Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance
877-865-7002
Today’s Deal Zone Items... Handpicked deals...
$3498 $3498
SAVE $click

$3699 $1299
SAVE $2400

$1000 $700
SAVE $300

$3899 $1499
SAVE $2400

$748 $648
SAVE $100

$2999 $1999
SAVE $1000

$1699 $899
SAVE $800

$1698 $1398
SAVE $300

$4499 $3499
SAVE $1000

$1399 $1049
SAVE $350

$1149 $799
SAVE $350

$1399 $1049
SAVE $350

$1498 $1198
SAVE $300

$2797 $2597
SAVE $200

$280 $250
SAVE $30

$1699 $1299
SAVE $400

$8399 $7599
SAVE $800

$899 $799
SAVE $100

$1699 $1299
SAVE $400

COVID-19, WSJ: “Covid-19 Outbreaks Led to Dangerous Delay in Cancer Diagnoses”

I had my COVID-19 IgG antibody test about 4.5 months after my 2.5 week April health episode. My working theory has been that my ongoing EBV/Hashimoto’s problem might have been triggered by CV19. The findings below cast doubt on that theory. However, a single small study is never something to rely on, and the work doesn’t go beyond 4 months.

If “protection against reinfection” is not immunity, then I don’t know what it is. Maybe someone fact-check the fact-checkers at Twitter and their ilk.

Covid-19 Outbreaks Led to Dangerous Delay in Cancer Diagnoses

A decline in mammograms and other screening procedures after the coronavirus pandemic struck is leading to missed and delayed cancer diagnoses, according to data from insurance claims, lab orders, Medicare billings and oncology-practice records, an emerging pattern that is alarming oncologists.

Hundreds of thousands of cancer screenings were deferred after worries about Covid-19 shut down much of the U.S. health-care system starting this spring. Because many cancers can advance rapidly, months without detection could mean fewer treatment options and worse outcomes, including more deaths

There’s really almost no way that doesn’t turn into increased mortality,” with the full effects likely to play out over a decade, said Norman E. “Ned” Sharpless, director of the National Cancer Institute. Missed screenings and other pandemic-related impacts on care could result in about 10,000 additional deaths from breast and colon cancer alone over the next 10 years, the NCI projected earlier this year. Dr. Sharpless said the estimate now appears low.

...

WIND: tip of the iceberg. Even setting aside deaths from dozens of killing diseases and conditions whose treatment has been impacted, the death toll from the economic carpet bombing of the world will kill far more people. That a plunging economy kills people is a hard fact borne out from many decades of actuarial tables, for the #Artists reading this.

Setting aside the destruction of hopes, dreams, savings, plans (a massive impact on its own), the policies around COVID-19 are killing people, and will kill many more people (and worldwide), and those responsible will never be held to account—because two or ten years from now, even when the awful toll is understood, those responsible will surely rationalize away their sociopathic behavior, like the grotesquely anti-science anti-rational anti-life 105 Stanford doctors that are unwilling or unable to think in risk assessment terms, but feel that engaging in character assassination is a positive act.

Death Toll From Covid-19 Pandemic Extends Far Beyond Virus Victims

Researchers are finding growing evidence that the Covid-19 pandemic’s deadly reach is stretching far beyond people who died from coronavirus infections.

From Alzheimer’s disease deaths to fatal heart attacks, federal data show deaths in 2020 have exceeded those of previous years in numerous categories. Doctors and health researchers say the fatalities reflect the ways the pandemic has amplified stress and financial strain while causing many people to avoid hospitals for fear of infections.

“For a long period of time there was a pretty dramatic drop-off in ER visits, elective-surgery screenings, things that Americans do all the time to keep themselves healthy,” said Tom Inglesby, who directs the Center for Health Security at Johns Hopkins University.

The effects are piling up. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has tracked thousands of deaths this year beyond expected levels for conditions that also include hypertension, strokes and diabetes. Physicians say the surge was especially notable in the spring, when the pandemic hit New York and other parts of the Northeast hard.

...

OWC Accelsior 4M2 PCIe SSD
6000 MB/sec!
Mac or PC.


Ideal for Lightroom, Photoshop, video.
Capacity up to 16TB!
OWC Envoy Express

World’s first Thunderbolt 3 M.2 NVME SSD enclosure.

Super fast, bus-powered, 3.3 oz, DIY easy, rugged and compact!


See also OWC Express 4M2
√ No more slow and noisy hard drives!
OWC Envoy Pro EX SSD
Blazingly fast Thunderbolt 3 SSD!

Up to 4TB capacity, USB-C compatible.

USB-C model also available


Great for travel or for desktop!
OWC Thunderblade Thunderbolt 3 SSD

Blazing fast, up to 16TB.

YEE HAH!



√ No more slow and noisy hard drives!

COVID-19, Harvard Gazette: “Protection against reinfection: COVID patients may be protected for up to four months”

2012-08-31: SARS-COV-2 IGG QUAL Neg
A negative test result means that SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies were not detected in the specimen above the limit of detection... This test was performed using Diasorin Liaison XL methodology which is designed to detect IgG antibodies to the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2. COVID-19 lab tests are currently reviewed by the FDA under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA).

I had my COVID-19 IgG antibody test about 4.5 months after my 2.5 week April health episode. My working theory has been that my ongoing EBV/Hashimoto’s problem might have been triggered by CV19. The findings below cast doubt on that theory. However, a single small study is never something to rely on, and the work doesn’t go beyond 4 months.

If “protection against reinfection” is not immunity, then I don’t know what it is. Maybe someone fact-check the fact-checkers at Twitter and their ilk.

Protection against reinfection: COVID patients may be protected for up to four months

People who survive serious COVID-19 infections have long-lasting immune responses against the virus, according to a new study led by researchers at Harvard-affiliated Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH).

The study, published in Science Immunology, offers hope that people infected with the virus will develop lasting protection against reinfection. The study also demonstrates that measuring antibodies can be an accurate tool for tracking the spread of the virus in the community.

...The researchers found that levels of an antibody called immunoglobulin G (IgG) remained elevated in infected patients for four months and were associated with the presence of protective neutralizing antibodies, which also demonstrated little decrease in activity over time.

“That means that people are very likely protected for that period of time,” said Charles. “We showed that key antibody responses to COVID-19 do persist.”

They also found that measuring IgG was highly accurate in identifying infected patients who had symptoms for at least 14 days...

In another finding, Charles and her colleagues showed that people infected with SARS-CoV-2 had immunoglobulin A (IgA) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) responses that were relatively short-lived, declining to low levels within about two and a half months or less, on average.

“We can say now that if a patient has IgA and IgM responses, they were likely infected with the virus within the last two months,” said Charles.

...

Peter K writes:

Antibody testing just has many limitations, and the fact that your body actively filters them out as part of its daily cleanup isn’t helping them to register on tests.

Since you’re an athlete, and I’m assuming still riding at least one bike, you’re helping the process of filtering them out. So it’s no surprise to me that you tested negative.

As an anecdote, my sister developed Covid toes, which is an indisputable sign she had antibodies in her system. Yet, 2-3 months later, negative antibody test.

Another example would be me, as a celiac. As long as I’m not ingesting gluten or any of its components, negative antibody test. Even if I start ingesting them, it won’t show sufficiently for a diagnosis. If I ingest moderately and exercise heavily, still insufficient, even though I have clear symptoms. It’s only after prolonged exposure and buildup in the body that antigens will show sufficiently. It’s just the nature of the tests, you have to be sick enough for long enough for it to show in the results.

WIND: I was in exceptionally strong condition prior to my 2.5-week April episode (having come off strong fitness from two double centuries in March as well as being fully acclimatized to high altitude). I've long felt that my body in such condition just deals with stuff aggressively—I hardly ever get sick, and my body seems to eliminate toxins and drugs quickly.

It took me 3-4 weeks after that to get my fitness up to acceptable levels again (for me), and I was seemingly OK on and off, but any hard physical effort seemed to wipe my out like it never had before, such as my ascent of White Mountain Peak. Normally I’d recover from that relatively moderate effort (see hard core) in a day or so, but I could hardly walk 1/4 mile on level ground without feeling exhausted. It took a full week to feel semi normal, which is not to say strong. Whatever hit me has had a lasting impact even here in mid-October eg EBV and Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis.

View all handpicked deals...

Canon EOS 5DS DSLR Camera (Body Only)
$3699 $1299
SAVE $2400

Mail-In Ballots Raise Risk of Ballot Fraud by Exposing Name, Address, Signature

See also:
New Data Analysis Finds 353 Counties With 1.8 Million More Registered Voters Than Residents
Officials Allay Concerns That Voter Portals Allow Cancelling Other Voters’ Mail-in Ballots in Some States

In no way is this a partisan statement; it is all about the security of the mail-in ballots and our right to vote with a secret ballot, without which we’re just a banana republic. Yet what we now have now enables exactly that.

My signature and name and address are fully disclosed on the OUTSIDE of the ballot, visible to anyone at a glance, in particular a cell phone camera or similar. I recall that in the past, my absentee ballot had a privacy fold-over flap. So why is my name, address, signature now exposed for anyone to see?

Everyone deserves to have their ballet counted, and everyone deserves the right of privacy. There should not be security weaknesses with ballots, so why can’t we have a double envelope, which would solve this risk entirely? Or go back to the fold-over security flap that I recall using in the past?

Insta-scan ballot against a name/address database?

In short: imagine a QR-code scanner for ballots, referencing name/address against databases.

This is the age of the internet. With OCR via a cell phone and a database, it is short work to look up just about anyone and deduce their party affiliation with high accuracy, by referencing any number of databases.

Off-the-shelf technology with a bit of customization (an "app") would enable anyone person to aim a cell phone at a ballot and get a near-instantaneous readout which could surely approach 90% accuracy by querying appropriate databases. And who knows what is in that bar code—maybe it contains party affiliation outright.

Bad actors need only discard (or delay) a small percentage of “undesirable” ballots , with 2-3% ample to swing a national election—and very difficult to detect. Bad actors could do this at key junctions: mailbox, mailperson*, ballot collection boxes, the tallying point, etc.

Is this being done? I make no claim that is is. But it could be done, and that makes the entire process a petri dish for problems, this election or the next. And it sure as heck is what I would try as a state actor (China, Russia) or an intelligence agency (any country including USA), or any organization seeking to control elections—low-hanging fruit for malefactors.

* The postal service union first endorsed Bernie Sanders, and then Joe Biden. Every day we read about mail-in ballots being found in the trash or similar. Whatever your political views, the idea that a partisan entity should be responsible for ballots is chilling.

Extremely unreliable mail

Mail service this summer has been the worst in 35 years. In just two months, we’ve seen a valuable check go missing (another 2 week delay?), we’ve received DMV license plates for someone a mile away, we’ve seen 2-week delays, we regularly get mail addressed to neighbors, etc. You cannot trust the post office to deliver mail, let alone trust that postal workers or facilities are secure. The delay of mail is election-changing all by itself. In other words, the postal service is so incompetent that malfeasance would scarcely be detectable. At this point, I would NEVER willingly use the US Postal Service for any significant document or check. Why the hell would I trust my ballot to it? Accordingly, I sent and dropped off my ballot in the town ballot collection box.

 

OWC ROVER PRO wheels for Mac Pro

No tools or hassle… just place your Mac Pro’s factory feet into the Rover Pro’s polished stainless-steel housings and secure with a few hand twists.

When you’re done moving your Mac Pro around, the Rover Pro makes it just as quick and easy to convert back to the factory feet for stationary use.

Reader Comment on Magnesium: “hayfever subsided, asthma much better, cramps subsided”

re: magnesium
re: Health and Vitality Start with getting Key Nutrients: Best Sources for Magnesium, Vitamin K2, Vitamin D3, Vitamin A, Vitamin C
re: BMJ: “Subclinical magnesium deficiency: a principal driver of cardiovascular disease and a public health crisis”
re: Don’t Treat Asthma, CURE It! Magnesium Supplementation has Banished My Small Airway Pulmonary Issues; ZERO need for prescription inhaler for 18 weeks running
re: Magnesium Supplementation Personal Findings: Brain, Lungs and Asthma, Sleep, Urinary Flow, Muscle Spasms

Reader Thorsten K writes:

Please keep up the good reporting in WIND. It’s so good to know that not everybody in this world has gone insane…

As for the magnesium: I’ve been taking 1000mg per day since June, and things are getting better with my shoulder and muscle cramps. Not to mention that my hayfever subsided. My family got curious and also started to take Mg, and their asthma has gotten much better.

Thanks again for your info on this! I had researched this high and low but somehow never came upon Magnesium Chloride until your reporting.

WIND: magnesium deficiency is the norm, and it’s degrading the health of hundreds of millions of people worldwide, yet it’s exceedingly rare for doctors to ever mention magnesium to their patients, let alone know how to correctly test for magnesium deficiency—unacceptable, but sadly the norm.

The modern food supply is badly deficient in many things but particularly magnesium which is critical in hundreds of physiological processes, including mitochondrial energy production. Adequate dietary intake of magnesium via food is not really a solution; magnesium is one of those things you really cannot fix with dietary choices—you’d have to eat 5000 calories a day due to depleted soils and hence poor Mg content in food.

See my recommendations in Health and Vitality Start with getting Key Nutrients: Best Sources for Magnesium, Vitamin K2, Vitamin D3, Vitamin A, Vitamin C

Getting adequate potassium in diet is fairly hard too—I say that based on carefully calculating intake on a day when I was trying to eat potassium-rich foods and yet barely getting to the RDA. Consider both RnAReset Pico Potassium @AMAZON and RnARset Remag @AMAZON.

Also, a great way to get magnesium is ReMag lotion @AMAZON, also by RnAReset.


MacPerformanceGuide.com

COVID-19: the WHO Says that Lockdowns are a Bad Idea, Hurting the Most Vulnerable Hardest — “lockdown policies producing DEVASTATING effects on short and long-term public health”

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it — Lloyd Chambers. That applies to climate science, COVID-19, and Einstein’s theory of relativity.

RE: The Doctor Is In: Scott Atlas And The Efficacy Of Lockdowns, Social Distancing, And Closings.
RE: Martin Kulldorff, professor, Harvard Medical School: Letter to the editor: Scott Atlas and lockdowns
RE: COVID-19: Great Barrington Declaration by Medical Professionals and Epidemiologists
RE: The data is in — stop the panic and end the total isolation
RE: Time to Steepen the Curve and Accelerate Infection of Low-Risk People
RE: What the Pandemic Has Taught Us About Science

Science slowly tries to get it right, slowly succeeds, but most of it is bullshit along the way. That’s a fact that even scientific organizations acknowledge.

By comparison, leaders make choices. A good leader says “we can’t know”, and knows that we have to manage our risk (risk assessment), and default to freedom. That has been the meta message in the blog here for the past 6 months, if you weren’t paying attention.

I’ve said before that the WHO and CDC cannot be trusted, and that’s true and proven in myriad ways during this crisis. But even blind squirrels find acorns, and sometimes an organization finally has to wake up and finally do the right thing, or collapse under the crushing weight of its own hypocrisy.

Trust the science, trust the doctors” is now revealed as the bullshit propaganda that it always has been (and always will be*). Still, this WHO reversal (like its mask reversal) is welcome, even though so much damage was done by the time they got it right.

Never before has so much damage been done to so many by so few based on understanding so little.

Lockdowns made sense for a short while when no one really knew the risks of COVID-19. But they stopped making sense months ago. The damage done by lockdowns is irreversible for millions of people, and the death toll caused by lockdowns will far exceed COVID-19 deaths.

Hysterical anti-scientific policies around COVID-19 have been the goal of too many politicians and especially the social programming networks (“news”), whose very business model is scaring people, dividing people, getting people to freak out/stress out/hate anyone not in their 'tribe'.

* See first paragraph—“the science” is not a thing unless you reject science because no one who says the science is settled is qualified to discuss it.

The WHO is in effect stating that President Trump has been right about lockdowns all along. That ought to make a few heads explode right before the election, particularly since the WHO leadership is hardly a fan of Trump. The 'spin' should be interesting, but my guess is that it will be ignored by most of the media, because it breaks the narrative in favor of the truth. Indeed when I checked today, this bombshell news is not even mentioned at CNN.com, not even under “Live COVID updates”. If the suppression of this bombshell policy position is not prima facie evidence for the press being the enemy of the people, nothing is. How many people do these scum plan on killing just to fuel their money-making model?

WHO Official Urges World Leaders to Stop Using Lockdowns as Primary Method Against CCP Virus

October 10, 2020

“We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus,” David Nabarro told The Spectator in an interview aired on Oct. 8. “The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted, but by and large, we’d rather not do it.”

Nabarro pointed to the collateral damage that lockdowns are having worldwide, especially among poorer populations.

“Just look at what’s happened to the tourism industry, for example in the Caribbean or in the Pacific, because people aren’t taking their holidays. Look what’s happened to smallholder farmers all over the world because their markets have got dented. Look what’s happening to poverty levels. It seems that we may well have a doubling of world poverty by next year. Seems that we may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition because children are not getting meals at school and their parents, in poor families, are not able to afford it,” Nabarro said.

“This is a terrible, ghastly global catastrophe actually,” he added. “And so we really do appeal to all world leaders: Stop using lockdown as your primary control method, develop better systems for doing it, work together and learn from each other, but remember—lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer.

Nabarro isn’t the only scientist opposing lockdowns. A number of medical or public health scientists and medical practitioners have signed the Great Barrington Declaration, which states that “current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health.”

...

When language this strong is used by a stodgy organization like the WHO, you know that the policies around COVID-19 have been the biggest clusterfuck in the history of the world.

Over 14,000 Health Experts Sign Petition Against COVID-19 Lockdowns

The Great Barringtion Declaration (which Google is trying to suppress) is making headway. The signatory page is malfunctioning as of Oct 11, but it was working a few days ago. But you can still read and sign it.

As of Oct. 8, more than 9,400 medical practitioners and 4,900 medical and public health scientists have joined more than 120,000 members of the general public in signing the petition, which was created on Oct. 4 and co-authored by Harvard professor of medicine Dr. Martin Kulldorff, Oxford professor Dr. Sunetra Gupta, and Stanford Medical School professor Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.

“As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection,” reads the petition, which is titled the Great Barrington Declaration, after the Massachusetts town where it was signed.

The petition calls for an end to current lockdown policies, saying that they are producing “devastating effects” on short- and long-term public health.

Some of these devastating effects, the doctors wrote, include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings, and deteriorating mental health. They argue that this will, in the future, lead to greater excess mortality, with the working class and younger generation “carrying the heaviest burden.”

“Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice,” the petition continues. “Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.”

OWC Thunderbolt 3 Dock
Ideal for any Mac with Thunderbolt 3


Dual Thunderbolt 3 ports
USB 3 • USB-C
Gigabit Ethernet
5K and 4K display support plus Mini Display Port
Analog sound in/out and Optical sound out

Works on any Mac with Thunderbolt 3

Hypothesis: Could COVID-19 Provoke a Flare-Up of Epstein Barr Virus?

re: Personal Health: Cyclical Extreme Fatigue Explained: Diagnosis of Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis and Epstein Barr Virus
re: Dealing with Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis and Epstein Barr Virus (EBV): a Few Things that Have Helped

I was diagnosed with Epstein Barr Virus and Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis in early September 2020.

Although I tested negative for COVID-19 antibodies in early September, that was 4.5 months after my 2.5 week mid-April episode that was consistent with CV19 symtoms. So I had written of the April episode as “unknown pathogen”.

However, since then, a physician friend of mine has told me that antibody tests that far out are sketchy. Thus a negative test might not mean much. Furthermore, a physician friend of his is suffering from Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) for months, just like I have been suffering (and still do)—it has been a long haul and I still only have a fraction of my strength. This is too strikingly similar.

Epstein Barr virus is known to hide-out in the body permanently, flaring up opportunistically. Moreover, it is my own life experience that a virus can flip genetic switches—in my case a lifetime of no allergies or asthma turned into a 10-year ordeal to get both under control, following a severe pulmonary viral infection at age 20 (all my allergists have confirmed this as a real thing).

So what I am getting at is the possibility that this ongoing fatigue (similar to mononucleosis, though my WBC count is normal) might in fact be EBV or some genetic switch-flipping thing. So it might take a loooooong time to recover from.

Hypothesis

Yeah, I know all this is “anecdotal” as physicians like to say, and I am well aware of confirmation bias, but I am not making a conclusion, only a working hypothesis:

Might a COVID-19 infection trigger the flare-up of other latent viral problems such as Epstein Barr Virus? And/or other viruses (perhaps varicella zoster eg Shingles)?

I hope to speak directly to this other physician with EBV, so we can compare notes. Of course, whatever I had might have been some other virus, so the hypothesis is a general one.

Make an Old Dog Run Like a Young Puppy
with an OWC SSD

SATA, USB3, Thunderbolt, internal upgrades and PCIe SSD options for Mac or PC.
View All OWC SSDs...

COVID-19: The Pandemic that Killed Debate

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it — Lloyd Chambers. That applies to climate science, COVID-19, and Einstein’s theory of relativity.

Repudiating rational debate on science is as ANTI-science as it gets, yet this attitude has become the new norm in not just the social programming networks (“news”) but it is being used to harass, intimidate and silence those in science and medicine who dare to disagree.

RE: The Doctor Is In: Scott Atlas And The Efficacy Of Lockdowns, Social Distancing, And Closings.
RE: Martin Kulldorff, professor, Harvard Medical School: Letter to the editor: Scott Atlas and lockdowns
RE: COVID-19: Great Barrington Declaration by Medical Professionals and Epidemiologists
RE: The data is in — stop the panic and end the total isolation
RE: Time to Steepen the Curve and Accelerate Infection of Low-Risk People
RE: AIER: “The Pandemic that Killed Debate”

Emphasis added.

AIER: “The Pandemic that Killed Debate”

October 6, 2020

Carl Sagan famously said, “the cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.” This wisdom has been sadly forsaken during the COVID19 pandemic, when one powerful narrative has taken not only the public, but the scientific community, by storm...

Even as evidence proving that lockdowns do not stop the virus rolls in by the truckload, the scientists who argue for a different approach are marginalized, censored, affixed with disparaging labels, and ostracized. Sweden’s chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell was accused of “leading Sweden to catastrophe” and of “experimenting” on the Swedish people. Nobel Laureate Michael Levitt’s careful studies and models were labeled “lethal nonsense” as he weathered attacks left, right and center. John Ioannidis, one of the world’s most productive scientists, found his studies smeared and ignored. Sunetra Gupta, one of the world’s foremost epidemiologists at The University of Oxford, found that expressing her wide-ranging infectious disease knowledge suddenly made her “unethical and dangerous.”

The latest smear target is neuroradiologist and health policy expert Dr. Scott Atlas, formerly of Stanford. A longtime lockdown dissenter, his principal and latest offense seems to be agreeing to serve on The White House’s coronavirus task force...

...[WIND: read the Kulldorf letter and reply in the article]

...Professor Kulldorff received no reply to this offer, so The Soho Forum — a highly respected debate platform — took up the case, personally inviting the scientists to participate in an online, one-on-one debate via Zoom, taking the negative on this resolution:

To minimize mortality and optimize public health, the U.S. should implement a targeted coronavirus strategy that better protects the old and other high-risk groups, while letting children and young adults live close to normal lives.

This offer was emailed to Dr. Philip Pizzo, the chief signatory of Stanford’s letter in opposition to Atlas, who replied simply: “Thank you for the invitation. We have conveyed what we have to say in our letter and do not have additional comments to offer.” From both a public policy and scientific standpoint, this blanket refusal to engage in discourse is concerning. When someone can level an accusation of dishonesty at a public figure, refuse to debate the substance with the accused, and suffer no consequences for this behavior, this stifles the free expression of opinions and ideas...

The alternative — some narrative-maker decides the information that will be provided, withholds contradictory relevant information, and forbids the defense from speaking at all— is fascism. It is tyrrany. It is certainly not American.

...

WIND: real science has been decaying for many years now. As an avid reader about science my entire life, I have watched an increasing intellectual corruption in publications like Scientific American and similar places—obvious confirmation bias and cognitive commitments having no scientific basis are readily found in the prose. Offhand statements lacking any proof is seen in far too many articles—this is persuasion @AMAZON technique and I read it all the time. Opposing viewpoints are simply not published. The “press” then amplifies this ten-fold, taking care to never discuss the other side.

Non-replicable studies: confirmation bias, selection bias, financial corruption, non-public data, falsifying data, excluding key factors (intentionally or through lack of imagination)—these all have led to a crisis in science.

Test-tube thinking: particularly in medicine, the failure to realize that the human body is a complex synergistic ecosystem with myriad feedback mechanisms and wildly varying “software” (genetics and epigenetics and biome), not a test-tube where single variables can be studied.

Financial corruption: look no further than the sordid history of the chimeric cholesterol hypothesis and the history of statins—see my see my recommended reading list.

Vast peer pressure: the very topic discussed above. And for example in climate science, where only a fool could expect to question the consensus and expect to secure grants or make a living. It has become an echo chamber with little or no discussion of the known and fully feasible solution for the Golden Age (eg Gen 4 Nuclear Power). Climate science is now so structurally corrupt that it is best seen as a religious movement—apropos the term “denier” as in “denier of the faith”. The issue is not about whether and how much the Earth is warming, it is about whether it can even be discussed without repercussion. So it’s a religion, not a science.

Collapse of independent medical opinions: very few doctors remain free to prescribe or treat as they see fit, or even to speak freely about some medical topics—employer pressure (fire at will), mandatory treatment protocols (many of which have little basis in science and are all about Big Pharma profits), insurance companies that enforce conformity and suppress practice out of the consensus, an total failure to improve health instead modern allopathic medicine focuses almost entirely on bandaids that suppress symptoms. Diabetes, obesity, heart disease and numerous other modern maladies have only gotten worse, and this is no accident but a fact of medical ignorance masquerading as science, for manu decades.

The hysteria about COVID-19 has turned a crisis into a total nuclear meltdown. The whole thing is as anti-scientific as I have seen in my lifetime.


Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

COVID-19; WSJ: What the Pandemic Has Taught Us About Science

See also: ethics in medicine, ‘Replication crisis’ spurs reforms in how science studies are done, SARS CoV2 aka COVID-19: Perspectives on Data and Science, Suggested Reading.

To understand the intellectual, ethical, financial corruption in medicine around statins and cholesterol (which continues today), see my recommended reading list.

A few things caught my eye.

Emphasis added.

WSJ: What the Pandemic Has Taught Us About Science

Editorial by Matt Ridley, House of Lords

...Peer review is supposed to be the device that guides us away from unreliable heretics. A scientific result is only reliable when reputable scholars have given it their approval. Dr. Yan’s report has not been peer reviewed. But in recent years, peer review’s reputation has been tarnished by a series of scandals. The Surgisphere study was peer reviewed, as was the study by Dr. Andrew Wakefield, hero of the anti-vaccine movement, claiming that the MMR vaccine (for measles, mumps and rubella) caused autism. Investigations show that peer review is often perfunctory rather than thorough; often exploited by chums to help each other; and frequently used by gatekeepers to exclude and extinguish legitimate minority scientific opinions in a field.

Herbert Ayres, an expert in operations research, summarized the problem well several decades ago: “As a referee of a paper that threatens to disrupt his life, [a professor] is in a conflict-of-interest position, pure and simple. Unless we’re convinced that he, we, and all our friends who referee have integrity in the upper fifth percentile of those who have so far qualified for sainthood, it is beyond naive to believe that censorship does not occur.” Rosalyn Yalow, winner of the Nobel Prize in medicine, was fond of displaying the letter she received in 1955 from the Journal of Clinical Investigation noting that the reviewers were “particularly emphatic in rejecting” her paper.

The health of science depends on tolerating, even encouraging, at least some disagreement. In practice, science is prevented from turning into religion not by asking scientists to challenge their own theories but by getting them to challenge each other, sometimes with gusto. Where science becomes political, as in climate change and COVID-19, this diversity of opinion is sometimes extinguished in the pursuit of a consensus to present to a politician or a press conference, and to deny the oxygen of publicity to cranks. This year has driven home as never before the message that there is no such thing as “the science”; there are different scientific views on how to suppress the virus.

...

A replication crisis has shocked psychology and medicine in recent years, with many scientific conclusions proving impossible to replicate because they were rushed into print with “publication bias” in favor of marginally and accidentally significant results. As the psychologist Stuart Ritchie of Kings College London argues in his new book, “Science Fictions: Exposing Fraud, Bias, Negligence and Hype in Science,” unreliable and even fraudulent papers are now known to lie behind some influential theories.

...

For example, “priming”—the phenomenon by which people can be induced to behave differently by suggestive words or stimuli—was until recently thought to be a firmly established fact, but studies consistently fail to replicate it. In the famous 1971 Stanford prison experiment, taught to generations of psychology students, role-playing volunteers supposedly chose to behave sadistically toward “prisoners.” Tapes have revealed that the “guards” were actually instructed to behave that way. A widely believed study, subject of a hugely popular TED talk, showing that “power posing” gives you a hormonal boost, cannot be replicated. And a much-publicized discovery that ocean acidification alters fish behavior turned out to be bunk.

Prof. Ritchie argues that the way scientists are funded, published and promoted is corrupting: “Peer review is far from the guarantee of reliability it is cracked up to be, while the system of publication that’s supposed to be a crucial strength of science has become its Achilles heel.” He says that we have “ended up with a scientific system that doesn’t just overlook our human foibles but amplifies them.”

...

WIND: the idea that politicians should “follow the science” sounds good, but only the gullible think that makes sense, because the science is rarely clear and it is only a fraction of the total risk assessment needed for quality decision making. A “consensus” ~= bullshit.

Moreover, most scientists are myopic as to the numerous issues surrounding any challenge, almost certainly biased, generally poorly educated in other fields (e.g., enonomics and philosophy and more). As a result, very few are unqualified to make decisions on governance and policy. Indeed, all evidence points to professional malfeasance when it comes to numerous issues around COVID—a refusal to entertain debate on very real and very deadly issues—those folks are not even qualified to practice in their own field, by rejecting its very basis—vigorous intellectual debate.

* I know firsthand just how poorly educated doctors are when it comes to understanding health and nutrition and even concussions, let alone improving baseline health, instead focusing on bandaids (medications mainly) for problems once they happen. Ethics in medicine is in a very sorry state.


Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

Amazon Product Review: Finish Line Citrus Degreaser

Amazon makes sure product reviews are credible. Well, maybe not, BUT they are way more credible the “news”.

This one got 32 votes, vs 2 votes for other answers:

Finish Line Citrus Degreaser Bicycle Degreaser 20oz Pour Can @AMAZON.

Question: ive tride the park toll citris cleaner 1 part cleaner and 3 part sparcling water and it tastes like sprite and i was wonding if this one would work.

Answer: Depends on the size of the bubbles. Have to use a European sparkling water, like Pellegrino. Actually ends up tasting more like Orangina. Especially effective for cleaning out your inside tubes, although you do have to put up with a certain amount of dripping from your bottom bracket while it's working.
By David Pearce on November 30, 2015

The bleach reviews might be even better.


Upgrade the memory of your 2020 iMac up to 128GB

COVID-19: Is Part of the Story the Truth?

I don’t have any big issue with this interview taken as a whole. But it’s representative of the rampant oversimplification even by doctors that leads to a distorted view of COVID-19.

Here, I present a few of the claims and point out how they mislead and fail to provide full context. Select excerpts, emphasis added.

Stanford Medicine, Sept 23 2020: 5 Questions: Flu vaccination in a time of COVID-19

The flu season peaks from December through February in the United States, sickens between 9 million and 49 million people each year, and sends an average of 200,000 to the hospital annually, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Influenze numbers are estimates based on CDC models, These models are not real data, they are guesses not validated by science. Models are for persuasion; models are not science. Models that don’t work well are thrown away and not discussed; models that get lucky are cited until they stop working. In short, models are bullshit.

There also appears to be a greater number of asymptomatic COVID-19 cases than asymptomatic flu cases. And the death rate for COVID-19 appears to be higher than the death rate for flu. There also appears to be more super-spreading events with COVID-19 than with flu: It seems to be transmitted more easily through the air, although both viruses are primarily spread by droplets. Finally, the risk of complications and death in healthy infants and children appears to be higher for flu than for COVID-19.

How would we know about asymptotic influenza cases any more than we know about asymptotic COVID-19 cases? While the statement might be correct, no one really knows for sure: do you go to the doctor if you just feel slightly “off” or think you have a mild cold? I sure don’t. Who reports that? No one. Who tests for influenza? I’ve never been tested for it.

Note the weasel words “appears”; this is doublespeak for “we don’t know; it is unproven”. Ditto for any failure to have real proof—ferquently referred to as a “consensus”—most often when Big Pharma is involved, or there are political considerations.

Death rate”: no one knows or can know how many people have been infected by either influenza or COVID-19. Without knowing that, it is mathematically impossible to compute a death rate. Yet the term is bandied about as if it is some kind of fact, when it is actually a crude guess influenced by political considerations, financial corruption (hospitals pressuring doctors to presume CV19 for financial gain), etc.

What Dr. Kappagoda is referring to as the “death rate” is unclear, but what is clear that non one knows or can know the death rate versus infection rate, since no one knows the infection rate, and it cannot be known without large-scale randomized testing at frequent intervals! Which no country has done.

Thus it’s misleading to quote an undefined “death rate” for something that cannot even be computed. Death rate for confirmed infections? Death rate based on model estimates? Death rate based on hospitalizations? On guessing? Yep, based on guessing. No, that’s not a joke.

“COVID death” = no credible definition or science

  • As defined by the CDC, a COVID-19 death includes virtually any death in which the patient is even suspected of having CV19. It need not be proven that the patient actually had CV19, it need not be shown as the primary cause, it’s hugely unscientific.
  • A death in a car crash, by heart attack or stroke and just about anything can be counted as a CV19 death if CV19 is suspected (it need not be proven).
  • Doctors are pressured to categorize as CV19 death because hospitals have financial incentives to label the death on COVID (extra payments to them). It used to be illegal for hospitals to employ doctors; now hospitals can fire doctors at will for failing to bow to such pressures (which also includes the medications you are given-beware!).
  • Different jurisdictions within the same country or state frequently use different approaches, and other countries may count COVID deaths completely differently!

There is nothing scientific when it comes to the claimed death toll from COVID.

Apple iPhone 7
Only $799 $295


MN9H2LL/A (USA/Global Unlocked)
Used, Mint Condition, Factory Unlocked

COVID-19: Great Barrington Declaration by Medical Professionals and Epidemiologists

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it — Lloyd Chambers. That applies to climate science, COVID-19, and Einstein’s theory of relativity.

Repudiating rational debate on science is as ANTI-science as it gets, yet this attitude has become the new norm in not just the social programming networks (“news”) but it is being used to harass, intimidate and silence those in science and medicine who dare to disagree. The silencers refuse to debate the issues—that speaks volumes.

RE: The Doctor Is In: Scott Atlas And The Efficacy Of Lockdowns, Social Distancing, And Closings.
RE: Martin Kulldorff, professor, Harvard Medical School: Letter to the editor: Scott Atlas and lockdowns
RE: COVID-19: Great Barrington Declaration by Medical Professionals and Epidemiologists
RE: The data is in — stop the panic and end the total isolation
RE: Time to Steepen the Curve and Accelerate Infection of Low-Risk People
RE: AIER: “The Pandemic that Killed Debate”

I’ve signed it. This declaration is the most rational approach we have to COVID-19.
Lloyd Chambers, B.S, Stanford University

UPDATE: Google (alphabet) is taking pains to place crackpot posts about the the Great Barrington Declaration high in the ranking so as to misrepresent it. But this is not news; Google has long been a major manipulator of public opinion, by suppressing results that do not agree with its politics.

The Great Barrington Declaration

[emphasis added, click through the title above to read at the source and/or sign it]

Oct 4 2020

As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e.  the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. 

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. 

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. 

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed.

Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

On October 4, 2020, this declaration was authored and signed in Great Barrington, United States, by:

Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring of infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations.

Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.

WIND: anyone who values a faux safety over their liberty deserves neither.

This is not about any particular policy or issue. It is about the refusal to debate the issues knowing that many policies are hugely destructive, and that these policiues are killing people now and will kill many more—many more than COVID-19. To refuse to have that discussion is grotesquely unethical.

Professionals who shirk their moral and professional responsibilities by refusing to debate the issues are anti-science, anti-reason, and anti-humanity.

The lives of my 80-year-old parents are dear to me. But the lives of my ~20 year old children are more dear, with 60 years to go. In my mid 50’s, I have increased risk too (especially with a recent health condition). My wife is much older than me so she has even higher risk. Yet I’ll take that risk, I’ll take one for 'the team'. It’s the only moral thing to do.

As a moral proposition, it is grotesque to damage a huge majority with very long lives ahead of them for the benefit of the few, many of whom have very little time left with or without CV19*. It is a moral imperative to fix these terrible policies.

We didn’t know enough in March about COVID-19, perhaps even into April. But those times are long gone. Now, COVID-19 policies have devolved into tryrannical and wholly arbitrary rules that are killing people—far more than COVID-19 (whose death numbers are total GIGO). Still, there is a 'benefit' for collectivist mentalities: prepping the populace to accept totalitarian measures, softening up the populace for more invasive controls of any imagined future threat. Where in the constitution were these sweeping martial law powers including de-facto house arrest ever granted? Michigan finally figured it out, but what is the penalty for a governor whose core instincts are dictatorial in nature?

* And anyone dumb enough to believe the claimed COVID-19 death toll should not even be in the conversation. The count is utterly corrupt on an intellectual and financial basis, as is public record.

Make an Old Dog Run Like a Young Puppy
with an OWC SSD

SATA, USB3, Thunderbolt, internal upgrades and PCIe SSD options for Mac or PC.
View All OWC SSDs...

Did China Create the CCP Virus (COVID-19)? Where it the Scientific Analysis of Specific Claims?

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it — Lloyd Chambers. That applies to climate science, COVID-19, and Einstein’s theory of relativity. Repudiating rational debate on science is as anti-science as it gets.

re: Did China Create the CCP Virus (COVID-19)? Tucker Carlson Interview of Chinese Virologist

Feel free to discount ZeroHedge, and its commentary on this matter.

What I want to see/hear is scientific confirmation or refutation of the specific claims in the papers! Not some dumb-ass interview with an alleged expert who might or might not be neutral. I want specific scientific confirmation or refutation of the points in the paper—not character assassination or mind reading or politicized opinions. Just the truth, please.

SARS-CoV-2 Is an Unrestricted Bioweapon: a Truth Revealed through Uncovering a Large-Scale, Organized Scientific Fraud (direct download here).

See also the first paper Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synethetic Route (direct download here).


Upgrade the memory of your 2020 iMac up to 128GB

CDC Finally Figures Out that COVID-10 Can Spread Via Tiny Air Particles

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it — Lloyd Chambers. That applies to climate science, COVID-19, and Einstein’s theory of relativity.

Finally the CDC has grudgingly codified what was obvious to any person of ordinary intelligence: a highly transmissable virus almost by definition must be airborne*. This is why back in January I recommended N100 masks to my readers.

We might never know what the real deal is on transmissibility is, since it is a Real World thing that no laboratory test will ever replicate properly. So the science is not settled on the degree to which transmission through the air matters, but it clearly is to some degree and maybe far more than the CDC is willing to consider, since the Real World is hard to study sometimes.

Even from a risk management perspective masks made sense from day one. You don’t wait for proof when the risk assessment decision is so clear—unless you are an idiot (medical expert). So we were lied to by the CDC, WHO, Surgeon General, etc. Now people get assaulted or arrested in some cases for not wearing a mask that still won’t protect the wearer**. And of course, masks don’t matter if your Cause is Just.

To not understand basic risk management repudiates the CDC or WHO or Surgeon General as credible entities. It is also true, and not a contradiction, to say that excessive emphasis on masks is just as idiotic and heavy-handed—and politicized.

The mantra of “trust the experts, trust the science, trust the data” is political posturing designed to stifle rational debate. Experts do NOT agree about COVID-19, a consensus is never science and the data about COVID-19 is GIGO—dubious at best even for the alleged COVID-19 death count.

* In a modern society, where we can mostly rely on non-contaminated water and similar.
** I can wear a glasses-foging leaky surgical mask or a filthy bandana at a health care facility where even the nurses have gaping holes in their mask-fit (personal experience!). BUT I am precluded from protecting myself with a valved N95 or N100 mask—the sign at the door says so! Yet if everyone had a valved N95 or N100 mask to protect themselves, this whole pandemic could have been shut down in March. If all at risk people had had such self-protecting masks, maybe the death count would have been 10% as much?! That is the sordid history of what experts have done to the public.

WSJ: CDC Acknowledges Covid-19 Can Spread Via Tiny Air Particles

[emphasis added, excerpts from full interview]

The agency updates guidelines after previously deleting language on airborne particles; virus can spread to people more than 6 feet away.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said tiny particles that linger in the air can spread the coronavirus, revising its guidelines on the matter just a few weeks after the health agency had acknowledged a role for the particles and then abruptly removed it.

The guidelines on how the coronavirus spreads were initially updated last month to acknowledge a role, and possibly the primary one, played by tiny aerosol particles in spreading the virus. But the agency removed the changes only days later, saying a draft version of the proposed changes had been posted in error.

WIND: when experts lie to the public, reverse themselves, and take 9 months to figure out the obvious, anyone gullible enough to parrot “listen to the experts” and “follow the science” should stop embarrasing themselves in public with their ignorance of what has actually transpired.

In particular, the suppression of debate and viewpoints means that the so-called experts are more about politics than science and cannot be trusted to tell us anything credible. Not so long as disagreements mean intimidation and character assassination for raising extremely important issues that can save many lives.

Read the article and then realize that the utterly idiotic closures of outdoor recreation areas is exactly the OPPOSITE of the totalitarian tactics in too many states. Not to mention that health improves with exercise and sunlight.

In its new guidelines, the CDC acknowledged the need to ensure proper ventilation of indoor spaces, saying that “being outdoors and in spaces with good ventilation reduces the risk of exposure to infectious respiratory droplets.”

We’re supposed to trust confused experts?

The latest problem with the CDC’s guidelines stemmed from confusion inside the agency, not interference from the White House or the Health and Human Services department, people familiar with the matter said.



Upgrade the memory of your 2020 iMac up to 128GB

Science Daily: “Can the common cold help protect you from COVID-19?”

If confirmed, this study might explain why so many people can shrug off COVID-19 (asymptomatic). My working hypothesis would be that people with baseline cross-reactive immunity and a strong immune system can easily fend off CV19.

Since older people surely have had the common cold many times, one has to ask why the elderly are having such severe issues with the COVID-19. The answer might be simple: poor overall health including a weak immune system that can is sluggish to rouse itself when something attacks could give CV19 precious extra days to establish itself and wreak havoc.

Can the common cold help protect you from COVID-19?

[emphasis added, excerpts from full interview]

A new study provides evidence that the seasonal colds you've had in the past could protect you from COVID-19. The study also suggests that immunity to COVID-19 is likely to last a long time -- maybe even a lifetime.

...

The study, published in mBio, is the first to show that the COVID-19-causing virus, SARS-CoV-2, induces memory B cells, long-lived immune cells that detect pathogens, create antibodies to destroy them and remember them for the future. The next time that pathogen tries to enter the body, those memory B cells can hop into action even faster to clear the infection before it starts.

Because memory B cells can survive for decades, they could protect COVID-19 survivors from subsequent infections for a long time, but further research will have to bear that out.

...

What this study doesn't show is the level of protection provided by cross-reactive memory B cells and how it impacts patient outcomes.

"That's next," said David Topham, Ph.D., the Marie Curran Wilson and Joseph Chamberlain Wilson Professor of Microbiology and Immunology at URMC, who runs the lab that conducted this work. "Now we need to see if having this pool of pre-existing memory B cells correlates with milder symptoms and shorter disease course -- or if it helps boost the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines."


World of Panasonic

Epidemiologist Professor Sunetra Gupta: “We may already have herd immunity”

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it — Lloyd Chambers. That applies to climate science, COVID-19, and Einstein’s theory of relativity.

Repudiating rational debate on science is as ANTI-science as it gets, yet this attitude has become the new norm in not just the social programming networks (“news”) but it is being used to harass, intimidate and silence those in science and medicine who dare to disagree.

RE: The Doctor Is In: Scott Atlas And The Efficacy Of Lockdowns, Social Distancing, And Closings.
RE: Martin Kulldorff, professor, Harvard Medical School: Letter to the editor: Scott Atlas and lockdowns
RE: COVID-19: Great Barrington Declaration by Medical Professionals and Epidemiologists
RE: The data is in — stop the panic and end the total isolation
RE: Time to Steepen the Curve and Accelerate Infection of Low-Risk People
RE: What the Pandemic Has Taught Us About Science

The Stanford doctors attack on Dr. Scott Atlas shows us that ethics in medicine has hit a deadly new low. We are talking about deaths at levels that far exceed COVID-19 deaths.

Only children and vicious people can choose to ignore that fact, by avoiding rational debate over critically important issues that amount to death by government policy failure. Try to do so, and you’ll be harrassed, and that’s the fun part.

Yet a few brave voices of reason are still out there, such as Professor of Epidemiology Sunetra Gupta at Oxford University (interview below), Professor of Epidemiology Martin Kulldorff of Harvard, Professor of Epidemiology John Ionaddis of Stanford University, Dr. Malcom Kendrick of the UK, and the lightning rod for it all, Dr Scott Atlas.

I had not seen this interview until October 7, but it was done way back in July.

We may already have herd immunity – an interview with Professor of Epidemiology Sunetra Gupta

[emphasis added, excerpts from full interview]

21 July 2020

Are we already immune to coronavirus? Professor Sunetra Gupta, a theoretical epidemiologist at Oxford University, discusses her recent study on the herd immunity threshold, as well as her views on the social costs of lockdown, the inaccuracy of epidemiological models, and the curtailment of academic debate.

A study produced by a team at Oxford University indicated that some parts of the United Kingdom may already have reached herd immunity from coronavirus. A significant fraction of the population, according to the study published last week, may have “innate resistance or cross-protection from exposure to seasonal coronaviruses”, making the proportion vulnerable to coronavirus infection much smaller than previously thought.

The Oxford team is led by Sunetra Gupta, a professor of theoretical epidemiology. In recent months, she has argued that the cost of lockdown will be too high for the poorest in society and questioned the language and quality of debate on the pandemic’s impact

Q: In the debate over T-cell immunity or cross-reactivity with coronaviruses, the common-sense view is that exposure to things that are similar does give you some protection, and it seems to be borne out in recent studies.

...when the Covid-19 virus started to spread, I was pretty certain it wouldn’t have a huge, devastating impact in terms of mortality, because we had all these other coronaviruses circulating.... the pre-existing antibodies or T-cell responses against coronaviruses seem to protect against infection, not just the outcome of infection.

Q: It’s interesting that you mentioned folklore. In the West we have this idea that we want to eliminate disease – that there’s a heroic figure who intervenes and then resets the social order. In some parts of Asia there is a very different approach, it’s more about accommodating yourself to the natural world, and cultivating a more holistic view of how you live with disaster. Things like lockdown have their own folklore.

...It’s semi-religious, actually. I’m astonished at two things. One is the bellicose language used with respect to the virus, which does point to this desire to annihilate, which seems to me strange. Maybe it has something to do with coming from an eastern tradition, but I’d like to think it’s strange because we live with infectious diseases. We do accommodate infectious diseases into our social contract, really...

...people are treating it like an external disaster, like a hurricane or a tsunami, as if you can batten down the hatches and it will be gone eventually. That is simply not correct. The epidemic is an ecological relationship that we have to manage between ourselves and the virus...

....we’re not thinking about what’s happening with other infectious diseases or how many people are going to die of cancer. That’s the axis of disease, but then there’s the socioeconomic axis, which has been ignored. But there’s a third, aesthetic access, which is about how we want to live our lives. We are closing ourselves off not just to the disease, but to other aspects of being human.

Q: We talk about international travel as a disease vector, and talk about how we’ll never get back to that normal. It’s the sledgehammer idea that you can eliminate it by stopping mixing. It’s a kind of false trade-off.

I think the trade-off is very extreme. Obviously the most extreme manifestation of that trade-off is the 23 million people who will be pushed below the poverty line as a result of this sledgehammer approach. The costs to the arts is I think also incredibly profound – the theatres and all other forms of performing art. But also the inherent art of living, which I think is being compromised. Acts of kindness are being eschewed. Someone was telling me yesterday that their mother said to them “please don’t come home, you’re going to kill us”.

Q: The lockdown has been so successful that people are terrified. What do you think policymakers and politicians, and others such as yourself, can do to help us return to normal?

What politicians can do is maybe alter their language to reflect that we do live with risk, we have to make quite difficult decisions about trade-offs that exist between ways of life, between livelihoods, and sacrifices that have to be made at a societal level.

Q: There’s an essential sense of contamination that pervades everything. You see repeatedly people reacting with total vitriol to pictures of young people going to the park or the beach. How do you transform a collective sense of contamination and sin into something productive?

Maybe the way to counter it now is to say, actually, not only is it a good thing for young people to go out there and become immune, but that is almost their duty. It’s a way of living with this virus. It’s how we live with other viruses. Flu is clearly a very dangerous virus, but the reason we don’t see more deaths from flu every year is because, through herd immunity, the levels of infection are kept to as low a level as we can get.
[WIND: see Time to Steepen the Curve and Accelerate Infection of Low-Risk People ]

I think there is a way of living in a community where we do take some risk. We do the same with motorcars and whatnot. We say, ok there’s a risk, we’ll take it, because if we didn’t take that risk we’d be living our lives in a way we don’t want to.

Q: The expression “herd immunity” has entered the same realms as austerity and Brexit. It has become a sort of danger word because of that whole debate at the very beginning. The minute you say herd immunity, the popular newspapers say you want to kill all the old.

...The truth is that herd immunity is a way of preventing vulnerable people from dying. It is achieved at the expense of some people dying, and we can stop that by preventing the vulnerable class in the process. In an ideal situation, you would protect the vulnerable as best you can, let people go about their business, allow herd immunity to build up, make sure the economy doesn’t crash, make sure the arts are preserved, and make sure qualities of kindness and tolerance remain in place...

Q: How can journalists do better when reporting crude statistics that often come out? The framing of it is so crucial, and what you see so many times is people misreport and exaggerate stats.

Yes, I think the reporting has done us no favours and continues to remain that way....

These absurd comparisons between large countries and small countries. It’s not a song contest, it’s just absolutely ridiculous. It’s also very harmful. When you think of the US as a whole, you’re missing the fact that the epidemic appears to be over in the north east and growing in the south west. Why would you put them together? There’s no reason to lump a rise in cases in Arizona with everything else.

And then finally the whole business of reporting cases, which is deeply problematic because it depends on how many people have been tested in the first place and where they’re being tested. I’m not saying journalists shouldn’t report case numbers, it should just be heavily caveated. Deaths are deaths, but cases can be anything.

Q: What can states do better? There aren’t many examples of countries doing a ...To lockdown to keep something under control is, in the long term, quite misguided.

Q: Would you have kept the lockdown purely to care homes?

Certainly. Shielding the vulnerable is what we also got wrong. I think nations should follow both in the practical recommendations and the rhetoric of Sweden. They made the decision, and it was presented without the hubris of “this is the right thing to do”. They could have protected the care homes better perhaps, and we can’t get all of these things right, but we should try our best to shield the vulnerable.

Q: So you think that the New Zealand approach, eradicating the virus, is both functionally silly and also immoral?

...It seems to be very short-sighted, how can it possibly keep the virus out?

I think the smugness, the self-congratulation with which it’s presented is misplaced. The self-righteous attitude is completely ridiculous....what New Zealand will have done would be tantamount to not vaccinating your own child. Just waiting for everyone else to vaccinate their children and then go “ok it’s all safe now”.

Q: Do you think the social construct is repairable, can society bounce back from this terror, and can science bounce back?

I hope society can bounce back. We have shown great resilience, certainly in other times. It’ll be interesting to see how this all gets represented in the literature. There’s very little in literature in terms of the 1918 flu pandemic...

...At the moment, I personally feel that the calumny that’s been heaped on us that dare to disagree with what is believed to be a communitarian imperative, but to my mind is utterly individualistic, is really quite scary.

WIND: to speak out is to take on enormous career risk, if not personal risk. Which is why few professionals speak out. and why most “experts” should rightly be ignored—they are not credible.


Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

Letter from Professor Martin Kulldorff of Harvard re Stanford Doctors attack of Dr Scott Atlas

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it — Lloyd Chambers. That applies to climate science, COVID-19, and Einstein’s theory of relativity.

Repudiating rational debate on science is as ANTI-science as it gets, yet this attitude has become the new norm in not just the social programming networks (“news”) but it is being used to harass, intimidate and silence those in science and medicine who dare to disagree.

RE: The Doctor Is In: Scott Atlas And The Efficacy Of Lockdowns, Social Distancing, And Closings.
RE: Martin Kulldorff, professor, Harvard Medical School: Letter to the editor: Scott Atlas and lockdowns
RE: COVID-19: Great Barrington Declaration by Medical Professionals and Epidemiologists
RE: The data is in — stop the panic and end the total isolation
RE: Time to Steepen the Curve and Accelerate Infection of Low-Risk People
RE: AIER: “The Pandemic that Killed Debate”

The Stanford doctors attack on Dr. Scott Atlas shows us that ethics in medicine has hit a deadly new low. We are talking about deaths at levels that far exceed COVID-19 deaths.

Only children and vicious people can choose to ignore that fact, by avoiding rational debate over critically important issues that amount to death by government policy failure. Try to do so, and you’ll be harrassed, and that’s the fun part.

Yet a few brave voices of reason are still out there, such as Professor of Epidemiology Sunetra Gupta at Oxford University (interview below), Professor of Epidemiology Martin Kulldorff of Harvard, Professor of Epidemiology John Ionaddis of Stanford University, Dr. Malcom Kendrick of the UK, and the lightning rod for it all, Dr Scott Atlas.

Martin Kulldorff, professor, Harvard Medical School:
Letter to the editor: Scott Atlas and lockdowns

[emphasis added]

Sept 16, 2020

In an open letter, 98 Stanford faculty members accuse their Stanford colleague and White House COVID-19 advisor Scott Atlas of “falsehoods and misrepresentations,” claiming that “many of his opinions and statements run counter to established science.” Surprisingly, the alleged falsehoods are not mentioned, making scientific discourse difficult.

Among other things, the letter advocates handwashing, which Atlas obviously agrees with. So, what are the disagreements?

While anyone can get infected, there is a thousand-fold difference in mortality risk between the old and young, and the risk to children is less than from annual influenza. Using an age-targeted strategy, Atlas wants to better protect high-risk individuals, while letting children and young adults live more normal lives. This contrasts with general age-wide lockdowns that protect low-risk students and young professionals working from home, while older higher-risk working-class people generate the inevitable herd immunity.

The open letter ignores collateral damage caused by lockdowns. Being a public health policy expert, it is natural and reassuring that Atlas also consider plummeting childhood vaccinations, postponed cancer screenings, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, deteriorating mental health and more house evictions, just to name a few.

Among experts on infectious disease outbreaks, many of us have long advocated for an age-targeted strategy, and I would be delighted to debate this with any of the 98 signatories. Supporters include professor Sunetra Gupta at Oxford University, the world’s preeminent infectious disease epidemiologist. Assuming no bias against women scientists of color, I urge Stanford faculty and students to read her thoughts.

Martin Kulldorff, professor, Harvard Medical School

WIND: given that the issue is life and death, the Stanford signatories ought to take a long look in the mirror for their anti-life, anti-reason, anti-science “viewpoint” which is nothing more than a naked ad-homiment political attack.

When a professional refuses to address any factual points, refuse to debate the issues, that is as ANTI-science as it gets and grotesque violation of medical ethics—those Stanford doctors are not professionals, but scoundrels who have no business practicing medicine.


Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

COVID 19 aka CCP Virus: Efficacy of Vaccines, Particularly a New and Minimally Tested COVID-19 Vaccine

I have two parents, one shy of 80 and one over 80, so this post is of personal interest to me, since I don’t want either one hit by COVID-19. One parent is particularly at risk.

So I have lots of “skin in the game” on the whole CV19 thing. But that is not going to make me give up on objective thinking and resort to the hysteria and faux-science (often anti-science) promulgated by the press, politicians and most of the medical establishment.

See also:
Balancing the Efficacy and Safety of Vaccines in the Elderly
Why vaccines are less effective in the elderly, and what it means for COVID-19
Flu Shots May Not Protect the Elderly or the Very Young
Efficacy of vaccines in elderly

Medical profession and risk assessment

Most of the medical profession doesn’t consider risk management outside their narrow field, since risk assessment must take into account *all* known risks, including medical risks (short and medium term!), economic costs, psychological impacts which degrade health and the immune system, and social costs.

ALL those factors result in heightened poor health outcomes! Yet the medical “experts” ignore the the elephant in the room: economic factors. Longstanding actuarial facts prove that poor economic situations result in poor health outcomes and death. This is just common sense on top of hard data known for many decades.

The “experts” refuse to do proper risk assessment, dooming tens of millions of people to higher risks and damaged lives, with a few notable exceptions.

“The Doctor Is In: Scott Atlas And The Efficacy Of Lockdowns, Social Distancing, And Closings”
As of July 2020, Up to 300 Million People May Be Infected by COVID-19, Stanford Guru John Ioannidis Says + Feckless Leaders Killing People
•  Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media

Here then is my take on vaccines for COVID-19, with background.

Risk assessment for a COVID-19 vaccine

Asserting that several new and untested variants of a COVID-19 vaccine will be both SAFE and effective in the elderly would be both unscientific and irresponsible.

  • Different vaccines cannot be lumped together; each vaccine might have a different safety and efficacy profile.
  • Side effects and risks will be poorly understood prior to use in the general population.
  • A COVID-19 vaccine might have nil benefit for the elderly (more on that below), but might have as yet unknown risks, possibly serious one.

Getting a COVID-19 vaccine and then assuming one is protected could be a fatal gamble for the elderly in particular—those vaccinated are likely to engage in many more social interactions, which in turn greatly increases the risk of infection. The at-risk and the elderly need to remain cautious, vaccinated or not.

Efficacy of vaccines for the elderly

The whole idea of a vaccine for COVID-19 is the reverse of what might be thought:

A COVID-19 vaccine is likely to be largely useless for the elderly.

There is ZERO scientific evidence that a COVID-19 vaccine will be effective for the most at-risk population (the elderly). In fact, it is more probable to be ineffective, based on the influenza vaccine. Thus the real goal should be to vaccinate the low-risk people as a step towards herd immunity, to reduce the risk of transmission to the largest group of high-risk people—the elderly.

The issue is related to poor immune response, including immunosenesence.

Balancing the Efficacy and Safety of Vaccines in the Elderly

...Elderly populations present specific concerns related to preventative health practices, especially vaccination. Although the power of vaccination is unquestionable in controlling infectious disease, immunosenescence can lead to reduced immune responses following immunization in the elderly, and increased morbidity and mortality.

Further complicating this issue, some vaccines themselves may pose a substantial safety risk in the elderly when compared to younger counterparts. Though any health care intervention must balance risk and reward, safety and immunogenicity are often poorly characterized in older populations. This review explores several domestic and travel vaccines, examining what is known concerning efficacy and safety in the elderly, and considers future alternatives.

Flu Shots May Not Protect the Elderly or the Very Young

October 2012

Despite government recommendations, there is little evidence that flu vaccines help individuals older than 65 or younger than two.

...One oft-cited claim, based on several large meta-analyses published more than a decade ago, is that seasonal flu shots cut the risk of winter death among older people by half. But the research behind that claim has been largely debunked. A 2005 study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine noted that influenza only causes about 5 percent of all excess winter deaths among the elderly—which works out to one death from flu per 1,000 older people each season—so it’s impossible for the shot to prevent half of all their winter deaths.

The following year, a study reported that as vaccine coverage increased among the elderly in Italy in the late 1980s, there was no corresponding drop in excess deaths. In another 2006 paper, Lisa Jackson, an infectious disease epidemiologist at the Group Health Research Institute in Seattle, and her colleagues showed that although vaccinated seniors were 44 percent less likely to die during flu season than unvaccinated seniors were, the vaccinated ones were also 61 percent less likely to die before flu season even started. “Naturally, you would not expect the vaccine to work before the thing it protects against is going around,” says Lone Simonsen, a research professor in global health at George Washington University and a co-author of the 2005 study in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

...The dearth of controlled research on seniors stems in part from the fact that the U.S government considers such clinical trials unethical. Based on an idea known as clinical equipoise, scientists can’t test, in a randomized controlled trial, a treatment that the larger medical community already considers to be effective, because doing so would involve denying treatment to half of the participants, potentially putting them at risk. “We’re in a difficult spot,” Shay says—since the CDC already recommends flu shots to seniors, the agency can’t suddenly turn around and ask them to participate in a clinical trial that might deny them the standard of care.


...So should people still dutifully line up for their flu shots? Older kids and healthy adults do get some protection from them; just perhaps not as much as they want or expect. But for seniors and toddlers, there may never be a clear answer to this question, particularly because the U.S. government is unlikely to conduct additional clinical trials. On Monday, Osterholm and a group of five other scientists at the University of Minnesota’s Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy published a report highlighting the need for better alternatives. Although the current options may—for most people—be better than nothing, “we can no longer accept the status quo,” they wrote. “The perception that current vaccines are already highly effective in preventing influenza is a major barrier to pursuing game-changing alternatives.

Since that article in 2012, there is some limited evidence that a high-dose influenza vaccine has a “moderate” improvement in outcomes. But it is hardly conclusive and far from compelling:

Conclusions: Among adults ≥65 years of age, recipients of standard and high dose influenza vaccines differed significantly in their characteristics. After adjusting for these differences, high dose vaccine offered more protection against A/H3N2 and borderline significant protection against all influenza A requiring outpatient care during the 2015-2018 influenza seasons.

None of the studies I’ve found offer compelling evidence. Indeed, one of them has to resort to “relative effectiveness” and “borderline significance”, which is the kind of garbage thinking used when studies show weak results. Moreover, if the effectiveness is very low to start with, a modest relative improvement still means *poor* effectiveness (e.g. going from 10% absolutely effectiveness to 12.5% is 25%, and still very poor).


Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

COVID 19 aka CCP Virus: the Bigger the LIE, the More It is Believed—the Dishonesty and FAKE STATISTICS of the Death Toll Figures

This post quotes Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media about the use of masks for COVID-19.

See also CCP Virus.

Every day, I hear “200000 people dead from COVID-19” in the USA. This is total nonsense, and it is now being used as a political bludgeon and to instill fear in the public—massively unethical by both the medical profession and the media and politicians.

The bigger the lie, the more it is believed. A time-tested truth, abused by history’s most notorious mass killers. With the money-making model of the social programming networks (formerly known as “news”), it is all about inciting fear in all its forms, the media will never report real data or figures—the ugly truth is that more death is GOOD for the media making money. And politicians are all too happy to oblige for their own ends, some to their own disadvantage.

The truth is that:

  • No one knows the death rate relative to the infection rate (quite different from the case rate), but many experts now believe it is on the order of 0.1% to 0.25%. The true death rate cannot be known, because the infection rate is not and cannot be known. It is almost certainly towards the 0.1% level (or less) because of large numbers of undetected asymptomatic cases.
  • The death statistics are self selecting, which makes them GIGO: scientists believe that a good proportion of the population already has some degree of immunity from COVID-19. Thus any projected death toll incorrectly extrapolates across a population for which a large portion might not be susceptible. So the media and the medical establishment carry on their propaganda of fear.
  • The death rate is minuscule for the young (40 and younger), but the massive economic carpet-bombing of America will likely kill 10X to 100X of the young as CV19 ever will.
  • As of late September, infections are RISING but deaths are PLUMMETING. See CDC data.
  • Deaths from all causes are 9.7X greater than COVID-19. Where is the concern about a 10X greater problem?!!!
  • Deaths involving pneumonia vs COVID-19 alone are obfuscated by CDC data and the CDC cannot even testify to the accuracy, e.g., “presumed COVID-19”. In other words: guessing.
  • The vast majority of deaths are in the very old with multiple comorbidities. Yet even if someone dies of a heart attack or stroke or cancer, if that person has COVID-19, then hospitals get more money and it is counted as COVID-19 death. Heck, if some dies in a car crash it can be counted as a CV19 death, according to CDC guidelines.
  • Nearly all COVID-19 deaths are alleged deaths: financial incentives to report death as CV19, bad tests, subjective judgment calls, concurrent infections and other conditions.
  • Baseline death rates are not subtracted out from COVID-19 deaths—statistical incompetence. A significant number of those deaths would have happened from other causes over the same time frame, without COVID-19.

It’s ridiculous to quote such a statistically dubious figure. Yet the media and politicians repeat it as a mantra because it serves their goals. But it hurts the public by instilling fear and anxiety, and crushing lives by (just for starters) forcing people out of work. See just how absurd the death rate is in the pie chart.

Worse, comparing countries' death rates is for children and idiots: countries have vastly different ways of counting the deaths, not to mention very different populations*. If you hear the media talking about such things, you are listening to idiots.

* Consider as just one factor the percentage of population of Black people. Sadly, a much higher mortality rate but that’s the reality. And it might be due to low Vitamin D, with the feckless medical establishment has done nothing about.

See also:

Save Big $$$$ on Memory for 2019 Mac Pro

Up to 65% better pricing than Apple

Lloyd recommends 32GB RDIMM modules for most users (more expensive LRDIMMS are for 512GB or more).


COVID 19 aka CCP Virus: Belgian Medical Doctors on Immense Damage Caused by Current Policies

See also CCP Virus.

Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media

September 5, 2020

...

Immense damage caused by the current policies

An open discussion on corona measures means that, in addition to the years of life gained by corona patients, we must also take into account other factors affecting the health of the entire population. These include damage in the psychosocial domain (increase in depression, anxiety, suicides, intra-family violence and child abuse)16 and economic damage.

If we take this collateral damage into account, the current policy is out of all proportion, the proverbial use of a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

We find it shocking that the government is invoking health as a reason for the emergency law.

As doctors and health professionals, in the face of a virus which, in terms of its harmfulness, mortality and transmissibility, approaches the seasonal influenza, we can only reject these extremely disproportionate measures.

  • We therefore demand an immediate end to all measures.
  • We are questioning the legitimacy of the current advisory experts, who meet behind closed doors.
  • Following on from ACU 2020 46 https://acu2020.org/nederlandse-versie/ we call for an in-depth examination of the role of the WHO and the possible influence of conflicts of interest in this organisation. It was also at the heart of the fight against the “infodemic”, i.e. the systematic censorship of all dissenting opinions in the media. This is unacceptable for a democratic state governed by the rule of law.43

...

WIND: that’s Europe, but freedom and individual rights have died the same way over here in the USA, as The Constitution is completely ignored based on hysteria and groupthink and media manipulation. Tens of millions of people forced out of work and unable to pay rent, soon to be evicted.

OWCToberFest

The horde of monster deals has returned.

Deals on just about everything!

COVID 19 aka CCP Virus: Belgian Medical Doctors on Emergency Law vs Human Rights

See also CCP Virus.

Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media

September 5, 2020

...

Emergency law versus Human Rights

The general principle of good governance calls for the proportionality of government decisions to be weighed up in the light of the Higher Legal Standards: any interference by government must comply with the fundamental rights as protected in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Interference by public authorities is only permitted in crisis situations. In other words, discretionary decisions must be proportionate to an absolute necessity.

The measures currently taken concern interference in the exercise of, among other things, the right to respect of private and family life, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association, the right to education, etc., and must therefore comply with fundamental rights as protected by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

For example, in accordance with Article 8(2) of the ECHR, interference with the right to private and family life is permissible only if the measures are necessary in the interests of national security, public safety, the economic well-being of the country, the protection of public order and the prevention of criminal offences, the protection of health or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others, the regulatory text on which the interference is based must be sufficiently clear, foreseeable and proportionate to the objectives pursued.45

The predicted pandemic of millions of deaths seemed to respond to these crisis conditions, leading to the establishment of an emergency government. Now that the objective facts show something completely different, the condition of inability to act otherwise (no time to evaluate thoroughly if there is an emergency) is no longer in place. Covid-19 is not a cold virus, but a well treatable condition with a mortality rate comparable to the seasonal flu. In other words, there is no longer an insurmountable obstacle to public health.

There is no state of emergency.

...

WIND: we have a more rigorous Constitution here in the USA, but that’s only a weak theory at this point, though very soon that may change.

Upgrade Your Mac Memory
At much lower cost than Apple, with more options.
Lloyd recommends 64GB for iMac or Mac Pro for photography/videography.

COVID 19 aka CCP Virus: Belgian Medical Doctors on the Role of the Media

See also CCP Virus.

It is my belief, based on personal experience, that too many doctors do not operate according to Primum non nocere*, being all too willing to medicate and cause harms based on weak or corrupt institutional guidelines and/or pricing measures, to ignore side effects (proven that at least 75% are never reported), etc. I am glad to see it mentioned here.

Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media

September 5, 2020

...

The role of the media and the official communication plan

Over the past few months, newspaper, radio and TV makers seemed to stand almost uncritically behind the panel of experts and the government, there, where it is precisely the press that should be critical and prevent one-sided governmental communication. This has led to a public communication in our news media, that was more like propaganda than objective reporting.

In our opinion, it is the task of journalism to bring news as objectively and neutrally as possible, aimed at finding the truth and critically controlling power, with dissenting experts also being given a forum in which to express themselves.

This view is supported by the journalistic codes of ethics.42

The official story that a lockdown was necessary, that this was the only possible solution, and that everyone stood behind this lockdown, made it difficult for people with a different view, as well as experts, to express a different opinion.

Alternative opinions were ignored or ridiculed. We have not seen open debates in the media, where different views could be expressed.

We were also surprised by the many videos and articles by many scientific experts and authorities, which were and are still being removed from social media. We feel that this does not fit in with a free, democratic constitutional state, all the more so as it leads to tunnel vision. This policy also has a paralysing effect and feeds fear and concern in society. In this context, we reject the intention of censorship of dissidents in the European Union43

The way in which Covid-19 has been portrayed by politicians and the media has not done the situation any good either. War terms were popular and warlike language was not lacking. There has often been mention of a ‘war’ with an ‘invisible enemy’ who has to be ‘defeated’. The use in the media of phrases such as ‘care heroes in the front line’ and ‘corona victims’ has further fuelled fear, as has the idea that we are globally dealing with a ‘killer virus’.

The relentless bombardment with figures, that were unleashed on the population day after day, hour after hour, without interpreting those figures, without comparing them to flu deaths in other years, without comparing them to deaths from other causes, has induced a real psychosis of fear in the population. This is not information, this is manipulation.

We deplore the role of the WHO in this, which has called for the infodemic (i.e. all divergent opinions from the official discourse, including by experts with different views) to be silenced by an unprecedented media censorship.43 44

We urgently call on the media to take their responsibilities here!

We demand an open debate in which all experts are heard.

...

WIND: well said.

But good luck with that—what we are witnesssing is a massive move towards totalitarianism, training the population to be compliant and obediant.

Upgrade Your Mac Memory
At much lower cost than Apple, with more options.
Lloyd recommends 64GB for iMac or Mac Pro for photography/videography.

COVID 19 aka CCP Virus: Belgian Medical Doctors on the Hippocratic Oath

See also CCP Virus.

It is my belief, based on personal experience, that too many doctors do not operate according to Primum non nocere*, being all too willing to medicate and cause harms based on weak or corrupt institutional guidelines and/or pricing measures, to ignore side effects (proven that at least 75% are never reported), etc. More like the Hippocritic Oath. I am glad to see it mentioned here.

Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media

September 5, 2020

...

Strengthening a prevention policy 

The corona measures form a striking contrast to the minimal policy pursued by the government until now, when it comes to well-founded measures with proven health benefits such as the sugar tax, the ban on (e-)cigarettes and making healthy food, exercise and social support networks financially attractive and widely accessible. It is a missed opportunity for a better prevention policy that could have brought about a change in mentality in all sections of the population with clear results in terms of public health. At present, only 3% of the health care budget goes to prevention. 2

The Hippocratic Oath

As a doctor, we took the Hippocratic Oath:
“I will above all care for my patients, promote their health and alleviate their suffering”.

“I will inform my patients correctly.”

Even under pressure, I will not use my medical knowledge for practices that are against humanity.”

The current measures force us to act against this oath. Other health professionals have a similar code.

The ‘primum non nocere’, which every doctor and health professional assumes, is also undermined by the current measures and by the prospect of the possible introduction of a generalised vaccine, which is not subject to extensive prior testing.

...

WIND: research shows that ample sleep is critical to vaccine efficacy. Sleep well for several days before and after!

I won’t be taking the vaccine, and I will discourage my family from doing so. This is the ONLY rational way to proceed, given our generally healthy status, and the always unknown risks of new vaccines.

* Primum non nocere is a Latin phrase that means "first, do no harm." Non-maleficence, which is derived from the maxim, is one of the principal precepts of bioethics that all students in healthcare are taught in school and is a fundamental principle throughout the world.


Upgrade the memory of your 2020 iMac up to 128GB

COVID 19 aka CCP Virus: Belgian Medical Doctors on a Vaccine

See also CCP Virus and Efficacy of Vaccines, Particularly a New and Minimally Tested COVID-19 Vaccine

Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media

September 5, 2020

...

Vaccine

Survey studies on influenza vaccinations show that in 10 years we have only succeeded three times in developing a vaccine with an efficiency rate of more than 50%. Vaccinating our elderly appears to be inefficient. Over 75 years of age, the efficacy is almost non-existent.38

Due to the continuous natural mutation of viruses, as we also see every year in the case of the influenza virus, a vaccine is at most a temporary solution, which requires new vaccines each time afterwards. An untested vaccine, which is implemented by emergency procedure and for which the manufacturers have already obtained legal immunity from possible harm, raises serious questions. 39 40 We do not wish to use our patients as guinea pigs.

On a global scale, 700000 cases of damage or death are expected as a result of the vaccine.41

If 95% of people experience Covid-19 virtually symptom-free, the risk of exposure to an untested vaccine is irresponsible.

...

WIND: research shows that ample sleep is critical to vaccine efficacy. Sleep well for several days before and after!

I won’t be taking the vaccine, and I will discourage my family from doing so. This is the ONLY rational way to proceed, given our generally healthy status, and the always unknown risks of new vaccines.


Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

COVID 19 aka CCP Virus: Belgian Medical Doctors on a Second Coronavirus Wave

See also CCP Virus.

Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media

September 5, 2020

...

A second corona wave?

A second wave is now being discussed in Belgium, with a further tightening of the measures as a result. However, closer examination of Sciensano’s figures37 shows that, although there has been an increase in the number of infections since mid-July, there was no increase in hospital admissions or deaths at that time.

It is therefore not a second wave of corona, but a so-called “case chemistry” due to an increased number of tests50 The number of hospital admissions or deaths showed a shortlasting minimal increase in recent weeks, but in interpreting it, we must take into account the recent heatwave. In addition, the vast majority of the victims are still in the population group >75 years.

This indicates that the proportion of the measures taken in relation to the working population and young people is disproportionate to the intended objectives

The vast majority of the positively tested “infected” persons are in the age group of the active population, which does not develop any or merely limited symptoms, due to a well-functioning immune system. 

So nothing has changed – the peak is over.

...

WIND: Influenza is coming also.

The gross planning stupidity has been in not letting the bulk of the healthy low-risk population get infected over the summer, thus actively preparing for autumn and winter. Instead, we have most of the population still susceptible, and now headed indoors (poorer health) and thus more primed for infection.


Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

COVID 19 aka CCP Virus: Belgian Medical Doctors on Consequences of social isolation on physical and mental health

See also CCP Virus.

Fall and then winter are going to kill a lot of people, by government policies.

Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media

September 5, 2020

...

We believe that the policy has introduced mandatory measures that are not sufficiently scientifically based, unilaterally directed, and that there is not enough space in the media for an open debate in which different views and opinions are heard. In addition, each municipality and province now has the authorisation to add its own measures, whether well-founded or not.

Moreover, the strict repressive policy on corona strongly contrasts with the government’s minimal policy when it comes to disease prevention, strengthening our own immune system through a healthy lifestyle, optimal care with attention for the individual and investment in care personnel.2

The concept of health

In 1948, the WHO defined health as follows: ‘Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or other physical impairment’.3

Health, therefore, is a broad concept that goes beyond the physical and also relates to the emotional and social well-being of the individual. Belgium also has a duty, from the point of view of subscribing to fundamental human rights, to include these human rights in its decision-making when it comes to measures taken in the context of public health. 4

The current global measures taken to combat SARS-CoV-2 violate to a large extent this view of health and human rights. Measures include compulsory wearing of a mask (also in open air and during sporting activities, and in some municipalities even when there are no other people in the vicinity), physical distancing, social isolation, compulsory quarantine for some groups and hygiene measures.

Consequences of social isolation on physical and mental health

Social isolation and economic damage led to an increase in depression, anxiety, suicides, intra-family violence and child abuse.16

Studies have shown that the more social and emotional commitments people have, the more resistant they are to viruses. It is much more likely that isolation and quarantine have fatal consequences17

The isolation measures have also led to physical inactivity in many older people due to their being forced to stay indoors. However, sufficient exercise has a positive effect on cognitive functioning, reducing depressive complaints and anxiety and improving physical health, energy levels, well-being and, in general, quality of life.18

Fear, persistent stress and loneliness induced by social distancing have a proven negative influence on psychological and general health19

...

WIND: what’s more stressful than being locked down and out of work, unable to visit with friends and family, savings gone and then being evicted?

Government thugs are stressing-out tens of millions of people at least (around 40 million people cannot pay rent here in the USA, since the government forced them out of work). It’s an outrageous abuse of human rights.

I am personally furious that I cannot visit my father (81) because of irrational fears instilled in someone close to him by the social programming networks. He is now cut off from all his children and grandchildren for that reason. It’s less about me (I have my family) than him. Surely tens of millions of people are in similar situations—this is what the COVID-19 hysteria is doing to people—and it stinks to high heaven in every way.

OWC Easy SSD Upgrade Guide
MacBook Pro and MacBook Air
iMac, Mac Pro, MacMini, more!

COVID 19 aka CCP Virus: Belgian Medical Doctors on Masks

See also masks and particulate respirators.

Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media

September 5, 2020

Propagation 

Spreading occurs by drip infection (only for patients who cough or sneeze) and aerosols in closed, unventilated rooms. Contamination is therefore not possible in the open air. Contact tracing and epidemiological studies show that healthy people (or positively tested asymptomatic carriers) are virtually unable to transmit the virus. Healthy people therefore do not put each other at risk. 24 25 Transfer via objects (e.g. money, shopping or shopping trolleys) has not been scientifically proven.26 27 28

All this seriously calls into question the whole policy of social distancing and compulsory mouth masks for healthy people – there is no scientific basis for this.


Masks

Oral masks belong in contexts where contacts with proven at-risk groups or people with upper respiratory complaints take place, and in a medical context/hospital-retirement home setting. They reduce the risk of droplet infection by sneezing or coughing. Oral masks in healthy individuals are ineffective against the spread of viral infections29 30 31

Wearing a mask is not without side effects32 33 Oxygen deficiency (headache, nausea, fatigue, loss of concentration) occurs fairly quickly, an effect similar to altitude sickness. Every day we now see patients complaining of headaches, sinus problems, respiratory problems and hyperventilation due to wearing masks. In addition, the accumulated CO2 leads to a toxic acidification of the organism which affects our immunity. Some experts even warn of an increased transmission of the virus in case of inappropriate use of the mask.34

Our Labour Code (Codex 6) refers to a CO2 content (ventilation in workplaces) of 900 ppm, maximum 1200 ppm in special circumstances. After wearing a mask for one minute, this toxic limit is considerably exceeded to values that are three to four times higher than these maximum values. Anyone who wears a mask is therefore in an extreme poorly ventilated room35

Inappropriate use of masks without a comprehensive medical cardio-pulmonary test file is therefore not recommended by recognised safety specialists for workers
Hospitals have a sterile environment in their operating rooms where staff wear masks and there is precise regulation of humidity / temperature with appropriately monitored oxygen flow to compensate for this, thus meeting strict safety standards. 36

WIND: first we’re told (WHO, CDC, Surgeon General) that masks don’t work. Now we’re mandated to use them. And now, these doctors say they have negative health consequences—but I think the comments above are for sealed masks, not those with valving or the absurdly leaky facial coverings and skimpy surgical masks that most people wear.

It’s a shame that the highly unethical restriction of valved masks is the rule—everyone should protect themselves first, since valved N95 masks are less leaky than what 95% of what I see people wearing as “approved” facial coverings—and thus protecting yourself entirely while protecting others just as well is far, far superior. Shame on the medical community for toxic advice. If everyone had had a valved N95 particulate respirator, CV19 would have been stopped in its tracks months ago.

  • In my own mask use, including up to 50 miles during a double century averaging ~200 watts power output and riding up to 9000' elevation, a valved particulate respirator does impede breathing, but only modestly with proper breathing technique.
  • At least one of my elderly readers can faint and have serious problems wearing an unvalved N100 mask—it really is dangerous.
  • I am dubious that simple surgical masks impede anyone, although the leakiness irritates my eyes and it does feel hot and stale to breathe in one. A valved mask is much better.
  • Improper breathing (short and shallow) is surely at work—learn how to breathe properly. That said, I don’t know how a large population can be taught to breath properly (or to eat properly or exercise properly or anything at all!).

Make an Old Dog Run Like a Young Puppy
with an OWC SSD

SATA, USB3, Thunderbolt, internal upgrades and PCIe SSD options for Mac or PC.
View All OWC SSDs...

COVID 19 aka CCP Virus: Belgian Medical Doctors on PCR Tests for COVID-19

See also CCP Virus.

Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media

September 5, 2020

...

The facts about covid-19

Gradually, the alarm bell was sounded from many sources: the objective facts showed a completely different reality5 6

The course of covid-19 followed the course of a normal wave of infection similar to a flu season. As every year, we see a mix of flu viruses following the curve: first the rhinoviruses, then the influenza A and B viruses, followed by the coronaviruses. There is nothing different from what we normally see.

The use of the non-specific PCR test, which produces many false positives, showed an exponential picture.  This test was rushed through with an emergency procedure and was never seriously self-tested. The creator expressly warned that this test was intended for research and not for diagnostics.7
The PCR test works with cycles of amplification of genetic material – a piece of genome is amplified each time. Any contamination (e.g. other viruses, debris from old virus genomes) can possibly result in false positives.8

The test does not measure how many viruses are present in the sample. A real viral infection means a massive presence of viruses, the so-called virus load. If someone tests positive, this does not mean that that person is actually clinically infected, is ill or is going to become ill. Koch’s postulate was not fulfilled (“The pure agent found in a patient with complaints can provoke the same complaints in a healthy person”).

Since a positive PCR test does not automatically indicate active infection or infectivity, this does not justify the social measures taken, which are based solely on these tests. 9 10

...

WIND: sounds about right, and together with testing fraud (a real thing) and testing delays that make testing useless, sounds like mass stupidity.


Upgrade the memory of your 2020 iMac up to 128GB

COVID 19 aka CCP Virus: Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media

See also CCP Virus.

The social control policies around the COVID-19 hysteria are an outstanding success story, if the goal is to prepare the population of this country to accept a totalitarian state.

Everything else has been a disaster whose consequences will linger for a generation or more.

The central planning policies of this country’s governors in response to COVID-19 have carpet-bombed this country economically and socially. And yet, they continue to this day.

So it is with special appreciation that I came across this letter from Belgian doctors. Kudos to them for speaking out and risking a great deal.

Why are American doctors and their organization so ethically lacking? (Other than Dr Scott Atlas and epidemiologist John Ionnadis and a few others). Here in the USA, we need the Belgians to show us the way?

Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media

September 5, 2020

[It’s a long letter, please read the entire thing as only a few excerpts are shown here. Emphasis added.]

...We ask for an open debate, where all experts are represented without any form of censorship. After the initial panic surrounding covid-19, the objective facts now show a completely different picture – there is no medical justification for any emergency policy anymore. The current crisis management has become totally disproportionate and causes more damage than it does any good.
We call for an end to all measures and ask for an immediate restoration of our normal democratic governance and legal structures and of all our civil liberties
.

‘A cure must not be worse than the problem’ is a thesis that is more relevant than ever in the current situation. We note, however, that the collateral damage now being caused to the population will have a greater impact in the short and long term on all sections of the population than the number of people now being safeguarded from corona...

We believe that the policy has introduced mandatory measures that are not sufficiently scientifically based, unilaterally directed, and that there is not enough space in the media for an open debate in which different views and opinions are heard. In addition, each municipality and province now has the authorisation to add its own measures, whether well-founded or not.

Moreover, the strict repressive policy on corona strongly contrasts with the government’s minimal policy when it comes to disease prevention, strengthening our own immune system through a healthy lifestyle, optimal care with attention for the individual and investment in care personnel.2

The concept of health

In 1948, the WHO defined health as follows: ‘Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or other physical impairment’.3

Health, therefore, is a broad concept that goes beyond the physical and also relates to the emotional and social well-being of the individual. Belgium also has a duty, from the point of view of subscribing to fundamental human rights, to include these human rights in its decision-making when it comes to measures taken in the context of public health. The current global measures taken to combat SARS-CoV-2 violate to a large extent this view of health and human rights...

The facts about covid-19

Gradually, the alarm bell was sounded from many sources: the objective facts showed a completely different reality5 6

The course of covid-19 followed the course of a normal wave of infection similar to a flu season. As every year, we see a mix of flu viruses following the curve: first the rhinoviruses, then the influenza A and B viruses, followed by the coronaviruses. There is nothing different from what we normally see.

The use of the non-specific PCR test, which produces many false positives, showed an exponential picture.  This test was rushed through with an emergency procedure and was never seriously self-tested. The creator expressly warned that this test was intended for research and not for diagnostics.7

...Since a positive PCR test does not automatically indicate active infection or infectivity, this does not justify the social measures taken...

Lockdown.

If we compare the waves of infection in countries with strict lockdown policies to countries that did not impose lockdowns (Sweden, Iceland …), we see similar curves.  So there is no link between the imposed lockdown and the course of the infection. Lockdown has not led to a lower mortality rate.

...A strong immune system relies on normal daily exposure to these microbial influences. Overly hygienic measures have a detrimental effect on our immunity. 12 13 Only people with a weak or faulty immune system should be protected by extensive hygiene or social distancing...Influenza will re-emerge in the autumn (in combination with covid-19) and a possible decrease in natural resilience may lead to further casualties.

...It appears that most people already have a congenital or general immunity to e.g. influenza and other viruses. This is confirmed by the findings on the cruise ship Diamond Princess, which was quarantined because of a few passengers who died of Covid-19. Most of the passengers were elderly and were in an ideal situation of transmission on the ship. However, 75% did not appear to be infected. So even in this high-risk group, the majority are resistant to the virus.

...Most people therefore already have a congenital or cross-immunity because they were already in contact with variants of the same virus.

Most people who test positive (PCR) have no complaints. Their immune system is strong enough. Strengthening natural immunity is a much more logical approach. Prevention is an important, insufficiently highlighted pillar: healthy, full-fledged nutrition, exercise in fresh air, without a mask, stress reduction and nourishing emotional and social contacts.

Consequences of social isolation on physical and mental health

Social isolation and economic damage led to an increase in depression, anxiety, suicides, intra-family violence and child abuse.16 Studies have shown that the more social and emotional commitments people have, the more resistant they are to viruses. It is much more likely that isolation and quarantine have fatal consequences17

The isolation measures have also led to physical inactivity in many older people due to their being forced to stay indoors. However, sufficient exercise has a positive effect on cognitive functioning, reducing depressive complaints and anxiety and improving physical health, energy levels, well-being and, in general, quality of life.18

Fear, persistent stress and loneliness induced by social distancing have a proven negative influence on psychological and general health19

...All this seriously calls into question the whole policy of social distancing and compulsory mouth masks for healthy people – there is no scientific basis for this.

...

WIND: What an outstanding letter for its rational approach to this whole mess. Red-pill yourself and read the whole thing, at least to understand that the media and political presentations are so grotesquely oversimplified as to be pure evil.

Mindless obediance, feckless courts, tyranical governors

For anyone with open eyes and active mind* (vanishingly rare), the COVID-19 hysteria is finally revealing itself as one of the largest and most unethical medical scams in history, along with the greatest intrusion on individual rights in the history of the United States (and elsewhere).

The population of this semi-free country now accepts losing jobs and savings and dreams and homes (40 million people cannot pay their rent). Via coercive government force (the implicit point of a GUN), no debate, no scientific basis, no rationality. Something so unconstitutionally grotesque that the entire Supreme Court deserves the label of useless feckless jackasses. Useless turds all of them, for sitting by idly and letting it all happen to this day.

* 99% of the population has their opinion assigned to them by the social programming networks (formerly known as “the news”). To disagree with that is either to be exceptional, or a fool.


Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

Forest Fire Smoke is Not Just Unpleasant, it Has Serious Health Impacts: “Stanford researchers discuss wildfires’ health impacts”

I was diagnosed with Epstein Barr Virus and Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis in early September 2020. I've paid special attention to keeping away from smoke, which kept me housebound for nearly two weeks, with 4 HEPA filters keeping the interior air clear. The last thing I needed was another hit to my immune system.

I’ve long advised using an N100 particulate respirator for dust and smoke, starting back in 2017 (P100 and N95 are also good), but for exercise and comfort, stick with those having exhale valves*. Problem is, N100/N95/P100 masks are unobtanium and we are down to 4 or 5 of them for the whole family at this point.

N100 vs P100 vs N95

An N100 particulate respirator filters out 20 times as much as an N95 (99.75% filtration vs 95%). If you’re dealing with heavy smoke, an N95 is way better than what most people wear, but it lets in a LOT of nasty stuff vs an N100. A P100 particulate respirator is the same as an N100 for particles, except that it also deals with airborne oils (think poison oak, solvents, etc).

* N95/N100/P100 masks are deemed unacceptable by experts (liars if not outright idiots), vs a bandana or massively leak surgical mask: these f*cking morons (experts) allow massively leaky facial coverings at my local health care facility, but not a valved mask which leaks far less air (I verified this myself) and protects the wearer. The contemptible and malicious idea that protecting yourself is off limits versus a leaky surgical mask or hyper leaky bandana is beyond stupid—it is feckless and reckless. If we had all had N95 valved masks, this pandemic would have been stopped cold within weeks of its start. If you still don’t want that valve, use cloth or a cotton pad inside the mask to block the valving.

Stanford researchers discuss wildfires’ health impacts

The cloak of wildfire smoke that has descended across huge swaths of Northern California is a visible reminder of air pollution’s health threats. For people at high risk for severe COVID-19 symptoms, the bad air presents a new challenge. For firefighters and others exposed to large amounts of smoke, the long-term effects are uncertain.

...People who are over 65 years of age have a higher chance of heart attacks and strokes even after two to three days of bad air quality due to wildfire smoke.

The smoke from wildfires goes through the lungs and the airways and can be absorbed into the blood. There are over 400 toxins associated with wildfire smoke, which have a multitude of bad effects on the body. In the blood, these toxins can activate the immune system and platelets and the lining of blood vessels. When this happens, the inflammation can induce clots which lodge in the heart or the brain vessels and cause heart attacks or strokes, respectively. Asthma can get worse with wildfire smoke because the smoke gets into the lungs and causes irritation and muscle spasms, which lead to wheezing and difficulty breathing.

...air pollution causes immune changes, and increased levels of long-term exposure to small particulates called PM2.5 is associated with decreased life expectancy. Given that wildfire smoke is 80 percent PM2.5, we expect acute immune dysregulation. Our own research has shown increases in inflammatory markers in teenagers exposed to wildfire smoke. Less is known about long-term impacts of wildfire smoke exposure on health, which is why our work with retired firefighters is so important. Given that areas of elevated air pollution are associated with increased COVID-19 rates, exposure probably renders the body less able to fight off viral infections, such as COVID-19.

...

Cloth masks offer very limited protection but are better than nothing. One study used the smoke from a candle to measure filtration and found that cloth masks were about 50 percent effective in filtering very small particles. However, the best solution is to stay indoors if you can. Otherwise, standard N95 masks are in limited supply for health care workers, but an N95 mask with an exhalation valve could be used. These help protect you from the particulate matter in wildfire smoke, but can’t be used in the health care setting because the valve could potentially allow the transmission of virus.

WIND: all masks need to be properly fitted (sealed), which rules out beards and facial hair.

A lack of sealing is why so many “approved” masks are bullshit—failing to protect the wearer from dust or smoke or COVID-19 other than minimally. Filtering half is better than nothing but filtering 95% (N95) is 10X better than half and 99.75% (N100/P100) is 200X better.



Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

Dealing with Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis and Epstein Barr Virus (EBV): a Few Things that Have Helped

I was diagnosed with Epstein Barr Virus and Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis in early September 2020.

Update October 10 2020: I can now manage perhaps 2 days of 7 for my baseline bike ride (90 minutes, 1000 calories expended), but that drains the energy tank. I rode for a decade 7 days a week with no issues, and at longer druation than that in the Jan - June time period over those years (heavy training load plus double centuries).

In addition to ensuring adequate magnesium and potassium, I have begin looking into CoQ10 and Acetyl L-Carnitine and creatine, because they are directly in involved in cellular energy production. I now am thinking that this is a mitochondrial energy issue, hence those supplements.

...

This post is to share a few things that have helped me in dealing with Epstein Barr Virus and Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis which have resulted mainly in extreme fatigue, but also a monthlong joint problem in the knuckles of my hand.

I did have one joyous day of nearly full strength, riding my bike nearly three hours (1900 calorie ride, first ride in 11 day)... but the next day was weakness and I was wiped out the day after that with legs that felt like the muscles had gone dead. The oscillation in energy is extreme, from feeling hardly able to stand up straight to doing that bike ride a day later.

Is the fatigue the result of EBV or Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis? Yes, meaning either or both and who can really know. It seems that I am going to need some weeks of rest and care to try to heal. Hopefully it’s mainly EBV and the thyroiditis part will calm down.

Magnesium

Being involved in perhaps as many as 1000 metabolic processes, magnesium has many healing and modulating functions within the body. For example, it is a strong pulmonary relaxant which cured my asthma (far more effective than prescription inhalers for me), and a moderate muscle relaxant. It supports the immune system and protects the cardiovascular system and brain, and helps the body to eliminate toxins. Most people are magnesium deficient, so this is a baseline nutritional requirement to fix.

Vitamin C

After suffering for a month from arthritic-like pain in two knuckles of my right hand, I had a thought to try Lypo-Spheric Vitamin C. Within 24-36 hours, all the pain had gone. Perhaps a coincidence (?) in my N=1 experiment that many doctors would guffaw at as anecdotal nonsense*. Or maybe it helped kill off some virus and/or had anti-inflammatory effects. The fact is the pain disappeared almost overnight.

* Which is why doctors rarely can help with anything complicated and mult-factorial—closed minds in the context of an extremely complex ecosystem (the synergistic human body and mind). Functional medicine doctors (hard to find) would likely be much more open to hypotheses.

CBD

CBD at bedtime helps relax me, but (this might be peculiar to me) seems to increase sensation and flexibility in my feet and toes. I am hoping it will modulate my immune system and help me heal out of the EBV and perhaps even the Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis, by tuning down inappropriate immune system functions.


Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

Zeiss Batis for Sony

diglloyd.com | Terms of Use | PRIVACY POLICY
Contact | About Lloyd Chambers | Consulting | Photo Tours
Mailing Lists | RSS Feeds | Twitter
Copyright © 2020 diglloyd Inc, all rights reserved.
Display info: __RETINA_INFO_STATUS__