which drive severe flu and COVID-19. Without proper vitamin D3 supplementation for several months (0.125 mg 5000 IU for 70 kg 154 lb bodyweight) and without recent high elevation sun exposure on white skin, most people only have 5 to 25 ng/mL circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D. All the pertinent research is cited at: https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/ .
It's really not a good sign. As a doctor said on this thread, signs of poor health abound, not clear to what degree Covid, the vaccines or general fear/loathing/derailed life
I would also point you to Geert Vanden Bossche's theory. He attributes the relative lack of virulence in Omicron to an interplay between the vaxx non-neutralizing antibodies and the virus. He expects the virus will find a work around that will take away this protection against severe disease in the lower airways. He discusses his theory in a (long) interview with Bret Weinstein. He's also written a white paper.
IMO, it doesn't have to be either/or. The apparent protection from severe disease may be a consequence of this antibody-virus interaction, and repeated infections and injections are damaging the immune systems of the vaxxed.
FYI, I also linked to the Walgreens data in another comment. They shift the date ranged and update every day (I believe). It consistently shows a higher number of infections in the vaxxed versus the unvaxxed.
Aye--there's the rub. Typical of gaslighting Leftys! ...Say that Satan is your pal and that Christians are evil. Invert and distract. Weapons of mass-distraction.
Yes. As an adjective, "gift" means marriage or the state of being married. As a noun, it means poison. Swedish also does not distiguish between toxin, posion and venom linguistically, sometimes creating confusion in translations.
Luckily, we do have the term "äktenskap" for marriage too, though matrimony would be a more idiomatically correct translation as it is more formal and classier-sounding.
I have no idea why we use "gift" that way, since the old norse word for poison et al is etter, pronounced as 'otter' but with an 'eh!' instead of the 'oh!'-sound (or eitr, transcribing from runes isn't straightforward, and since all us scandinavians insist our own people pronouce the runes correctly, that just adds to the confusion).
I think I heard about "gift" in a Swedish class I took many decades ago. Isn't it the same as English "gift", 'something given'? A bride is 'given' to her husband (or vice versa), and a poison is something 'given' (like free vaccinations).
No one’s going to fight me on 2 or 3, I expect. But on 1, I’ve long had a major problem with the very concept of vaccination with the intention of protecting the most vulnerable. The logic goes like this:
A. The most vulnerable to the alleged pathogen are vulnerable because their immune systems are less responsive to novel pathogens & immunogenic materials. They also have less to no “physiological reserve” so that, if they fall ill, they’re very close to critical failure of some organ system or other (cardiovascular, respiratory, renal etc).
B. On immunocompetence, however, here’s the crucial point. They don’t respond well to vaccines any more than they do to pathogens. If this logic holds up, the only group you’ve no real chance of helping with a vaccine are the only group who cannot benefit from vaccination.
C. The null hypothesis is that vaccinated & unvaccinated elderly & ill recipients of jabs don’t experience different outcomes if infected. I don’t think we can reject the null hypothesis.
The same logic should hold for influenza vaccinations. Unfortunately it appears in UK at least (according to Cochrane a few years ago) that flu shots don’t reduce hospitalization or death in the target population (which I think for years were people 65y & up).
I may be quite wrong on this whole thing, but if it’s right, it’s a bloody great torpedo amidships about the entire global strategy. Can anyone destroy this “logic” (which should happen if it’s wide of the mark)?
In one of his many 2020 interviews, I recall Sucharit Bhakdi raising similar issues about vaccinating the very (co morbid rich) elderly. There was a sort of B.1 claim: not only do they not respond well to vaccines; they do not tolerate them well.
Back in the day when "do no harm" meant something to MDs, interventions with this population were mostly limited to palliative, with very strict life quality outcomes calculations applied.
Ah, but I see now (checking my spelling) that Google instructs us that he is a "prominent source of misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic". Never mind!
Through 'patient support groups' they continue to convince Immunocompromised people and their loved ones; whether it be primary immunodeficiency or medication induced immunosuppression that the vaccines miraculously induce both a B and T cell response. That is remarkable enough but then they make no distinction between SCID, CVID etc in their presentations. Until treating MD's stop cowering and start standing up to this fraud call it what it is full on fuckery. Dr Yeadon thank you for your integrity from the start of this. The elderly were preyed upon and the rest are being used to manipulate people into taking it despite them not needing it even if it was safe and effective. In the same 'information sessions' they then tell people they must encourage their loved ones to take the vaccine in order to protect them via herd immunity. If you question why herd immunity is necessary if this vaccine confers protection to the immunocompromised they cut your access. This does not compare to the gaslighting of scientists and MD's speaking the truth but it is unbelievable to still see it working. And yes these are all sponsored by Pharma.
You’re right, but I don’t believe for a moment that the point of the “vaccines” is profit, but control.
The drug companies are making out like drug cartels, but the entire planned near global coup d’etat had the effect of losing trillions in value from the portfolios of those who own / control the money & assets of the world.
Slowing the world’s economy for a few years was always going to be eye wateringly expensive. Yet we now know that they knew, before they embarked on this course of action, that NONE of the NPIs worked, per a detailed review by scientists at WHO in 2019.
Matt Taibbi had a long article saying the ultra rich did very well with the lockdowns. I agree it is about control and maybe depopulating the earth. Seems as though there is a spirit of chaos, lies, and authoritarianism roaming, pulling the strings of these ultra rich folks. I also think it is anti Eros.
he is right that they DID do well. that was prior to the market crashing though to some extent. Now, as we all know they stand to gain by way of that crash, so i would not be too fast to rule out pure unadulterated greed here
Absolutely,agree….it is control, but, when you are printing the money you will always come out on top.A 20 x increase in profit ( from vax) covers a good deal of any devaluation loss.
Igor and el gato....THANK YOU. Thank you for actually doing the work to look into all this nonsense. Like I have stated before...I am being told one thing yet seeing another. Orwell would be proud.
The gene-transfer jabs shut down the toll-like receptors, which are a critical part of the immune systems way of responding to viral infection. THe Jab shuts them down to increase the life of the mRNA in the body. Essentially it is giving the jabbed V-AIDS to a greater or lesser degree.
Now that is the science... the science of eugenics
I’ve wondered to the extent that things like mistletoe lectin (a molecular mimic of shiga toxin) and Coley’s toxins (which contains 6 TLR ligands that we know of) might act as a reset button to restore innate immune function after vax injury.
If the historical record is any indication, CT holds a lot of promise in treating non-neoplasticism disease of all types. I’m about to drop a stack on this topic 🔜 -- in the coming weeks.
Dr. Vliet last August shared the animal studies that showed all the vaxxed cats (sorry Gato) and ferrets died from ADE. Dr. Vanden Bossche said a few weeks ago on The Highwire the vaxx are driving variants that could because more deadly. Mark Skidmore on Lighthouse shared an Expose article that shows Canada cases hospitalized and deaths are way up for vaxxed.
Thank you-An exellent and worthwhile overview! Lest we lose sight of the forest for the trees, despite all of this bona fide data analysis--may we now cut to the chase and enact a moratorium on the experimental drug agenda? How is it possible that there are still people who cannot fathom the idea of a bioweapon?...or a profiteering/control agenda?
Anecdotal evidence. I fly back to PR for my Abuelo’s funeral. It turns into a superspreader event as my aunt, uncle, great aunt, and two cousins all get Covid. All of them vaccinated and boosted. Meanwhile, those of us visiting from the states got nothing. Me unvaccinated while my brother and other aunt were vaccinated after infection. By the way, I saw more masks on the island that I have seen in a year. Had to leave one of the panaderias as I refused to put on a mask.
I've been following the Walgreens test data for a couple months. The number of tests and the positivity rates by vaxx status have gone up and down, but the unvaxxed consistently represent ~25% of the tests and ~20% of the positives (all ages). On average, ~80% of the positives have had at least one jab, and ~50% of the positives have had three jabs. Three jabs doesn't seem to do much for the over 65s before or after the 5 month mark.
Per their slides, it appears that BA4-5 have not blown through yet. Perhaps this would be a good data source to monitor infections at least.
Walgreens (81,489 tests) positivity rate by vaxx status 06/18/2022 through 06/24/2022:
24.9% Unvaxxed
32.5% I Dose
33.5%. 2 Doses > 5 months ago
19.8%. 2 Doses <= 5 months ago
36.0% 3 Doses > 5 months ago
24.8%. 3 Doses <= 5 months ago
=========
78.9% of the people who tested positive had at least one jab.
47.2% of the people who tested positive had three jabs.
68.0% of the people who tested positive age 65+ had three jabs.
Unvaxxed comprise 25.7% of the tests and 21.1% of the positives.
"what would be REALLY interesting to get at would be a sense of just how much more contagious BA really is vs how much of the additional spread is coming from vaccines."
I like the term "Intrinsic infectiousness" used by Geert Vanden Bossche to disinguish from Ab-mediated enhancement of viral infection. I believe GVB posits that "intrinsic" infectiousness has not changed that dramatically across variants. Most of the increase in infectiousness is from vaccine Ab -induced enhancement. In a sane world, the data to compare R for vaccinated and unvaccinated populations would be widely available.
I will almost certainly be being dumb here, but:
1. How confident can we be about the variants claim? Not “do they really exist as separate, infective species”, but “in this population of people, some of whom get a positive PCR test, how confident are we that they’ve really got variant X & not Y?” I don’t think the PCR tests have been edited such that positive results are only possible if a particular variant is present. They’re surely relying on a 3rd party running full sequencing on a proportion of samples. I’m not sure every country can do this. The greatest capacity for this expertise is in UK, so it may even be the case that public health depts ‘contract out’ to labs in UK that sequencing.
2. In order to determine a case rate, don’t we need to know the number of tests run as well as the conditions of how the tests are run? Yet we rarely see “positive test results per 10,000 tests” or similar or “operational false positive rate was shown to be <0.1%”. I know we’ve come to depend upon the Our World In Data etc, but how many people know that the operators of such databases are the perpetrators themselves? For example, one of the two most-used global databases is Johns Hopkins University, who are lavishly funded by you know who philanthropaths.
Not that any of this is a surprise, I’m outing myself as a total non-believer in the reliability of these data series. They might be being made up as far as I’m concerned!
Thank you, Gato, for your indefatigable work. In asking the above, to be clear, I am not gratuitously throwing doubt on your hypothesis-making. 🤗
cases are a tough series to use, esp as some countries (esp in asia) were using much lower Ct's and some others get bad "salting" from rapid tests that only get counted when positive (which makes % positive challenging as a metric.
the sample rate issue has been a real hobbyhorse of mine and the fact that it's basically never adjusted for led to some wild over-estimation of case counts in the past.
testing tend to be down a lot year on year now.
this is actually leading to the inverse: case rise is currently being suppressed.
hoping to do some test rate adjusted series on EU shortly
Interesting about the idea of a flip & case patterns v time moving to underestimated case rates. Quite possibly true.
Thank you 🙏
You echoed my very thoughts about the PCR tests and variants, and I appreciate your explaining it so clearly, as I could not. Thank you!
The thing is, if we look at it from sampling theory (the math behind the math) if you don't know the false positive rate then you don't know anything about the reliability of the test. Which makes test data unusable. What am I missing?
Perfectly stated. People often don’t realise that there’s not a single value for operational false positive rate (OFPR). It certainly can vary according to the true prevalence, Becs yaw cross contamination might be the main route whereby false positives arise. We don’t know. No one ever ran blinded, known negative swab samples through the entire chain of custody.
I’ve been in touch with at least a good handful of self proclaimed PCR experts. Their opinions range from “this test is so reliable & the OFPR is so low that it need not be measured” to “as repeatedly told by its Nobel prize winking creature, it cannot be relied upon as a clinical diagnostic test”.
Fortunately. I can prove that the entire event is most likely an entire fraud, without mentioning PCR or, indeed, respiratory viruses. Please listen to any interview I’ve given this year.
Isn’t it medical malpractice to use a non-diagnostic test on Humans and use the results to make a clinical diagnosis?
I understand someone successfully sued the Govt in Portugal, and I heard a case had been brought in Germany, but I don’t know it’s outcome - the mainstream media are shy about reporting such things.
But what has surprised me, particularly in the litigious USA, why there are no cases brought for vaccine injury/death or for misuse of a lab test as a diagnostic test, plus of course medical treatment without informed consent.
Where are the civil Liberty/Human Rights outfits?
UK Gov site which deals with testing for travel, recommended that if a lateral flow test showed positive, then have a PCR Test. That to me suggested lateral flow is more likely to show false positive.
It seems the case that with free testing now no longer being offered, most people self-test with cheap lateral flow kits.
The reliability of test results was always in question, but I wonder if now that most are lateral flow self-tests they are even less reliable these days?
And if not vaccination, what has made a seasonal virus perennial?
Walgreens (RX-USA) has been reporting their C19 test results for months. The data isn't as granular as needed, but they do provide a denominator (all ages) for their date range, and it appears they are sequencing some of their samples. They are using both PCR and antigen tests, but they don't distinguish them in their data.
Walgreens (81,489 tests) positivity rate by vaxx status 06/18/2022 through 06/24/2022:
24.9% Unvaxxed
32.5% I Dose
33.5%. 2 Doses > 5 months ago
19.8%. 2 Doses <= 5 months ago
36.0% 3 Doses > 5 months ago
24.8%. 3 Doses <= 5 months ago
=========
78.9% of the people who tested positive had at least one jab.
47.2% of the people who tested positive had three jabs.
68.0% of the people who tested positive age 65+ had three jabs.
Unvaxxed comprise 25.7% of the tests and 21.1% of the positives.
=========
Slide 3
https://www.walgreens.com/businesssolutions/covid-19-index.jsp?fbclid=IwAR32Mert5ffj-JTsy5yd3_akJXzmPAUo3tSYRdu8Rc1l6rS31ZYTJHsmSgM
Wow, I hadn’t appreciated the enormous positivity rates!
A couple of comments. With such a high proportion of tests being positive, a huge premium is placed on extraordinarily careful technique in testing labs. Given the amplifying power of PCR cycling, I feel even more that I need to know the oFPR. Cross contamination is by no means the only source of false positives but at positivity rates of this order, there’s got to be a big question mark about that.
TBH, those seem implausibly high.
i suspect that to actually go into walgreens for PCR now vs taking a home test you need to feel pretty poorly/have some strong reason and that this is injecting some kind of bias. (or perhaps people are using it as a second pass screen after a positive antigen test)
Potentially. Where I am in Australia, it's pretty accepted that even if you get a negative RAT, and have symptoms, most will go get a PCR as well. Usually testing positive. So a lot of people ARE using both tests as confirmation either way.
That's a classic sampling bias - you look only at a subset that has symptoms and you find more sick people. Any generalization made from such biased data is invalid - commonly done, but invalid no matter how popular.
Anecdotally a lot of people get tested because it is required to travel. So this would include people testing independent of symptoms. However recently US and Canada have dropped testing requirements for travel. This may reduce the number of people getting tested without health motivation. Which logically could cause an increase in the positive/total tests ration.
in my clinic the rapid Ag tests were peaking at 60% positive. So the walgreens numbers look real
I’ve even less confidence in those immobilised immunoassays.
I couldn’t even find out the immunogen in UK when those lateral flow tests appeared.
Perhaps so, but in my practice the rate of false positives as judged byt he PCR follow on test are VERY low.
Now PCR tests serve as their own gold standard, which is a bit of a conundrum isnt it?
Conundrum? Maybe. I'd call it something else (foolish, unwise, invalid are three words that come to mind ;-).
May I know how you judged the false positive rate as very low?
To your point, my triple-jabbed brother got the 'ro last week. His antigen test was positive. His double-jabbed wife developed symptoms after a few days, and her antigen tests are repeatedly negative. I should note that she used the government issued garbage tests that the US government bought from China.
My coworker just said they use the garbage government provided tests which showed negative- but tested positive at the ER
Ok so we have a test that has an extremely high false positive rate AND an alarmingly high false negative rate? In engineering the term is "useless" (but "garbage" is good 'nuff).
But hey kids, that's "the science"!
I wonder about Walgreen's data collection. My sibling in AZ got PCR test from local Walgreen's and I saw nothing about vac status in the paperwork. Is this not reflected on test results (i.e., is the data on a separate thing with no record of what the person tested reported to Walgreen's)?
In Canada ... (and I think I've seen similar in the UK) when the data goes too far in the wrong direction, governments simply stop reporting it..
Health Canada - Literally Killing Grandma...and Not Reporting the Deaths?https://sheldonyakiwchuk.substack.com/p/health-canada-literally-killing-grandmaand
I imagine it goes down something like this ... the PR Team when faced with a situation that they cannot spin their way out ... the supervisor says - ok well f789 it... let's just stop releasing the data and that solves the problem -- off to the pub now....
In the UK they stopped reporting the data because ‘… some people were using it to draw misleading conclusions about the vaccines…’.
😄
gawd no drawing conclusions using DATA!
Glad they nipped that trend in the bud pronto!
Well you may draw conclusions as long they are the ones they tell you.
And now we are using the cover up of the data to draw conclusions about the vaccines.
You do make a totally valid point Mike.By now the indisputable fact is, that everything we are told is a lie,Thanks for pointing that out 👏🏻👏🏻If only I had found you before my Pfizer clot shot😳
Initially, I eagerly awaited official recognition of mistakes made,and a retraction of the vaccines.
How naïve I was 😢 The wonderful statisticians on Substack do manage to pull some useful proof of obvious manipulation of the data.That then reinforces the fact that we can’t believe anything,but doesn’t help us prove there is something…..
So here we are, fighting for LOCAL Not GLOBAL,I’m 10 years older than you I hope I live to see the success of LOCAL.😊I check you, Robin and Cory, on Telegram daily.THANK YOU.
In the New Forest we have a large awake community, building new health alternatives, PHA and supportive community groups.We have all written to our MPs, WHO, UKGov petitions etc, They have little effect 🙁there are many unseen warriors in the UK.We will not comply.
My very best wishes Helen
I recall that at the peak of their 2nd "Omicron wave", Portugal had a test positivity rate of 59% (!). Sorry, I did not bookmark the source.
I recall during the so-called 2nd wave, when England was reporting positivities in the northeast of 25% or so, speaking with a well known professor of immunology & epidemiology.
I asked the professor what % of ambulatory people they’d expect to be positive for influenza during an epidemic. “2% maximum”, they replied. When I pointed out the SARS-CoV-2 positivity data from walk in people, she gave what is best described as a hollow laugh. “You don’t believe these numbers?”
“No,” came the reply. “Completely absurd. Everyone will have been infected in a month or so. Does anyone believe this?”
Well, I never have. I’m not personally an expert in PCR but I’ve hired people who are. The way bulk testing is being done, it’s not possible to avoid cross contamination. They’re not running blinded negatives right through the chain of custody, as far as I can tell, anywhere in the world. It’s fraud. You must measure & subtract operational false positive rate each large run. Never done. Ok, then I discount all the results to worthless.
I wonder if some of the "new more evasive variant!" news is to push the "future framework" disaster ... (?) (Yet it's similar to what Geert VDB predicts, right?)
NYC went from long, long lines to get covid tests, to more covid test pop up tents / vans than Starbucks. Some blocks are alternating marijuana edible vans / stores, and covid test sites / vans (with no one there besides a young person on their phone .. (sometimes, friendly and receptive / aware of the FLCCC docs ...)
: (
Thoughts on if it's evolving to affect the lower lungs more?
Thank you ...
Thanks, Mike. I like your healthy scepticism in these matters.
I will admit to a similar general scepticism about epidemiologists, whom I regard as the "economists of disease". Economists (economics is a "discipline" closer to my original profession) are in my experience wrong in their predictions about 80% of the time.
In New Zealand they’re doing waste water testing to predict the growth of a variant. For example three weeks ago BA5 apparently accounted for 2.8% of infections, now it’s 10%. Also apparently now we have ‘immunocompromised’ people who are not able to clear the virus. https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2022/06/genome-sequencing-reveals-covid-19-mutated-in-waikato-immunocompromised-case-11-times.html
How come, quackcines didn't work their miracles yet? Time for a booster!
This is what they say in Canada today: will need a fall round to fend off a seasonal wave; others are saying "that's too late" and "we need to get a head start". I think they mean one round immediately and another one in 3-4 months? I think that will be when we start seeing the really spectacular results. Like, "You haven't seen nothing yet!"
Are normies not beginning to question things yet over there?
What normies? https://youtu.be/uqb819d7S1o
https://live2fightanotherday.substack.com/p/portugal-cant-get-enough-of-good
Walgreens gives some of this:
https://www.walgreens.com/businesssolutions/covid-19-index.jsp
Could the difference be because Portugal has BA.5.1 while Spain does not? Take a look here: https://outbreak.info/situation-reports?pango=BA.5.1&selected=PRT&loc=PRT&loc=ESP&overlay=false
Same with South Africa - they had BA.5 but not BA.5.1 like Portugal.
On that same site you can compare BA.5 and BA.5.1. One of the mutations that is different regards: L37F
This study says L37F is associated with more severe outcomes.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33179934/
I don't know if that mutation is worse for vaccinated, or bad for everyone.
thanks. had not seen that.
https://outbreak.info/location-reports?loc=ESP&pango=BA.5.1&selected=BA.5.1
this makes it look like 5.1 was ramping up pretty aggressively in spain by late may which generally ought to be enough time to start to see a death signal, but perhaps not.
france similar:
https://outbreak.info/location-reports?loc=FRA&pango=BA.5.1&dark=true&selected=BA.5.1
i think it may be another couple weeks before we can assess this with more certainty, but definitely a useful factor to consider.
finland tests at ~15% the rate of portugal per capita.
this makes their "cases" data basically impossible to compare without normalizing for sample rate
Great find.
In my country, Romania:
- only 40% of the population is vaxxed;
- only 27% is mRNA vaxxed;
- only 10% are boostered;
- only 0,004% are double boostered...
...yet the vaxxed demographic gives over 65% of the current infections.
LE According to the latest data (today) during the week 20-26 VI 63% of the infections were among vaccinated.
This is the 3rd week in a row when the percentage of the infected vaccinated jumps clearly over 60%.
- 6-12 VI: 61,8%;
- 13-19 VI: 65,1%;
- 20-26 VI: 63%.
Hats off to the Romanians. Your stats put my country (the U.S.) to shame.
invektor -
This analysis is very good for an ordinary person.
A few bullet points is how we communicate with the average Joe. The numbers speak for themselves. People are people, there are small confounders in comparisons, but in general this type of analysis is going to hold up.
They don't want to get in the weeds on studies, chiefly because they don't understand how to interpret them.
Spread the word to the other stacks'!
This is a ***SOLUTION***
Thank you!
Can you point to source data? Good to know.
Yes. In general our authorities are communicating through pdfs but you can copy&paste the text in a translate app: https://insp.gov.ro/centrul-national-de-supraveghere-si-control-al-bolilor-transmisibile-cnscbt/infectia-cu-noul-coronavirus-sars-cov-2/analiza-cazuri-confirmate-covid19/
The reports that are summarizing the situation over the last week are those with the title "Raport saptamanal..."
Tomorrow they will publish the report on the week 20-26.06, I'm really curious to see how the percentage of infections vaxxed vs not-vaxxed are looking. In the preceding week it was 65% vs 35%, after a very long period when it stayed around 55-60% vs. 45-40% (bad enough for the narrative).
For the general situation of cases, hospitalisations and deaths they publish another report, here: https://www.ms.ro/buletine-de-presa-covid/
We already know that during the week 20-26.06 cases went up by 50% and the main trigger is BA5 - which results from the reports with the title "Sx - Informare Cazuri etc.".
PS and regarding the vaxxes look here: https://insp.gov.ro/centrul-national-de-supraveghere-si-control-al-bolilor-transmisibile-cnscbt/infectia-cu-noul-coronavirus-sars-cov-2/raportare-saptamanala-vaccinare-impotriva-covid-19/
Romania's population is around 19.000.000.
is this stratified by age or risk or testing frequency?
trying to rule out simpson's paradox as an explanation.
Unfortunately, not.
We had stratified data regarding the general age of the infected (vaxxed and no-vaxxed together) until March, when it became obvious that, overall, vaxxed people where infected much easily than the unvaxxed.
The figures are still available here: https://datelazi.ro/ , the big chart with the title "Cazuri per categorie de vârstă, în timp". But this website isn't updated anymore.
In general they started little by little to hide information as soon as data putting in danger the Bruxelles' narrative started to appear. Today we have only those very laconic PDFs.
Thank you for sharing!
Great article! We do not quite know yet why some variants prefer some countries and not others. So far ba.5 spreads nicely and seems to be doing "great" in Portugal, UK, Germany, and seems to be progressing in USA also.
Lesser mortality may be a mirage if each Covid infection takes our immune systems down 20% (a number thrown just for example) and some people are reinfected often (and will be reinfected MORE often as their immunity is worn down).
I am expecting more bad things than good things to be honest.
agree.
some of the all cause mortality data is looking really worrying.
starts to make you wonder about outcompete scenarios.
eg. if repeated jabs are cumulative in terms of immune suppression and/or vaccine induced injury we could be seeing a big rise in non-covid deaths that do not look directly associated to vaccines like an AE but are the ultimate effect of immune degradation.
i feel like that hypothesis is still a work in progress, but the data is kind of ominous.
how outrageous that we have to do all this sleuthing when we are 19 months in the vaxx campaigns and could simply have large scale epi studies on all cause, heart related deaths, cancer etc, all broken out by vaxx status. to me the most damning single fact is that we don't (outside that nordic study). anyway, thx for the sleuthing.
well, i mean, sure, it's pretty disappointing in terms of public health function, but, OTOH how cool is it that we can and that such work has becomes so widespread and collaborative?
this is how the world changes.
It is good. It does give us purpose and it is productive. I think there is hope when we can communicate and work together. It is very disheartening to feel alone. Fortunately, these platforms show that we aren’t alone. They help us combat the weapon that Evils are trying to use against us, especially isolation. So we pitch in!
hear! hear! The isolation and (for myself, anyway) wondering if I was somewhat insane, was disheartening before I found these forums of thinking people. I was beginning to seriously wonder if I saw/experienced a different world than everyone around me. Thank you all for sharing and debating these issues. Hugs for everyone!
You touched on a concern of mine: how much longer will we have internet access? What are alternate forms of contact that we could/should be sharing? Do we need to go back to landlines?
We have this amazing access that allows us to learn, inform and collaborate, worldwide. How much longer will “they” tolerate that?
I have been concerned about that as well. Not sure what to do. Get a meeting place decided upon? : )
My thought as well. I think that data will be so buried and obfuscated that we’ll need an earth mover to uncover the facts.
Many hands make light work, I’ve been told. While I don’t always concur with that sentiment in every context, it appears that many citizen sleuths have successfully and effectively taken up the challenge in the covid-data context. Who ever you are, I appreciate you and your selfless efforts.
what you say is true. It's the #2 SOLUTION right after resisting.
Normally, I'd say thinking is #1, but that ship sailed over 2 years ago.
Keep it simple like invektor. We don't want to fib, but we're not going to be perfect. Who cares if we're off by a degree? It'll be a helluva a lot better than the force-fed data-crimes the public health authorities are pushing.
The average person can not handle conversations like this.
A few bullet/talking points and that's it. We need to distill those talking/data/bullet points down.
If we do it this way, it's much easier to communicate and it doesn't come off as an indictment.
Plus this shit is just WRONG. A good portion of our country knows this, but they don't have the intestinal fortitude to say out loud what they know in their hearts.
We need to make it easy for them at the water cooler.
If I had a stack (which I never will), I could post something everyday about these tactics. Messaging and the Audience are the key.
Make sense?
Why don't you create such a stack? At this stage, addressing and convincing the general public of what is going on is much more important than the detailed analysis of small increases in mortality, new variants and the general bs that the official story is wrapped in. More and more articles like this are just preaching to the choir. We are all convinced of what is going on and don't need additional data points. When shtf in terms of mortality the public will figure that out without all this analysis. If we are to turn the tables we need to reach the average Joe and make him understand why that happens before it happens. Otherwise they will swallow yet another explanation given by the propaganda machine. How do we do that is the key to all this.
Oy Average Joe!
May i get back to you?...currently i am indisposed watching prime-time cattitude...
This is categorically unavoidable. Community wide immunosuppression, incident to coerced injecting of a biologic which we absolutely know causes this, is naturally going to result in more disease and harm.
Keep pushing the Vitamin D to everyone we talk to
***SOLUTION***!!!!
I've won over a few people just using this tactic alone.
Add daylight in your eyes and sleep when you're tired.
The best solution would've been to do NOTHING.
We're past that though, so I think we speak to people about those three things. They're easy for the average person to understand.
Perception and truth are the same thing.
Yes! It really works for me. I have never taken supplements before, and I eat a mostly carnivorous diet (- Dene ancestry may give me good genes for living without veggies perhaps?). I started taking Vitamin D and zinc when this started and I haven't had so much as a sniffle since then. Surprised myself even!
p.s.: virtually no pharmaceuticals either, except recreationally.
This is exactly why we're in this mess. It was in the wild for months. The public doesn't understand that.
We need to make it easier for them.
This is purely anecdotal and a gut feeling more than anything else but I am seeing what seems like an acceleration in disease state progression for a wide swath of conditions in a large percent of my patients, many of whom are middle aged and older. The effects of lockdowns? The effects of worsening poverty? The effects of Covid? The effects of the vaccine? I can't say...
Yup. What do you think is happening on a broader scale, with the least amongst us?
Let's say in the ghettos of Sao Paulo or the slums of Mumbai?
Shit rolls down hill. Common sense, right?
***SOLUTION***
Talking point.
***SOLUTION***
Sorry to interject. I know you two are talking to each other about data.
I would like to point out the following, so that people on these stacks' can communicate to average Joe's
We are seeing waves of re-infection, multiple variants, with less time between reinfection - while at the same time each subsequent vaccination provides less time of protection, correct?
That's rhetorical, but my point is that's tangible, backed up by facts and easy to communicate.
Has that happened in the history of mankind?
The vaccines provide none of the following:
1. Prevention of infection
2. Transient infection with control of c19 replication
3. Amelioration of disease process
4. Decreased transmission without effect on the infected individual.
If you had a two or three extra common colds per year, let's say, over ten years, wouldn't there be cumulative damage to you're immune system? You just can't spend an extra 15-20 days/year in bed without a cumulative effect.
We trying to "win" the debate with the average person. It must be easy to understand, and the take-away is that the vaccines are a failure and MIGHT be making things worse.
Ominous scares people. Just talking out loud, but food for thought. Typing on phone, so not as well thought out as I'd like, but does it sort of make sense?
sure it does. But until you can show the average person that they don't reduce your risk of serious outcomes, none of that will sink in IMO.
As I wrote at: https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/testable-hypotheses-on-ba4-and-ba5/comment/7055316 these rises in cases and/or hospitalisations in countries well north of the equator in the last few months is a serious concern since it is occurring when average 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels are rising towards their summer peak around August.
All other things being equal, this rise reduces flu and COVID-19 severity, and so average amounts of viruses shed per infected person. This reduces transmission and so the number of infected people. https://nutritionmatters.substack.com/p/covid-19-seasonality-is-primarily
This happens even when the average 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels are still well below the 50 ng/mL 125 nmol/L needed for strong innate and adaptive responses to viral, bacterial and fungal pathogens and to reduce the risks of wildly dysregulated inflammatory responses which drive severe flu and COVID-19. Without proper vitamin D3 supplementation for several months (0.125 mg 5000 IU for 70 kg 154 lb bodyweight) and without recent high elevation sun exposure on white skin, most people only have 5 to 25 ng/mL circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D. All the pertinent research is cited at: https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/ .
It's really not a good sign. As a doctor said on this thread, signs of poor health abound, not clear to what degree Covid, the vaccines or general fear/loathing/derailed life
🥲🥲
I would also point you to Geert Vanden Bossche's theory. He attributes the relative lack of virulence in Omicron to an interplay between the vaxx non-neutralizing antibodies and the virus. He expects the virus will find a work around that will take away this protection against severe disease in the lower airways. He discusses his theory in a (long) interview with Bret Weinstein. He's also written a white paper.
https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org
IMO, it doesn't have to be either/or. The apparent protection from severe disease may be a consequence of this antibody-virus interaction, and repeated infections and injections are damaging the immune systems of the vaxxed.
FYI, I also linked to the Walgreens data in another comment. They shift the date ranged and update every day (I believe). It consistently shows a higher number of infections in the vaxxed versus the unvaxxed.
"(hey, that’s science for you and if you’re not trying to actively disprove your theories, you’re doing it wrong)" **
** inverse applies to Fauci funded SettledScience™
in fairness, "science" is a lot easier if you start from your conclusions and work backwards to create data.
Kinda like making the virus and "vaccine" at the same time.
wax-on, wax-off...you don't need no mask to doff
Yesirree...and that's only for the most open-minded folks to consider. Some people(I know personally) cannot fathom that Evil exists.
Probably the same people who call everyone who disagrees with them a Nazi.
Aye--there's the rub. Typical of gaslighting Leftys! ...Say that Satan is your pal and that Christians are evil. Invert and distract. Weapons of mass-distraction.
They clearly didn't watch Mission Impossible II.
Or read a history book.
I majored in history. I've been scoffed at all my life. I just laugh at the prevalence of that winning combination of ignorance and arrogance.
RIGHT! Gollee...it's sure craazy how H'wood predicts this stuff!
Or they just make movies based on subject matter provided by their masters....😉
I believe the term "Scientism" is more apropos!
Or the phrase: Science for fun and PROFIT!!
Which brings me to how many Pharma drugs are made in China: Chi-Ching$$$$
Fast & Loose Science*...:)
Sometimes you gotta burn down the village to save it.
They load the clip in omnicolour
Said they pack the nine, they fire it at prime time
The sleeping gas, every home was like Alcatraz
And motherfuckers lost their minds
No escape from the mass mind rape
Play it again Jack and then rewind the tape
And then play it again and again and again
Until your mind is locked in
Believin' all the lies that they're tellin' ya
Buyin' all the products that they're sellin' ya
They say, "Jump" and you say, "How high?"
You brain-dead, you got a fuckin' bullet in your head
Bullet in your head, a bullet in your head
A bullet in your head, a bullet in your head!
Bunch of junkies going from spoon to needle...
Is it wrong that I heard the voice of Ice-T when reading that?
Two clowns were eating a cannibal One turns to the other and asks “did I start the joke wrong?”
World of Clowns Rijkaard!...:]
Cannibal stand-up routine:
"So I got arrested the other day. <beat> The charge? Salting a police officer!"
Read that one ages ago in a Dan Piraro cartoon. Always did love puns and wordplay.
Linguistics-fun: the swedish word for marriage and poison is the same: gift (soft 'j'-sound).
just got to my keyboard. that ones funny
Are you serious about poison and marriage?
Yes. As an adjective, "gift" means marriage or the state of being married. As a noun, it means poison. Swedish also does not distiguish between toxin, posion and venom linguistically, sometimes creating confusion in translations.
Luckily, we do have the term "äktenskap" for marriage too, though matrimony would be a more idiomatically correct translation as it is more formal and classier-sounding.
I have no idea why we use "gift" that way, since the old norse word for poison et al is etter, pronounced as 'otter' but with an 'eh!' instead of the 'oh!'-sound (or eitr, transcribing from runes isn't straightforward, and since all us scandinavians insist our own people pronouce the runes correctly, that just adds to the confusion).
I think I heard about "gift" in a Swedish class I took many decades ago. Isn't it the same as English "gift", 'something given'? A bride is 'given' to her husband (or vice versa), and a poison is something 'given' (like free vaccinations).
Whoa, I was thinking the same way, but it was master RG! LOL
It would've been a nice cameo appearance to have T rap along in that Rage song
Well written Mr. Gardner.
Credit goes to Rage Against The Machine.
Ok Rage Against the Machine and Die Hard to look at for reference literacy.
Just read their lyrics. I'd say Rage, The Clash and radiohead called all of this.
I had to look it up but now I want to listen to it 👍
You betcha. Leaky vaccine immune suppression = lethal variants for the jabbed.
Why the f@<k are these "vaccines" still getting jabbed into people?
The correct question.
They’re
1. superfluous,
2. ineffective &
3. dangerous.
No one’s going to fight me on 2 or 3, I expect. But on 1, I’ve long had a major problem with the very concept of vaccination with the intention of protecting the most vulnerable. The logic goes like this:
A. The most vulnerable to the alleged pathogen are vulnerable because their immune systems are less responsive to novel pathogens & immunogenic materials. They also have less to no “physiological reserve” so that, if they fall ill, they’re very close to critical failure of some organ system or other (cardiovascular, respiratory, renal etc).
B. On immunocompetence, however, here’s the crucial point. They don’t respond well to vaccines any more than they do to pathogens. If this logic holds up, the only group you’ve no real chance of helping with a vaccine are the only group who cannot benefit from vaccination.
C. The null hypothesis is that vaccinated & unvaccinated elderly & ill recipients of jabs don’t experience different outcomes if infected. I don’t think we can reject the null hypothesis.
The same logic should hold for influenza vaccinations. Unfortunately it appears in UK at least (according to Cochrane a few years ago) that flu shots don’t reduce hospitalization or death in the target population (which I think for years were people 65y & up).
I may be quite wrong on this whole thing, but if it’s right, it’s a bloody great torpedo amidships about the entire global strategy. Can anyone destroy this “logic” (which should happen if it’s wide of the mark)?
<most profitable drug in history> has entered the chat...
flu vaxx is and always was an evergreen scam.
now the branch covidians would like some of that annual vaxx pie.
Yep, and yep.
Best advice is keep your sleeves rolled down.
I think getting Covid-19 on the childhood vaxx schedule has been a big financial driver.
In one of his many 2020 interviews, I recall Sucharit Bhakdi raising similar issues about vaccinating the very (co morbid rich) elderly. There was a sort of B.1 claim: not only do they not respond well to vaccines; they do not tolerate them well.
Back in the day when "do no harm" meant something to MDs, interventions with this population were mostly limited to palliative, with very strict life quality outcomes calculations applied.
Ah, but I see now (checking my spelling) that Google instructs us that he is a "prominent source of misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic". Never mind!
Trust Google to steer you away from danger!
Wikipedia is excellent, too. 🤔
Through 'patient support groups' they continue to convince Immunocompromised people and their loved ones; whether it be primary immunodeficiency or medication induced immunosuppression that the vaccines miraculously induce both a B and T cell response. That is remarkable enough but then they make no distinction between SCID, CVID etc in their presentations. Until treating MD's stop cowering and start standing up to this fraud call it what it is full on fuckery. Dr Yeadon thank you for your integrity from the start of this. The elderly were preyed upon and the rest are being used to manipulate people into taking it despite them not needing it even if it was safe and effective. In the same 'information sessions' they then tell people they must encourage their loved ones to take the vaccine in order to protect them via herd immunity. If you question why herd immunity is necessary if this vaccine confers protection to the immunocompromised they cut your access. This does not compare to the gaslighting of scientists and MD's speaking the truth but it is unbelievable to still see it working. And yes these are all sponsored by Pharma.
People are afraid and stupid. And fear makes people even stupider.
Oh, and population control.
Because there are billions to be made.
You’re right, but I don’t believe for a moment that the point of the “vaccines” is profit, but control.
The drug companies are making out like drug cartels, but the entire planned near global coup d’etat had the effect of losing trillions in value from the portfolios of those who own / control the money & assets of the world.
Slowing the world’s economy for a few years was always going to be eye wateringly expensive. Yet we now know that they knew, before they embarked on this course of action, that NONE of the NPIs worked, per a detailed review by scientists at WHO in 2019.
Matt Taibbi had a long article saying the ultra rich did very well with the lockdowns. I agree it is about control and maybe depopulating the earth. Seems as though there is a spirit of chaos, lies, and authoritarianism roaming, pulling the strings of these ultra rich folks. I also think it is anti Eros.
Here’s the link to Taibbi: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/blue-and-red-do-have-something-in?r=2jx39&utm_medium=ios
he is right that they DID do well. that was prior to the market crashing though to some extent. Now, as we all know they stand to gain by way of that crash, so i would not be too fast to rule out pure unadulterated greed here
It’s fascinating how Big Pharma owns the major media. So many drug ads on Network TV, so there’s little chance this stuff gets blown wide open.
Absolutely,agree….it is control, but, when you are printing the money you will always come out on top.A 20 x increase in profit ( from vax) covers a good deal of any devaluation loss.
Igor and el gato....THANK YOU. Thank you for actually doing the work to look into all this nonsense. Like I have stated before...I am being told one thing yet seeing another. Orwell would be proud.
Your work is keeping me sane. Keep it up!
Amen!
The gene-transfer jabs shut down the toll-like receptors, which are a critical part of the immune systems way of responding to viral infection. THe Jab shuts them down to increase the life of the mRNA in the body. Essentially it is giving the jabbed V-AIDS to a greater or lesser degree.
Now that is the science... the science of eugenics
Indeed.
I’ve wondered to the extent that things like mistletoe lectin (a molecular mimic of shiga toxin) and Coley’s toxins (which contains 6 TLR ligands that we know of) might act as a reset button to restore innate immune function after vax injury.
If the historical record is any indication, CT holds a lot of promise in treating non-neoplasticism disease of all types. I’m about to drop a stack on this topic 🔜 -- in the coming weeks.
Non- neoplastic 😂🙄
(No edit function in the app.)
If you touch the three dots to the right of collapse there is an edit function 😊I know because my banana fingers often stray on keyboard 🤣
Eugyppius comparison of hyper-vaccinated versus less vaccinated in Germany.
https://www.eugyppius.com/p/omicron-ba5-prefers-hypervaccinated
Dr. Vliet last August shared the animal studies that showed all the vaxxed cats (sorry Gato) and ferrets died from ADE. Dr. Vanden Bossche said a few weeks ago on The Highwire the vaxx are driving variants that could because more deadly. Mark Skidmore on Lighthouse shared an Expose article that shows Canada cases hospitalized and deaths are way up for vaxxed.
Pet hobby horse indeed.
Thank you-An exellent and worthwhile overview! Lest we lose sight of the forest for the trees, despite all of this bona fide data analysis--may we now cut to the chase and enact a moratorium on the experimental drug agenda? How is it possible that there are still people who cannot fathom the idea of a bioweapon?...or a profiteering/control agenda?
Anecdotal evidence. I fly back to PR for my Abuelo’s funeral. It turns into a superspreader event as my aunt, uncle, great aunt, and two cousins all get Covid. All of them vaccinated and boosted. Meanwhile, those of us visiting from the states got nothing. Me unvaccinated while my brother and other aunt were vaccinated after infection. By the way, I saw more masks on the island that I have seen in a year. Had to leave one of the panaderias as I refused to put on a mask.
PR has been a covid panic fest.
the extent to which people have been convinced to love the jab and mask constantly is just surreal.
I've been following the Walgreens test data for a couple months. The number of tests and the positivity rates by vaxx status have gone up and down, but the unvaxxed consistently represent ~25% of the tests and ~20% of the positives (all ages). On average, ~80% of the positives have had at least one jab, and ~50% of the positives have had three jabs. Three jabs doesn't seem to do much for the over 65s before or after the 5 month mark.
Per their slides, it appears that BA4-5 have not blown through yet. Perhaps this would be a good data source to monitor infections at least.
Walgreens (81,489 tests) positivity rate by vaxx status 06/18/2022 through 06/24/2022:
24.9% Unvaxxed
32.5% I Dose
33.5%. 2 Doses > 5 months ago
19.8%. 2 Doses <= 5 months ago
36.0% 3 Doses > 5 months ago
24.8%. 3 Doses <= 5 months ago
=========
78.9% of the people who tested positive had at least one jab.
47.2% of the people who tested positive had three jabs.
68.0% of the people who tested positive age 65+ had three jabs.
Unvaxxed comprise 25.7% of the tests and 21.1% of the positives.
=========
Slide 3
https://www.walgreens.com/businesssolutions/covid-19-index.jsp?fbclid=IwAR32Mert5ffj-JTsy5yd3_akJXzmPAUo3tSYRdu8Rc1l6rS31ZYTJHsmSgM
I wonder what the reinfection rates would be across those same groups.
"what would be REALLY interesting to get at would be a sense of just how much more contagious BA really is vs how much of the additional spread is coming from vaccines."
I like the term "Intrinsic infectiousness" used by Geert Vanden Bossche to disinguish from Ab-mediated enhancement of viral infection. I believe GVB posits that "intrinsic" infectiousness has not changed that dramatically across variants. Most of the increase in infectiousness is from vaccine Ab -induced enhancement. In a sane world, the data to compare R for vaccinated and unvaccinated populations would be widely available.