Upgrade the memory of your 2020 iMac up to 128GB
Today’s Deal Zone Items... Handpicked deals...
$399 $199
SAVE $200

$2797 $2497
SAVE $300

$1398 $998
SAVE $400

$1499 $999
SAVE $500

$549 $499
SAVE $50

$799 $549
SAVE $250

$1699 $949
SAVE $750

$3899 $1499
SAVE $2400

$999 $849
SAVE $150

$1398 $998
SAVE $400

$240 $175
SAVE $65

$240 $175
SAVE $65

$1399 $799
SAVE $600

$1997 $1797
SAVE $200

$3399 $2699
SAVE $700

$400 $300
SAVE $100

$1699 $949
SAVE $750

$1199 $1099
SAVE $100

$1199 $1099
SAVE $100

$999 $949
SAVE $50

$1699 $949
SAVE $750

OWC Envoy Pro Elektron

Ultra-high performance across entire capacity, outperforms the competition.

Tiny, bus-powered, rugged, compact!

√ No more slow and noisy hard drives!

COVID “vaccines” ===> Immune-Stimulating Prophylactic Therapeutics?

re: ethics in medicine
re: What is a “Vaccine”? Redefining it for COVID

I reject the effort to redefine longstanding terminology so as to facilitate public messaging (propaganda), because it undermines debate and ends up turning everything into fruitless quarreling. This is what has happened in politics, numerous examples abound there. So now it is being done in medicine.

Isn’t it time to call the Trump vaccines what they really are? That is, immune-stimulating prophylactic therapeutics (ISPT’s). With demonstrated benefits, but benefits that seemingly age about as well as last autumn’s filberts.

Of course the public needs something simpler than “immune-stimulating prophylactic therapeutics” or even ISPT’s. But the medical establishment loves such mumbo-jumbo (helps keep the unwashed impressed with their superior wisdom), so let 'em have it, or something similar.


The difference between a vaccine and ISPT is very important for public messaging, should any of our public officials ever want to do so honestly.

Because you do not acquire immunity from COVID with the “vaccine”. Rather you acquire some varying level of immune response against COVID, one that decreases quickly with time.

Compare that to infection-acquired natural immunity. Even that might fade with time (or in weak individuals), but all signs say it is superior to COVID ISPT’s—the body generates multiple responses to the virus.

Given more and more deaths from COVID among the vaccinated (especially in high-risk groups), some messaging points come to mind to help protect the public by helping them understand the risks:

  • The vaccinated need to understand that they are not immune, retaining some level of risk that progressively and fairly rapidly declines. Precautions should be taken for high-risk folks since their immune-response starting point might be low to begin with.
  • Those with natural immunity appear to be far better protected (longer lasting), an idea avoided in public discussion in favor of the “vaccination” mantra. Those with it can unload some of the psychological burden.
  • It might be wise to let healthy people acquire natural immunity with low risk (after an ISPT).
  • Similarly, it might be wise to determine the peak of resistance for “vaccinated” people at low risk to acquire natural immunity with low risk (after an ISPT).
OWC Accelsior 4M2 PCIe SSD
6000 MB/sec!
Mac or PC.

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

What is a “Vaccine”? Redefining it for COVID Messaging

re: ethics in medicine

The Trump vaccines have surely saved a lot of lives. Maybe a short-term win, since allegedly rare breakthrough infections are surging and hospitalizing/killing people. And we must hope that aside from protecting high-risk groups that mass vaccination is not a Pandora’s Box that will cause far greater harm.

Meanwhile, the unvaccinated (with superior natural immunity or not) are being set up for persecution as scapegoats, in case something Bad does come to pass.

See also: People Think COVID is 81x More Dangerous Than it Actually Is

The Daily Bell: COVID Propaganda Roundup: The ‘Safe and Effective’ Narrative Implodes

by Ben Bartee, 2021-09-15

CDC’s old “vaccine” definition:

“a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease”

CDC’s new “vaccine” defiinition:

“a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases”

Likewise, Merriam-Webster’s old “vaccine” definition:

“a preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms, or living fully virulent organisms that is administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease”

Merriam-Webster’s new “vaccine” definition:

“a preparation that is administered (as by injection) to stimulate the body’s immune response against a specific infectious disease”

WIND: by the first definition, Vitamin D is a vaccine, stress hormones are vaccines, foods are vaccines, and so on. Even the second definition leaves open wide-ranging possibilities.

Science.org: A grim warning from Israel: Vaccination blunts, but does not defeat Delta —  “Vaccines Work, but not well enough”

re: ethics in medicine
re: What is a “Vaccine”? Redefining it for COVID

Are the Trump vaccines* not “working”? Poor data analysis/stratification coupled to worse reporting is a public health disaster. See discussion below.

Science.org: A grim warning from Israel: Vaccination blunts, but does not defeat Delta

by MEREDITH WADMAN, 2021-09-16

COVID surge in Israel, September 2021

With early vaccination and outstanding data, country is the world’s real-life COVID-19 lab.

...Israel has among the world’s highest levels of vaccination for COVID-19, with 78% of those 12 and older fully vaccinated, the vast majority with the Pfizer vaccine. Yet the country is now logging one of the world’s highest infection rates, with nearly 650 new cases daily per million people. More than half are in fully vaccinated people, underscoring the extraordinary transmissibility of the Delta variant and stoking concerns that the benefits of vaccination ebb over time.

...“I watch [Israeli data] very, very closely because it is some of the absolutely best data coming out anywhere in the world,” says David O’Connor, a viral sequencing expert at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. “Israel is the model,” agrees Eric Topol, a physician-scientist at Scripps Research. “It’s pure mRNA [messenger RNA] vaccines. It’s out there early. It’s got a very high level population [uptake]. It’s a working experimental lab for us to learn from.”

...People vaccinated in January had a 2.26 times greater risk for a breakthrough infection than those vaccinated in April. (Potential confounders include the fact that the very oldest Israelis, with the weakest immune systems, were vaccinated first.)

At the same time, cases in the country, which were scarcely registering at the start of summer, have been doubling every week to 10 days since then, with the Delta variant responsible for most of them. They have now soared to their highest level since mid-February, with hospitalizations and intensive care unit admissions beginning to follow. How much of the current surge is due to waning immunity versus the power of the Delta variant to spread like wildfire is uncertain.

...What is clear is that “breakthrough” cases are not the rare events the term implies. As of 15 August, 514 Israelis were hospitalized with severe or critical COVID-19, a 31% increase from just 4 days earlier. Of the 514, 59% were fully vaccinated. Of the vaccinated, 87% were 60 or older. “There are so many breakthrough infections that they dominate and most of the hospitalized patients are actually vaccinated,” says Uri Shalit, a bioinformatician at the Israel Institute of Technology (Technion) who has consulted on COVID-19 for the government. “One of the big stories from Israel [is]: ‘Vaccines work, but not well enough.’”


Yet boosters are unlikely to tame a Delta surge on their own, says Dvir Aran, a biomedical data scientist at Technion. In Israel, the current surge is so steep that “even if you get two-thirds of those 60-plus [boosted], it’s just gonna give us another week, maybe 2 weeks until our hospitals are flooded.”... Aran’s message for the United States and other wealthier nations considering boosters is stark: “Do not think that the boosters are the solution.”

WIND: reports like this could easily becomes sound-bite nuggets for anti-vaxxers*, as in “the vaccines don’t work, so why bother”. But at-risk groups need to understand two things which are not contradictory: (1) vaccination so far greatly reduces mortality and hospitalization, and (2) the protection fades quickly, and risk rises again.

Consider who is most likely to be infected by COVID: (1) the elderly/weak/obese, and (2) the unvaccinated (presumably on average mostly young/healthy).

In general, the elderly/weak fail to mount strong immune response with any vaccine (COVID or other). Yet these most-at-risk people were the first to be vaccinated, and so now their resistance to COVID has declined substantially. And it might have been nil or weak even after vaccination.

So it is to be expected that a significant number of the elderly/weak will become infected even after “vaccination”, and that many will die. But if it is just the elderly/weak/earliest vaccinated, how to explain the steep surge?

The surges in Israel and elsewhere imply that the vaccines are allowing orders of magnitude more breakthrough infections—if they were “rare”, COVID would have long since died down. So it feels like we are being lied to, it feels like a psyops campaign, and it feels like the government is setting us up for a disaster, while scapegoating the unvaccinated.

The argument for booster shots is based on the presumption that there was some immunie system response initially, and a booster will greatly strengthen that. But will boosters do much for those who responded poorly to begin with, those most at risk? At this date, the evidence is poor that boosters are the right approach.

The non-stratified (hence incompetent) data reporting is not explaining which cohort(s) are being infected with bad outcomes. Perhaps the data stratification insights exist, but it’s not discussed as it ought. Could it be that something truly scary being hidden from the public, such as vaccinated people across stratifications are all being hit? Or is it just experts and reporters incompetent at data analysis and/or communication?

We need competent stratified data show what the “vaccines” are actually accomplishing across all cohorts. The data must be stratified by age and morbidities and reported accurately in a timely manner so that meaningful insights can be had. Otherwise, we cannot know if the surge in severe outcomes in vaccinated people is a problem in high-risk cohorts, or a general cross-sectional issue, which would be a terrible prospect.

First, public health experts must prove with stratified data that breakthrough infections are limited in scope. At this point, I find that very hard to believe, but there is a lot to be learned around who is at risk. Is it just the high-risk groups, or is something more insidious going on?

The prophylactic therapeutics commonly referred to as vaccines offer partial protection and fade quickly over time. High-risk individuals should assume protection fades over time, and take precautions accordingly.

* I am neither pro nor anti-vax, speaking in terms of some viciuos “hammer down the nail that stands up” policy. I am for personal choice that evaluates the specific individual’s medical situation. And vaccines might prove to be our undoing.

Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

Israel Sees Record-High Daily Infections, Hints Fourth Vaccine Dose

re: The Epoch Times
re: ethics in medicine

What the heck is going on with vaccinations vs infections in Israel, one of the most vaccinated countries in the world?

The Epoch Times: Israel Sees Record-High Daily Infections, Hints Fourth Vaccine Dose

by Lorenz Duchamps, 2021-09-15

Highly vaccinated Israel recorded the highest number of daily CCP virus infections per capita this week as the country’s health ministry announced that on average, more than 10,700 new COVID-19 cases are being reported each day.

Health Ministry Director-General Nachman Ash said during a video call on Sept. 14 that the new figures are “a record that did not exist in the previous waves,” The Times of Israel reported.

...Although positive cases are on the rise again, people who fell seriously ill from COVID-19, the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, declined compared to the numbers of previous weeks. Ash noted that on average, people who fell seriously ill increased daily by around 70 to 80 new patients.

...“Vaccines fade over time, and after six months, they significantly decline while people become infected even after two vaccines,” Ash said, answering a question on the possibility of a fourth COVID-19 vaccine dose. “We don’t know when the vaccine will be approved, I very much hope it will not be within half a year like this, but the third vaccine will last longer. We are starting to prepare so that we have stockpiles of vaccines if necessary,” he continued.


WIND: a FOURTH vaccine dose? Really makes me wonder if the vaccinated are spreading COVID far more than public health authorities will admit to, making this a pandemic of the vaccinated, albeit with far fewer severe consequences for them.

And I wonder how many children will be harmed relative to how many helped. The bodies of children are not like adults, and they are being robbed of the chance for far superior natural immunity at nil risk. My bet is more harm than good.

The country began offering COVID-19 booster shots to children as young as 12 on Aug. 29, and Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said a campaign that began in July among seniors has slowed a rise in severe illness caused by the Delta variant. Currently, about 2.7 million Israelis have accepted the booster vaccine.

Clearly vaccines are not—they are short-term therapeutics, with all sorts of negative outcomes that no one has discovered yet—that is the way the world works everywhere—unforeseen consequences. I would love to see some objective scientific objective debate that is free of the rotten stench of the propaganda narrative. What might be the repurcussions a year or two from now and could they be quite serious?

Why Mass Vaccinations Prolong & Make Epidemics Deadlier: Vaccines Expert Calls Out Governments

Reuters: Israel Lowers Age of Eligibility for COVID-19 Vaccine Booster to 30: Health Ministry

by Reuters, 2021--8-25

Israel expanded its COVID-19 vaccine booster shots to those over 30 years old on Tuesday, broadening its booster campaign amid a surge in the Delta variant.

A statement from the Health Ministry said its decision to lower the age of eligibility for a third dose of the Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine from 40 to 30 followed a recommendation of its advising experts and its epidemiology task-force and vaccines committee. Boosters are administered to people who have received their second dose at least five months ago.

Evidence has emerged showing that the vaccine’s protection diminishes with time. But there is no consensus among scientists and agencies that a third dose is necessary.


DIGLLOYD: vaccines are working so well, that Israel is already talking about a 4th booster shot.

A sign of stupidity is to keep repeating what doesn’t work. But at least in reducing mortality the therapeutics falsely described as vaccines do seem to be working for a short-term win. Long term, who knows what bad effects are building.

Study Suggests that COVID Hospitalizations and Deaths are up to 50% Bogus

No, this is no is not a Babylon Bee post.

When the zero-credibility far-Left The Atlantic questions COVID hospitalization statistics, maybe a sea change is coming? Or maybe someone over there had a concussion and came to their senses.

The Atlantic: Our Most Reliable Pandemic Number Is Losing Meaning

by David Zweig, 2021-09-13

A new study suggests that almost half of those hospitalized with COVID-19 have mild or asymptomatic cases.

...The study found that from March 2020 through early January 2021—before vaccination was widespread, and before the Delta variant had arrived—the proportion of patients with mild or asymptomatic disease was 36 percent. From mid-January through the end of June 2021, however, that number rose to 48 percent. In other words, the study suggests that roughly half of all the hospitalized patients showing up on COVID-data dashboards in 2021 may have been admitted for another reason entirely, or had only a mild presentation of disease.

...might inflate the true numbers by a factor of two. “As we look to shift from cases to hospitalizations as a metric to drive policy and assess level of risk to a community or state or country,” Doron told me, referring to decisions about school closures, business restrictions, mask requirements, and so on, “we should refine the definition of hospitalization. Those patients who are there with rather than from COVID don’t belong in the metric.”

WIND: can someone tell me how a number that might be wrong by 50% ever was a “reliable pandemic number”? Anyone honest will admit it never was. But how wrong we will probably never know, due to slipshod practices of the medical establishment.

It’s not hard to discount COVID deaths and hospitalizations by at least 25% over the course of the pandemic, due to medical malfeasance in assigning cause. But I had never thought that it might be as high as 50%. And maybe it’s not, but it’s far away from zero. And that’s how we are still making public policy.


The horde of monster deals has returned.

Deals on just about everything!

Babylon Bee: New IPhone 13 Will Require Vaccination To Unlock Screen

re: The Babylon Bee

Never say never.

Babylon Bee: New IPhone 13 Will Require Vaccination To Unlock Screen


CUPERTINO, CA—During the much-anticipated unveiling of the new iPhone 13 at this year's Apple Event, CEO Tim Cook revealed that the newest model and iOS will ask users to confirm vaccination status before unlocking the screen.

"We here at Apple are doing our part to keep you safe by keeping our sacred products out of the hands of the filthy unvaccinated," said Cook as he paced the stage. "That's why starting with the iPhone 13, all Apple users will be required to scan their vaccination card in order to unlock their iPhones."

... Tim Cook confirmed he has software engineers and Chinese Uyghur slaves working overtime to ensure the "vax-verify" technology is ready for primetime.


WIND: I hope the 1/3 of the population that has trouble with humor gets this one.

Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

Does Peer Review of Medical/Scientific Papers Mean Much Any More?


Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

Does peer review of medical/scientific papers mean much any more?

Surely it has some value in stopping obviously bad papers from being published. But most scientific and medical studies are bullshit anyway! And the number of retractions is absurdly high.

Now let’s add in politics, money, and status. What exactly does  “peer review” mean? Which peers? In a clubby world, what are the chances of contrarian opposing viewpoints ( having any role in reviewing a paper for publication? Nil.

For example, do you think that John Ioannidis would have let the garbage science in the Bangladesh mask study be published on his watch? Almost certainly not, but who is ever going to ask a world-class thinker like him to review such a laughable study?

Taking this to the other side, what are the chances of an unpopular viewpoint getting past GroupThink peer review committees? About zero. How many studies opposing the orthodoxy get published... I’d guess few to none. And then, if you want to stay in the field, you had better toe the line and not come up with anything that challenges the orthodoxy.

Peer review sounds good, but in today’s world, but it’s an idea built on premises that today have no foundation.

Upgrade the memory of your 2020 iMac up to 128GB

Why Mass Vaccinations Prolong & Make Epidemics Deadlier: Vaccines Expert Calls Out Governments


Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

I am not “anti vax”. Indeed I have had many vaccinations over my lifetime, including for Shingles last year. Rather, I am for personal medical choices appropriate for each individual, as decided by that person in consultation with those they trust. Some of my family members are vaccinated and some are not, each for our own reasons. Those that insist that there is no choice and no decision to be made on vaccination via personal risk assessment are irrational and vicious usurpers. They do not belong in the discussion.

Below, the powers that be are already trying to discredit Vanden Bossche by calling him a veterinarian—but read the first paragraph on his wide-ranging qualifications and decide for yourself (click the title to see the full article).

The COVID vaccines are more akin a prophylactic therapeutic, designed to reduce hospitalization and death. They do not stop COVID—witness the large numbers of vaccinated people getting COVID in spite of being vaccinated and the calls for booster shots in less than a year. Those at risk are at far lower risk after vaccination, but that is only one consideration, as Vanden Bossche discusses.

Why Mass Vaccinations Prolong & Make Epidemics Deadlier: Vaccines Expert Calls Out Governments

by Robin Monotti Graziadei, 2021-09-13


“Mass vaccination campaigns may have a beneficial short-time effect in that they reduce viral spread and protect vulnerable people from disease (e.g., elderly people and those with underlying disease), but will eventually drive the propagation of more infectious variants. Dominant circulation of the latter will lead to a resurgence of viral infectious pressure, thereby eroding the innate immune defense of the unvaccinated (i.e., mostly younger age groups including children) and thus making them more susceptible to contracting Covid-19 disease. This already explains why mass vaccination campaigns conducted in the middle of a pandemic will only cause Sars-CoV-2 to engender more disease and claim more human lives. Because of this mass vaccination program, waves of morbidity will continue for much longer, as more (recovery from) disease cases will be required to compensate for the erosion of the population’s innate immunity and, therefore, to make up for the latter’s deficient contribution to HI. [Herd Immunity].

...There should be no doubt that non-transmission-blocking vaccines (i.e., so-called ‘leaky’ or ‘imperfect’ vaccines) can never ever control a pandemic, even though they may temporarily protect against disease. Only temporarily? Yes, indeed. Given the globally increasing immune pressure and concomitant infectious viral pressure, genomic epidemiologists have no doubt that this pandemic roller coaster will not stop before it takes us over the cliff into the abyss of complete viral resistance to anti-spike (S) antibodies. That is where all runaway trains of the different ongoing pandemics of highly infectious variants will be coming together and converge into a big whirl where they can no longer be distinguished from one another. The first stages of this evolution is what we now begin to see in countries which have already massively vaccinated their population (e.g., Israel). There is no doubt that other countries like the United Kingdom and the United States will soon go down the same path. Due to increasing resistance to neutralizing anti-S antibodies (Abs), these countries are now even beginning to shift from a primarily beneficial (i.e., less susceptible to severe disease) to a primarily detrimental effect (more susceptible to severe disease) in the vaccinated as compared to the unvaccinated (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/investigation-of-novel-sars-cov-2-variant-variant-of-concern-20201201).

Conclusively, mass vaccination campaigns during a pandemic of highly infectious variants fail to control viral transmission. Instead of contributing to building HI, they dramatically delay natural establishment of HI (Vanden Bossche, August 2021). This is why the ongoing universal vaccination campaigns are absolutely detrimental to public and global health.

People, no matter their names and reputation, who are not knowledgeable in the fields of immunology, virology, vaccinology and evolutionary biology/ epidemiology are, therefore, not a good source for information or advice. This particularly applies to politicians. The vast majority of them are not only scientifically illiterate but they are typically also unable or unwilling to work in a mid- or long-term perspective. Because they have no understanding whatsoever of the evolutionary dynamics of this pandemic, they simply do not understand that the rise in cases of disease currently observed in a number of European countries as well as in the US is due to enhanced circulation of more infectious variants that enjoy exceptional training as mass vaccination only increases the immune pressure exerted by the overall population.  Their simplistic reasoning make them conclude that vaccinating the unvaccinated (i.e., younger age groups and children) is going to solve the problem, whereas each and every independent (!) knowledgeable expert understands that this is only going to further raise the population-level immune pressure on viral infectiousness and, therefore, promote the adaptation of additional mutations that will eventually enable full neutralization escape of circulating, highly infectious variants (Vanden Bossche, June 2021).

Initially, people were told that ‘the more you vaccinate, the more you will prevent mutants from being generated and the less more infectious variants will spread’. This mantra proved miserably wrong as not only viral spread has increased in a number of countries despite very high vaccine coverage rates but it has now also become clear that the vaccinated spread the virus as much as the unvaccinated do (whereas it is even highly likely that vaccinees are a more important source of transmission of naturally selected, highly infectious variants (3)). Sadly enough, even a number of MDs have joined the club of fact checkers and have been taking advantage of their titles and reputation to divulgate simplistic and erroneous interpretations of the effect of mass vaccination campaigns. I cannot emphasize enough that, although none of them combine sufficient knowledge of virology, immunology, vaccinology and evolutionary biology to be able to understand what is driving the evolution of these pandemics towards a disastrous outcome, they have engaged in vilifying attacks that excelled in arrogance but were never built on solid scientific grounds. As if none of this were sufficient, TV channels and MSM have blindly supported the destructive rhetoric...



The mass vaccination hype will undoubtedly enter history as the most reckless experiment in the history of medicine. It will be cited as the unequivocal proof of how overuse or misuse of man-made antimicrobials leads to antimicrobial resistance, regardless of whether the antimicrobial is an antibiotic or an antibody administered through passive immunization or elicited via active immunization. Mass vaccination campaigns conducted in the middle of a viral pandemic will, for generations to come, become the most sobering example of the boundaries of human intervention in nature in general and of the boundaries of conventional vaccinology in particular. This irrational experiment will unambiguously highlight the clear-cut limitations of conventional vaccine approaches. It will convincingly illustrate that – unlike natural acute self-limiting infection or disease – ‘modern’ technologies alone do not suffice to develop vaccines that are capable of preventing viral transmission or immune escape...

While the word ‘vaccine’ may be banned, the word ‘fact checker’ will only gain traction as a general term used for any scientifically illiterate person who uses arrogance to vilify those who speak the truth and promotes – in exchange for dirty money – a narrative and groupthink mentality that are merely inspired by the interests of the stakeholders they blindly support.

For lack of insight, international and public health authorities will continue to blame lack of success on the more infectious variants and propose (impose?) boosters as a never-ending strategy to chasing new emerging variants...

WIND: this is precisely the kind of viewpoint that the propagandists over at Stanford ought to be debating.

I revisit my assertions from more than a year ago: we should protect those at risk, and not worry too much about the rest of the population. We should focus on treatment. This virus has to make its way through the population like any other before we get to a better place. Even the experts are now saying it will become endemic. Perhaps because of vaccines?

I don’t see anything in the foregoing that contradicts what is happening today. That doesn’t make it true, but the concerns seem credible. Consider:

  • Herd immunity (HI) is elusive; it is delayed precisely as Vanden Bossche states (“Instead of contributing to building HI, they dramatically delay natural establishment of HI”).
  • Vaccinations do reduce hospitalizations and deaths. Short term benefit, as Vanden Bossche states.
  • Large numbers of the vaccinated are being infected. Some are dying. (“shift to... primarily detrimental effect (more susceptible to severe disease) in the vaccinated”).
  • Boosters are already being touted as important. Perhaps because “this pandemic roller coaster will not stop before it takes us over the cliff into the abyss of complete viral resistance to anti-spike (S) antibodies”.
  • Follow the money—vaccines are worth $100B or more to Big Pharma. The Science doesn’t matter now.
  • With rare exceptions, doctors just follow guidelines; few have training even outside their own silo, making them unqualified to weigh in: “MDs have joined the club of fact checkers and have been taking advantage of their titles and reputation to divulgate simplistic and erroneous interpretations”.

Let’s look at one quote again, about medical doctors (MDs):

...Sadly enough, even a number of MDs have joined the club of fact checkers and have been taking advantage of their titles and reputation to divulgate simplistic and erroneous interpretations of the effect of mass vaccination campaigns. I cannot emphasize enough that, although none of them combine sufficient knowledge of virology, immunology, vaccinology and evolutionary biology to be able to understand what is driving the evolution of these pandemics towards a disastrous outcome, they have engaged in vilifying attacks that excelled in arrogance but were never built on solid scientific grounds...

My own personal experience, and one widely acknowledged by MD’s themselves it that MD’s have strictly limited knowledge outside their own medical siloes. That should be painfully obviuos to anyone who has ever needed to see a specialist, let alone ask about nutrition! MD’s are totally unqualified to weigh in on this debate.

Upgrade the memory of your 2020 iMac up to 128GB

CDC Says COVID-19 Antibody Seroprevalance is 83%, 2.1 Infections per Case Estimated


Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

Things are looking up.

City Journal: Delta is Dying

by Joel Zinberg, 2021-09-10

...The CDC looked for evidence of prior infection or vaccination in the blood of approximately 1.5 million blood donors from around the country between July 2020 and May 2021. Based on the antibodies found in the specimens, they were able to distinguish between those who had been vaccinated and those with antibodies resulting from infection. As of the end of May, the combined vaccine and infection seroprevalence (indicating the proportion of the population with antibodies and some level of immune protection) was 83 percent for those 16 and older (children under 16 can’t donate blood). Over 20 percent had antibodies indicating an earlier infection and recovery. Based on the infection-induced seroprevalence, the researchers estimated that there were actually 2.1 infections per reported Covid-19 case.

Now, following the surge from the Delta variant, the number of confirmed Covid-19 cases (all ages) is over 40 million, or 8 million more than on May 31. Applying the 2.1 multiple from the blood donation study to the entire population results in a real number of cases and people with natural immunity of 84 million, or 25 percent of the population. In addition, 177 million people are fully vaccinated, which is 53 percent of the total population and 34 million more than at the end of May. An additional 10 percent of the population has received a single dose, which provides some protection, albeit less than the full two doses.

...While there is overlap because some previously infected people have been vaccinated, roughly 80 percent of the country has vaccine or natural immunity. Both types of immunity provide effective protection against Covid-19. The risk of breakthrough infections among the vaccinated is small, and when they occur, the vaccines continue to be effective in preventing serious illness, even for the Delta variant. The CDC also acknowledges that reinfection of recovered Covid-19 patients is rare.


WIND: there are weaknesses in the study—it only was done with those donating blood, so that cohort might differ from the general population (e.g., the elderly could be far less likey to donate blood). Real figures could be notably higher, but presumably not lower since COVID is well-known to be asymptomatic in many.

Why are politicians demonizing the unvaccinated, including those with natural immunity?

If you want to make the personal choice of risking COVID (smart or stupid for your own personal situation), do so. If you have natural immunity, you not only don’t need the vaccine, it likely carries risks of more severe reactions (think risk assessment).

And if you want to be vaccinated... do so ASAP and then shut the hell up about the unvaccinated, since the CDC data implies that 83% of adults should already have immunity.

BTW, how can we not have herd immunity at 83% seroprevalance? These “experts” seem to be know-nothings when it comes to epidemiology.

Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

COVID Natural Immunity Gaining a Wee Bit of Traction?

re: natural immunity

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

Demanding vaccination without taking into account natural immunity is propaganda.

Jonathan Turley: California Medical Ethics Expert Sues University Over Vaccine Mandate

by Jonathan Turley, 2021-09-10

We recently discussed the lawsuit filed by a George Mason University professor who refused to get the Covid vaccine upon the recommendation of his doctors and due to his natural antibodies after recovering from the virus. GMU later relented and gave him an exception. However, now a University of California professor has sued on the same ground. Aaron Kheriaty, professor of psychiatry and human behavior at the University of California at Irvine, is the latest effort to force review of the issue of natural antibodies as a protection from Covid. 

Kheriaty is suing the Board of Regents and the University president due to his antibodies from a case of Covid-19 in July 2020. He told SBG“[i]f my immunity is as good, indeed, very likely better, than that conferred by the vaccine, there doesn’t seem to be any rational basis for discriminating against my form of immunity and requiring me to get a different form of immunity.”

What is most interesting about the case is that Kheriaty serves as director of UCI’s Medical Ethics Program and is a member of the UC Office of the President Critical Care Bioethics Working Group. Kheriaty has complained that it is now verboten to even raise natural antibodies despite studies showing that they may be even more effective than vaccines.  A study (often cited by the CDC) suggests the opposite.

...This case however presents the natural antibody case in its strongest and most direct terms. The odds are in favor of the university but it could be a case with potential for the Supreme Court.

WIND: this case ought to be expedited.

The Epoch Times: Previous COVID-19 Infection Protects Against Delta Variant Better Than Pfizer Vaccine: Study

By Mimi Nguyen Ly, 2021-08-27

People who have previously recovered from COVID-19 have been observed to have better protection against the Delta variant of the CCP virus compared to those who received the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine, according to a study from Israel.

“This analysis demonstrated that natural immunity affords longer-lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease, and hospitalization due to the Delta variant,” researchers from Maccabi Healthcare and Tel Aviv University said.

“This is the largest real-world observational study comparing natural immunity, gained through previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, to vaccine-induced immunity, afforded by the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine.”

Natural immunity refers to the immunity a person retains after having recovered from a virus, in this case, the CCP virus, also known as the novel coronavirus.


WIND: I predict that more and more studies are going to show this, and that over time, those with natural immunity will do far better as a group than the vaccinated.

Michigan Health Care System Says Workers With Natural Immunity Don't Need Vaccine

by TYLER DURDEN, 2021-09-13

Late last month, we first reported on a groundbreaking new study that appeared to "end the debate" on the subject of natural vs. vaccine-induced immunity. The study found that, when it comes to preventing serious infection with the delta variant, natural infection with a prior strain of COVID was as much as 13x more effective at preventing future infection than being fully vaccinated.

Dr. Fauci's response: "I don’t have a really firm answer for you on that."

Well, if he doesn't have a good justification, then he's going to have to find one soon. Because as the Biden Administration ups the pressure on employers to force their workers to choose between their jobs and the vaccine, Spectrum Health, an extensive hospital system in Western Michigan, has just declared that prior employees (including nurses, doctors, etc.) won't be required to get the vaccine if they have already been infected.

The decision, which was made by the hospital system's medical exemption committee, was first reported by the Detroit News. Individuals with a positive PCR or antigen test plus a positive antibody test from within the past thre emonths can claim the exemption. 

... The CDC has said it's "uncommon" for those infected with COVID to become reinfected within 90 days. But nobody really knows for sure. "Experts don’t know for sure how long this protection lasts, and the risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19 far outweighs any benefits of natural immunity," the CDC says.

What they don't want you to realize is the same is true for the vaccines.

WIND: Dr Fauci is a political hack who never has answers for anything that might undermine the narrative.

Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

WSJ: Hearing too Much in a Noisy World

re: Glenn Greenwald

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

This one hit home for me—my #1 stressor is the inescapable noise at my home, which most would perceive as a quiet neighborhood. I was always noise-sensitive (HSP), but after my concussion it became torture for a while*; now it’s “just” a daily stressor that makes me want to travel away from home to the mountains.

* Post-concussion for months, noise was unbearable, the visual equivalent of having someone shine a flashlight into my eyes. For up to a year, I could not tune out sounds and would be conscious of half a dozen irritating noises from all directions, such as in a grocery store. Things have greatly improved, but it’s still something that can destroy my concentration and disable me, if too loud/long.

Hearing Too Much in a Noisy World

by Nina Kraus, 2021-09-14

Even ordinary levels of background din can drown out the meaning our brains seek from sound

When the pandemic struck in March of 2020, the human world went quiet. During what some are now calling the anthropause, highways and byways emptied of cars while shops and services locked their doors for weeks and months. Using sensitive sound level analyzers, scientists from every continent confirmed a reduction in human-created sound levels, in some cities by as much as seven decibels, which translates to about one-fifth as loud as before.

...Few people realize that there are two types of dangerous noise. Everyone knows about the danger of loud sounds...

The sounds of human activity generally don’t reach that accepted threshold of “unsafe.” Most people would consider the day-to-day sounds of urban life or a bustling workplace “background noise.” We think we shrug it off and tune it out. But we are not really tuning it out so much as we are adapting our lives to a constant state of alarm.

...Chronic exposure to meaningless noise requires our brains to sustain an exhausting state of alertness and ultimately dulls our perceptions...

If you live in a city or labor in a noisy workplace, you may ace the hearing-threshold test when your ears are tested, but you are less able than your peers who are accustomed to quiet environments to detect sounds in noise or to pick up on subtle timing cues in sounds. A 2004 study in Psychophysiology of noise-exposed workers with otherwise clinically “normal” hearing found that they showed diminished responses to subtle changes in otherwise predictable acoustic patterns. They also were excessively distracted by irrelevant sounds, which interfered with their ability to perform tasks. Such weakened aural processing is exactly the sort that we associate with old age.

...Noise can have a pernicious effect not only on our hearing, but on all our senses. When there was background noise, subjects in the 2004 Psychophysiology study performed worse on visual-motor tasks, such as tracking a moving target on a computer screen with a mouse pointer. Road traffic noise has even been convincingly correlated with heart disease. Indeed, chronic noise exposure increases both the levels of stress people report and the measurable level of the stress hormone cortisol.

...Some medical scientists have grown concerned that the lifesaving medical equipment in neonatal ICUs could have the unintended consequence of funneling a jumble of potentially damaging noise into the brains of fragile newborns during their developmentally critical first few days of life... “auditory trauma” may compromise the linguistic and cognitive development of infants.

...Having our hearing always “on” is fatiguing for the brain, especially when the background noise is unimportant but unrelenting... Reading scores of children in classrooms on the noisy side of the school lagged behind those of their peers on the quiet side by up to 11 months. Mitigation efforts, including rubber rail padding and noise abatement materials in the affected classrooms, erased the learning gap.

...Another study, in 2005 in The Lancet, found that chronic exposure to aircraft noise negatively affected cognition and reading comprehension among children... according to a 2013 study in The Journal of Neuroscience, children raised in such environments often have a high level of neural noise in their brains, meaning that their auditory neurons are active even when the external world is quiet.


WIND: at my home at 5 AM the roar of the distant freeway starts. Revving engines miles away are heard at all hours (miles away), the train in Menlo Park 8 miles away is plainly audible, airplanes fly overhead regularly and are so loud they drown-out everything.

I have come to loathe many of my neighbor because of the all-day-long activities: leaf blowers, lawn mowers, shredders, septic-tank pump trucks, the unending construction jobs (never fewer than 5 within 1/2 mile), etc. Worst of all are next-door pool pumps, which run for hours and pollute my backyard with humming eletrical noise much of the day. I want to hear the birds and the wind, not some pool pump needed for the atrocity of a pool in a drought-stricken area. These neighbors of course locate their pumps as close as possible to the property line, so they have to hear it less.

Ear plugs and noise-canceling headphones you say? Then the rest of the world is cut-off, and irritation in the ears develops too. Those are non-solutions proposed by the oblivious. There is no real solution except to go elsewhere.

I do have some escape: when I travel in the mountains, I usually can sleep in places that are so quiet the ears (brain) strain to ear so much that phantom sounds can occur (low bass for me). At most it’s wind or owls or coyotes or some such.

In the past couple of years, I’ve also developed a faint hissing in my ears at most times. It seems to worsen when I’m stressed. I assume it is some form of tinnitus and I’ve long assumed it is due to nervous system damage (brain or nerves from ears), perhaps caused by my concussion or infectious trauma, not sure.

OWC Area 51

Accessories • batteries • cables, docks • hard drives and SSDs • Mac hardware • new and pre-owned Macs • Thunderbolt
... and more!
Mac or PC, iPhone/iPad accessories, more!

Glenn Greenwald: The Masking of the Servant Class: Ugly COVID Images From the Met Gala Are Now Commonplace

re: Glenn Greenwald

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

Worth reading Glenn Greenwald because he is in a handful of journalists that still calls it like he sees it, ignoring sacred cows.

Glenn Greenwald: The Masking of the Servant Class: Ugly COVID Images From the Met Gala Are Now Commonplace

by Glenn Greenwald, 2021-09-14

While AOC's revolutionary and subversive socialist gown generated buzz, the normalization of maskless elites attended to by faceless servants is grotesque.

From the start of the pandemic, political elites have been repeatedly caught exempting themselves from the restrictive rules they impose on the lives of those over whom they rule. Governorsmayorsministers and Speakers of the House have been filmed violating their own COVID protocols in order to dine with their closest lobbyist-friends, enjoy a coddled hair styling in chic salons, or unwind after signing new lockdown and quarantine orders by sneaking away for a weekend getaway with the family. The trend became so widespread that ABC News gathered all the examples under the headline “Elected officials slammed for hypocrisy for not following own COVID-19 advice,” while Business Insider in May updated the reporting with this: “14 prominent Democrats stand accused of hypocrisy for ignoring COVID-19 restrictions they're urging their constituents to obey."

...But as is so often the case, the most disturbing aspects of elite behavior are found not in what they have prohibited but rather in what they have decided is permissible. When it comes to mask mandates, it is now commonplace to see two distinct classes of people: those who remain maskless as they are served, and those they employ as their servants who must have their faces covered at all times. Prior to the COVID pandemic, it was difficult to imagine how the enormous chasm between the lives of cultural and political elites and everyone else could be made any larger, yet the pandemic generated a new form of crude cultural segregation: a series of protocols which ensure that maskless elites need not ever cast eyes upon the faces of their servant class.

...Similar scenes were visible at the even more opulent birthday bash which former President Barack Obama threw for himself to commemorate his 60 years on the planet... New York Times reporter Annie Karni explained that while some of the former president's neighbors found the party objectionable on the grounds of health and/or optics, many adamantly argued that such concerns were applicable only to ordinary people, not the more advanced and evolved species likely to be invited to such an extravagant and exclusive liberal party...

An avalanche of similarly repugnant imagery poured forth on Monday night at the most gluttonous and opulent royal court spectacle of them all: the annual Met Gala held by long-time Vogue editor-in-chief Anna Wintour... Following Pelosi and Obama's examples, a long list of America's most glittering stars bravely risked exposure to a deadly virus by appearing without masks, all to ensure that Americans would never again be deprived of such a richly gratifying moment for them.


Even with all of this deceit and manipulation, there is something uniquely disturbing — creepy even — about becoming accustomed to seeing political and cultural elites wallowing in luxury without masks, while those paid small wages to serve them in various ways are forced to keep cloth over their faces. It is a powerful symbol of the growing rot at the core of America's cultural and social balkanization: a maskless elite attended to by a permanently faceless servant class. The country's workers have long been faceless in a figurative sense, and now, thanks to extremely selective application of decisively unscientific COVID restrictions, that condition has become literal.

WIND: no credible scientific evidence shows that masks stop community transmission of COVID. Garbage science on masks dominates. Mask up! (unless you are one of the elites)

City Journal: Delta is Dying


Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

Things are looking up.

City Journal: Delta is Dying

by Joel Zinberg, 2021-09-10

New CDC findings show that we’re closer than ever to the end of the pandemic.

Despite media claims that “We Can’t Turn the Corner on Covid,” the numbers of Covid-19 cases, new hospitalizations, and deaths nationwide peaked and started to decline around the beginning of September. The combination of this milestone, new findings from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showing widespread levels of vaccination and natural immunity, and improved availability of treatments suggests that, outside of isolated pockets, Covid-19 is likely to become a diminishing health risk in the United States.

... A new study from Israel confirms that natural immunity to Covid-19 is superior to vaccine-induced immunity, even with the Delta variant. Between June 1 and August 14, when Delta was dominant in Israel, the risk of infections was 13 times higher for vaccinated people than for previously infected, unvaccinated people when either the infection or vaccination had occurred between four and seven months before


WIND: within a few months COVID terrorism should taper off, but powerful forces aim to maintain the fears and demonize the unvaccinated, even those with natural immunity.

Mac or PC, iPhone/iPad accessories, more!

Stanford Medicine: Garbage Studies Masquerading as Science

re: Dr Scott Atlas
re: Dr. John Ionnadis
re: Sebastian Rushworth MD: How to understand scientific studies (in health and medicine)
re: Ioannidis: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

This Bangladesh study is such low-grade “science” with so many flaws and statistical lies that it is a dumpster fire of scientific incompetence. It ought to be used as a case study how not to do scientific studies. Yet Stanford is promoting it as evidence that masks work.

It is not surprising—I have read the output of Stanford University research for years, and I have watched it become more and more woke and politicized whenever controversial subjects are involved.

Surgical masks reduce COVID-19 spread, large-scale study shows

A large, randomized trial led by researchers at Stanford Medicine and Yale University has found that wearing a surgical face mask over the mouth and nose is an effective way to reduce the occurrence of COVID-19 in community settings...

...“We now have evidence from a randomized, controlled trial that mask promotion increases the use of face coverings and prevents the spread of COVID-19,” said Stephen Luby, MD, professor of medicine at Stanford. “This is the gold standard for evaluating public health interventions. Importantly, this approach was designed be scalable in lower- and middle-income countries struggling to get or distribute vaccines against the virus.”


WIND: the “gold standard”? This study is full of methodological problems of many kinds. Its “randomization” is a joke, nor were there any real controls. It should be used as a case study of scientific incompetence. See the debunk, below.

How to Lie With Statistics and Bad Study Design, Mask Version

by Kevin Roche, 2021-09-02

This new study supposedly showing benefits of community masking has been touted for showing mask efficacy and pilloried by true scientists for its abysmal design and statistical methods...

First, note the bizarre organization that published the “study”.  That is a head-scratcher.  Couldn’t get Medrxiv to take it?   Second, note the corresponding authors.  They are not infectious disease researchers or epidemiologists.  As far as I can tell they are economists.  Now economists do a lot of good research, but you gotta believe there is an agenda at work here.  Third, just look at the primary description of the results, look at carefully by age group.  That is all I needed to see to know this is garbage.  Apparently CV-19 is so smart that it can tell how old a person wearing a mask is and decide whether or not to infect them based on age.  When you see that difference in effect by age group, you know some very serious confounding variable is at work.  Fourth, look at the confidence intervals, always a dead give away about how good a study’s results are.  Not just wide, but Pacific Ocean wide.

And now we get to the really fun part–the very selective cherrypicking of supposed results.  Reporting of symptoms was almost indistinguishable in the groups.  First of all, a very small number of the total villagers involved in the study were even reached.  Out of those 7.62% in the intervention group and 8.62% in the control group reported symptoms.  Statistically indistinguishable...

...My favorite is the fact that the intervention showed absolutely no impact on those under 50 years of age and only the most marginal effect on older groups.  There is no possible explanation for this other than an extremely discerning virus, capable of intuiting the age of various mask and non-mask wearers...


WIND: I recommend reading, for starters, How to understand scientific studies (in health and medicine) and Ioannidis: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.

Stanford Medicine today is polluted with anti-science anti-reason “experts” who refuse to debate issues, but instead shovel out bad science to support the narrative. This is the groupthink trash-talking crowd who engaged in the ad-hominem attack on Dr Scott Atlas, while ignoring world-class experts like epidemiologist Martin Kulldorf, Professor Sunetra Gupta, epidemiologist John Ionnadis and anyone with an objective viewpoint that doesn’t toe the line on the narrative about COVID.

Below, what makes this particularly “rich”, is that this is the same intellectual crooks in the medical establishment that refuse to engage in debate of the issues.

How misinformation, medical mistrust fuel vaccine hesitancy

Public trust in government agencies and health professionals; access to vaccines and treatments; and accurate, clear, nonjudgmental information about COVID-19 are key to counteracting misinformation about the disease.

...Not all health care workers on social media are reliable sources, however. “We have to have accountability for medical professionals who distribute harmful information,” said Vin Gupta, MD, a pulmonary critical care physician at the University of Washington...

WIND: no discussion of engaging alternative viewpoints. No discussion of natural immunity! This article serves propaganda purposes, avoiding serious discussion (or even mention) of why the distrust is there.

It apparently does not dawn on these morons that the source of the distrust is not misinformation about vaccines, but about end of science as we know it, in which dissenting views are canceled/suppressed, along with demonizing anyone who does not toe the line on the favored narrative.

Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

Glenn Greenwald: The ACLU, Prior to COVID, Denounced Mandates and Coercive Measures to Fight Pandemics

re: The Bizarre Refusal to Apply Cost-Benefit Analysis to COVID Debates
re: Big Tech Censorship of COVID-19 Discussion (Glenn Greenwald)
re: Glenn Greenwald

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

The ACLU stopped being an organization worth supporting years ago, having abandonded its objectivity and original mission.

Glenn Greenwald: The ACLU, Prior to COVID, Denounced Mandates and Coercive Measures to Fight Pandemics

by Glenn Greenwald, 2021-09-07

In a New York Times op-ed this week, the group completely reversed its views, arguing vaccine mandates help civil liberties and bodily autonomy "is not absolute."

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) surprised even many of its harshest critics this week when it strongly defended coercive programs and other mandates from the state in the name of fighting COVID. “Far from compromising them, vaccine mandates actually further civil liberties,” its Twitter account announced, adding that “vaccine requirements also safeguard those whose work involves regular exposure to the public."

If you were surprised to see the ACLU heralding the civil liberties imperatives of "vaccine mandates” and "vaccine requirements” — whereby the government coerces adults to inject medicine into their own bodies that they do not want — the New York Times op-ed which the group promoted, written by two of its senior lawyers, was even more extreme. The article begins with this rhetorical question: “Do vaccine mandates violate civil liberties?” Noting that "some who have refused vaccination claim as much,” the ACLU lawyers say: “we disagree.” The op-ed then examines various civil liberties objections to mandates and state coercion — little things like, you know, bodily autonomy and freedom to choose — and the ACLU officials then invoke one authoritarian cliche after the next (“these rights are not absolute") to sweep aside such civil liberties concerns:

[W]hen it comes to Covid-19, all considerations point in the same direction. . . . In fact, far from compromising civil liberties, vaccine mandates actually further civil liberties. . . . . 

[Many claim that] vaccines are a justifiable intrusion on autonomy and bodily integrity. That may sound ominous, because we all have the fundamental right to bodily integrity and to make our own health care decisions. But these rights are not absolute. They do not include the right to inflict harm on others. . . . While vaccine mandates are not always permissible, they rarely run afoul of civil liberties when they involve highly infectious and devastating diseases like Covid-19. . . . 

While limited exceptions are necessary, most people can be required to be vaccinated. . . . . Where a vaccine is not medically contraindicated, however, avoiding a deadly threat to the public health typically outweighs personal autonomy and individual freedom.

The op-ed sounds like it was written by an NSA official justifying the need for mass surveillance (yes, fine, your privacy is important but it is not absolute; your privacy rights are outweighed by public safety; we are spying on you for your own good). And the op-ed appropriately ends with this perfect Orwellian flourish: “We care deeply about civil liberties and civil rights for all — which is precisely why we support vaccine mandates.”

... [ACLU, 2008]: “The law enforcement approach to public health offers a rationale for the endless suspension of civil liberties,” they explained. Using post-9/11 expansions of state power as its framework, the group explained that “the ‘Global War on Terror' may go on for a generation, but the war on disease will continue until the end of the human race. There will always be a new disease, always the threat of a new pandemic. If that fear justifies the suspension of liberties and the institution of an emergency state, then freedom and the rule of law will be permanently suspended.


WIND: the ACLU stopped being an organization worth supporting years ago, having abandonded its objectivity and original mission of fighting for constitutional and civil rights.

Now we’re living with public acceptance of the idea that your right to work, travel, eat, shop can all be shut down by the government for just about any reason.

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.

Matt Taibbi: Moral Majority Media Strikes Again (Ivermectin Fake News)

re: “Why Has "Ivermectin" Become a Dirty Word?”
re: Matt Taibbi

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

What else is new?

Matt Taibbi: Moral Majority Media Strikes Again

by Matt Taibbi, 2021-09-07

When Rachel Maddow, Rolling Stone, and others jumped on a dubious report of ivermectin overdoses, it was just the latest in a string of moral mania mishaps

Citing a report of Oklahoma emergency rooms so overwhelmed by ivermectin overdoses that gunshot victims were going untreated, MSNBC anchor Joy Ann Reid Sunday proposed sticking the swallowers of “horse paste” at the back of the line in order to prioritize the more deserving, “rather than allowing the ivermectin people” — she spoke the words as if holding a vile wriggling thing with tweezers — to “take up all the beds”: <video

This was a network anchor despising a group of people so much that she itched to deny them medical care, not only despite having never met them, but despite the fact that they may not even exist. The “overwhelmed Oklahoma E.R.” tale later seemed to go sideways, the latest in a line of crackups by media lost in the throes of a moral panic.

...The problem lay in the reason the error spread, which happens to be the same reason underlying innumerable other media shipwrecks in the last five years. These include everything from wrong reports of Russians hacking a Vermont energy grid, to tales of Michael Cohen in Prague, to the pee tape, to Julie Swetnick’s rape accusation, to the Covington high school fiasco, to Russian oligarchs co-signing a Deutsche Bank loan application for Donald Trump, to Bountygate, to the “mass hysterectomies” story, and dozens beyond: the media business has become a machine for generating error-ridden moral panics.

News has become a corporatized version of the “Two Minutes Hate,” in which the goal of every broadcast is an anxiety-ridden audience provoked to the point of fury by the un-policed infamy of whatever wreckers are said to be threatening civilization this week: the unvaccinated ,... look at Maddow leaving her tweet up — so long as they feel stories are directionally right, i.e. aimed at deserving targets. 

I never thought this could happen, but people like Maddow, Reid, and the editors of the New York Times opinion page have taken over the role once occupied by Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority...


WIND: media violence is the norm these days; it is the business model. It should repulse anyone with a shred of decency. And watching “the news” these days can only lead to mental illness and physical illness over time. Journalism is all but dead.

Of course, Twitter, Facebook, etc do nothing for this kind of misinformation, let alone suspending sociopath Rachel Maddow.

BTW, anyone (including MDs) calling Ivermectin “horse paste” has ZERO credibility and should be ignored as the jackass they are. Whether or not Ivermectin is an effective anti-COVID agent is the core of the debate being avoided (I don’t have a view on it either way). But Ivermectin has been used for over 35 years as an anti-parasitic with great success, has an excellent safety profile. There is tremendous financial incentive for it to be shown ineffective against COVID, so count on studies designed up-front to show what. And please don’t ingest the horse version of Ivermectin ("horse paste")—that’s a really bad idea for both dosage and contamination reasons.

The end of rational debate and the end of science are upon us, courtesy if the perfect storm of politics + COVID. How long can the USA survive before crumbling into an unworkable mess?

Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

Example: Most Medical and Science Studies are Bullshit

re: COVID-19

How can you have a study where the authors themselves were not granted access to the raw data? But it happens all the time, particularly with Big Pharma studies.

Wow—285 articles cited this now retracted study. How many of those were updated to call out the retraction? How many news reports and how much propaganda resulted from this retracted study?

See also: Retraction Watch and Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.

Retraction: Cardiovascular Disease, Drug Therapy, and Mortality in Covid-19. N Engl J Med. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2007621.

original article here.

Because all the authors were not granted access to the raw data and the raw data could not be made available to a third-party auditor, we are unable to validate the primary data sources underlying our article, “Cardiovascular Disease, Drug Therapy, and Mortality in Covid-19.”1 We therefore request that the article be retracted. We apologize to the editors and to readers of the Journal for the difficulties that this has caused.

WIND: IMO, anyone willing to publish based on unverifiable data has serious ethical problems.

Should there be “one free pass, twice and you can never publish again” standard?

The retraction doesn’t mean the findings are false, but it renders them non-credible.

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!

Life-Altering Risks Revealed for Antibiotic Exposure in Children

re: COVID-19
re: Long-Haul COVID
re: natural immunity

Once again, we find the FDA and doctors complicit in causing lifelong damage by failing to properly evaluate drug safety.

The Epoch Times: More Risks Revealed for Antibiotic Exposure in Children

Feb 21, 2021, by By GreenMedInfo.

Children 2 years old and under who take antibiotics are at greater risk for childhood-onset chronic diseases such as asthma, allergies, obesity, and ADHD, according to a new study published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings.

The study joins others that link antibiotic use and overuse with disease in young children, underscoring the need to weigh the prudent use of antibiotics against the harm they inflict on the gut microbiome early in life.

The findings, based on work by researchers at Mayo Clinic and Rutgers University, support the hypotheses that the trillions of symbiotic microorganisms living in and on the body that make up the microbiome shape the early development of immunity, metabolism, behavior, and other critical functions.


WIND: antibiotics for children is too often a case of medical (and parental) malpractice. Parents from ignorance, but doctors have no excuse, since they know that so many things do not warrant antibiotics.

Yes there are rare cases where antibiotics are warranted—my daughter at 30 weeks old (born 12 weeks premature) would have been dead of sepsis within hours had I not caught the infection early. The clueless doctors and nurses didn’t even notice the nearly lifeless “rag doll”, if that tells you anything about observational competence, even at Stanford Medical center. I wil never unsee or unlearn that reality of gross medical incompetence. Hospitals are extremely dangerous places for all sorts of reasons.

The antibiotic Metronidazole gave me permanent nerve damage. The dumb-f*ck doctor had no clue and never even acknowledged, nor was it reported to the FDA. I got quite a few emails from other scared-shitless people having the same “rare” side effects. To this day I cannot keep my arms bent at more than 90° for more than a few minutes without numbness in my fingers, and pain. Total hassle for sleeping and similar. I have had other problems with other antibiotics too. I am scared to use them now.

The truth is that the FDA and doctors are incompetent when it comes to drug safety. Their interests do NOT align with your interests.

Take antibiotics only in the most extreme need.

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!

COVID-19: Feckless Mask Studies, Censorship, Natural Immunity, Faithless Experts, Bulldoze the Injured

re: COVID-19
re: Long-Haul COVID
re: natural immunity

Emphasis added.

Kevin Roche: How to Lie With Statistics and Bad Study Design, Mask Version

Sept 2, 2021, by Kevin Roche.

This new study supposedly showing benefits of community masking has been touted for showing mask efficacy and pilloried by true scientists for its abysmal design and statistical methods. To me, the level of garbage in the study is evident by two basic factors, which I will get to momentarily, but I will go through the whole thing rather than just dismissing it, which is all it deserves. I will do that to fully demonstrate the desperation of the mask religionists to find anything that supports mask effectiveness at stopping community spread of CV-19. That last part is the critical issue. In a world in which real science was respected, this preprint would get laughed out of peer review, but we will see what happens. (Mask Study)


WIND: since it supports the mask narrative, at least one reputable journal might publish it? Peer review is a joke that only the naive believe in—it’s controlled by committees of conformists.

Meet The Censored: Ivermectin Critic David Fuller

Sept 2, 2021, by Matt Taibbi.

If Internet algorithms can't tell the difference between criticism and advocacy, what's safe to report? Why one filmmaker believes "YouTube is unfit for the purpose for hosting journalism."

They fixed the problem, twice. That’s the good news. The first time filmmaker, former BBC and Channel 4 journalist, and Rebel Wisdom co-founder David Fuller put together a video criticizing ivermectin advocates was on August 4th. Called “Ivermectin For and Against,” it was taken down by YouTube, on the grounds that it constituted medical misinformation.

Fuller appealed the decision for a variety of reasons – more on those later – and won. He continued investigating the subject, and taking on the claims of ivermectin advocates, hoping to conclude with a video called “Vaccines and DarkHorse: A Final Word.” This last piece included footage of well-known ivermectin advocates Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying, whose DarkHorse podcast was previously featured on this site after YouTube banned some of their material.


TK: What lessons do you take away from this experience? 

Fuller: That YouTube is unfit for the purpose for hosting journalism, and that their moderation system is secretive, random and very disrespectful to creators who have made large amounts of money for the company. I still have no idea why any of these films was taken down or why.

WIND: COVID brought our governments the priceless opportunity to accelerate the death of scientific inquiry and free speech.

Kevin Roche: Coronamonomania Lives Forever, Part 15

Sept 1, 2021, by Kevin Roche.

I keep watching for signs that the world is leaving coronamonomania behind, but it isn’t clear that is happening.  Here is an excellent overview article looking at the suppression efforts and lockdowns in particular.  This truly was an unprecedented and unjustified approach.  (Tablet Article)

Even the NYTimes is allowing op-eds wondering what the heck our goals really are.  (NYTimes Article)

I am extremely concerned about the public communication, as usual, because in the next few weeks, breakthrough infections are going to become the majority of cases, and the proportion of hospitalizations and deaths will get higher as well.  The public has not been properly prepared for this and it has not been put in context for the public, so there will be freaking out, which will likely be exacerbated by the media terror-lovers.  There needs to be an exit plan and the biggest part of that plan needs to be stopping the endless reporting of meaningless data, like case numbers, and a far better education of the public on what to expect.

I am dubious about the entire booster idea, because it is not clear to me what the purpose is or that there is any data that a booster will have a longer impact than the original vaccination.  Israel is the first country to really push the boosters, and this study looks at that effort.  (Medrxiv Paper)   The researchers created comparative cohorts of people with two doses but no booster and those who received the booster.  The booster cohort had a much lower rate of infection, but this could be due to such a short follow-up period.  And there may be some selection factor at work in who got the boosters that exaggerates effectiveness.


WIND: follow the links.

TabletMag: The Masked Ball of Cowardice

August 29, 2021, by Michael P Senger.

Lockdowns,” the mass quarantine of both sick and healthy people, have never before been used for disease mitigation in the modern Western world. Previously, the strategy had been systematically ruled out by the pandemic plans of the World Health Organization (WHO) and by health experts of everydeveloped nation. So how did we get here?

Mass lockdowns of entire countries as a technique for fighting disease sprung into the world’s consciousness on the order of Xi Jinping, general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), who fomented a global propaganda offensive targeting Western governments and media. Within weeks, the WHO, an organization that once devoted itself to fighting disease and which has sadly become a tool of Chinese foreign policy, promulgated lockdowns into global policy through a series of pressconferences that showed a complete absence of analysis or logic.

...Likewise, in October 2020, the WHO’s peer-reviewed bulletin showed COVID-19’s overall IFR across all age groups to be about 0.23%. John Ioannidis, the world’s most-cited physician, believes the IFR to be lower and published his own peer-reviewed study showing the overall IFR to be about 0.15%. But in a poll conducted by the Menzies Research Centre, by June 2021 Australians on average estimated their chance of dying if they contracted the virus to be 38%, an overestimation of more than 160-fold.


As the experiments of Stanley Milgram proved, people can be convinced to commit atrocities when ordered to do so by scientific authorities. From journalists and judges to politicians and common professionals, the public has granted health officials one exception after another to their most fundamental rights, and they’ve been misled every step of the way. Whether out of gullibility, face-saving incompetence, or something worse, they’ve brought the world to a frightening place.


WIND: spot-on.

The Epoch Times: CDC Director Walensky Tells Unvaccinated People: Don’t Travel Over Labor Day Weekend

September 1, 2021, by Jack Philips.

“Given where we are with disease transmission right now, we would say that people need to take these risks into their own consideration as they think about traveling,” Dr. Rochelle Walensky said during a White House COVID-19 briefing Tuesday, adding that vaccinated people should wear masks. “If you are unvaccinated, we would recommend not traveling.”

As with other recommendations from the CDC, Walenksy’s remark has no legal authority.

...“No travel for you, bad little children,” wrote Dr. Robert Malone, who has self-identified as a key developer of mRNA vaccine technology, on Twitter after her announcement.


WIND: who gave this anti-scientific lying “scientist” the right to tell people not to travel?

Even if we agree that there is some risk, the statement lacks any reference to natural immunity and that is outrageous, since natural immunity which is 27X BETTER than vaccination? Pure propaganda is what the twaddle is.

The Epoch Times: Pfizer-BioNTech Still Immune From Lawsuits Over COVID-19 Vaccine After Federal Approval: Lawyers

August 29, 2021, by Meiling Lee.

The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) recent approval of the messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccine Comirnaty has prompted a wave of vaccine mandates across the country, yet individuals who happen to suffer serious side effects won’t be able to file a lawsuit against the producer of the vaccine, according to lawyers.

...Mark Sadaka, a medical litigations lawyer who has handled more than 175 vaccination cases, said full federal approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine doesn’t change the immunity status afforded to the vaccine manufacturer, so lawsuits can’t be filed if an individual has a severe reaction to the shot.

... Sadaka claimed that with the liability protection offered to vaccine companies, “there is no incentive to disclose safety risks of countermeasures outside of the simple goodwill of the large corporations that sell the product,” noting that “rare side effects are often swept under the rug in favor of profit.”


WIND: totally safe— a drug company making $40B profit in one year on the vaccine needs to put its boot on the neck of people harmed by the vaccine by denying them justice? You’re SOL if the vaccine hurts you and there are a lot of fates nearly as bad as death, such as severe permanent neurological damage.

The Epoch Times: Pfizer Board Member: ‘Natural Immunity’ Against COVID-19 Needs to Be Included in Policy Discussions

August 30, 2021, by Jack Philips.

Former Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, who is also a Pfizer board member, noted that “natural immunity” gained from a prior COVID-19 infection needs to be included in discussions about virus-related policies and mandates.

“The balance of the evidence demonstrates that natural immunity confers a durable protection,” Gottlieb said during an Aug. 30 interview, referring to a landmark new preprint Israeli study that found that prior COVID-19 infection confers more protection against the virus than any of the vaccines. “It’s fair to conclude that.”

Although Gottlieb said he would “be careful” about concluding whether natural immunity provides better protection against transmitting the virus, officials “should start assimilating that into our policy discussions.”

Natural infection confers robust and durable immunity,” he said, citing the Israeli study and others.


WIND: great to see someone with at least some ethics speaking out on the Pfizer board. But he should be pushing a lot harder and making a huge stink about the gross ethical violations of continuing to use the term “unvaccinated” to refer to 120 million Americans already gotten-and-over COVID, those with natural immunity.

OWC Area 51

Accessories • batteries • cables, docks • hard drives and SSDs • Mac hardware • new and pre-owned Macs • Thunderbolt
... and more!
Mac or PC, iPhone/iPad accessories, more!

COVID-19: “vaccine passports are both UNSCIENTIFIC and discriminatory”

re: COVID-19
re: Long-Haul COVID
re: natural immunity

re: COVID-19: Natural Immunity 13X Stronger Protection and Lasts Longer than Vaccination.

Martin Kulldorf has been a pain in the ass to the propaganda narrative of the CDC/FDA/“news” media because he insists on using facts and reason.

Harvard Epidemiologist Says the Case for COVID Vaccine Passports Was Just Demolished

August 30, 2021. Emphasis added.

New research found that natural immunity offers exponentially more protection than COVID-19 vaccines.

A newly published medical study found that infection from COVID-19 confers considerably longer-lasting and stronger protection against the Delta variant of the virus than vaccines.

“The natural immune protection that develops after a SARS-CoV-2 infection offers considerably more of a shield against the Delta variant of the pandemic coronavirus than two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, according to a large Israeli study that some scientists wish came with a ‘Don’t try this at home’ label,” the Scientific American reported Thursday. “The newly released data show people who once had a SARS-CoV-2 infection were much less likely than vaccinated people to get Delta, develop symptoms from it, or become hospitalized with serious COVID-19.”

...Put another way, vaccinated individuals were 27 times more likely to get a symptomatic COVID infection than those with natural immunity from COVID.

A Death Blow to Vaccine Passports?

...Vaccine passports are morally dubious for many reasons, not the least of which is that freedom of movement is a basic human right. However, vaccine passports become even more senseless in light of the new findings out of Israel and revelations from the CDC, some say.

Harvard Medical School professor Martin Kulldorff said research showing that natural immunity offers exponentially more protection than vaccines means vaccine passports are both unscientific and discriminatory, since they disproportionately affect working class individuals.

“Prior COVID disease (many working class) provides better immunity than vaccines (many professionals), so vaccine mandates are not only scientific nonsense, they are also discriminatory and unethical,” Kulldorff, a biostatistician and epidemiologist, observed on Twitter.

...Nor is the study out of Israel a one-off. Media reports show that no fewer than 15 academic studies have found that natural immunity offers immense protection from COVID-19.


WIND: none of this changes the fact that for some people, vaccination may still be the best risk assessment way to go. But for kids an many young people? Absurd.

Apple iPhone 7
Only $799 $295

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

The Weaponization of Medicine

re: ethics in medicine

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

Good summary of the pathetic state of affairs with medicine (and science) today.

The Weaponization of Medicine

by Paul Rosenberg, 2021-08-24

Whether or not we can express it clearly, or even perceive it clearly, I think nearly every adult grasps that medicine is being used as a weapon.

#1: Science is not consensus.

Ten, one hundred, or a million people, all draped in lab coats and saying the same thing, does NOT make it so. In fact, it matters not at all. It’s nothing but theater, and it’s anti-science...

#2: Medicine stands apart from, and above, politics.

...To place politics over medicine is to subjugate and degrade medicine: it’s a path backwards into darkness...

#3: Peer review no longer means much.

...peer review has been captured by academic hierarchies and almost fully separated from science proper. It has become a tool of institutional power...

#4: Medicine and science have nothing to do with social pressure.

Once “medicine” and “science” are mixed with social pressure, they are no longer science or medicine...

#5: If you don’t read multiple scientific papers, especially from rebels and cast-outs, you simply don’t know.

You can pretend you know, of course, and you can be sure that agents of the status quo will provide you with passable reasons to repeat their slogans, but you won’t actually know...


WIND: you can’t trust anything or anyone anymore. COVID hysteria pulled away the curtain. And maybe that’s a good thing.

Upgrade the memory of your 2020 iMac up to 128GB

COVID-19: Natural Immunity 13X Stronger Protection and Lasts Longer than Vaccination

re: COVID-19
re: Long-Haul COVID
re: natural immunity
re: COVID-19: “vaccine passports are both UNSCIENTIFIC and discriminatory”

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

This study is from Israel. Israel is one the most vaccinated countries in the world and yet is seeing a major outbreak of the COVID Delta variant.

If this study proves-out with more studies*, those who have had COVID (natural immunity) can be assured that they are in a FAR better position than those who were only vaccinated. But note that similarly compelling findings were seen in the Cleveland Clinic Health System Study.

It is likely that narrative-undermining data on natural immunity will continue to pile up.

However, for some people there is still a risk of serious problems from COVID and/or Long-Haul COVID, so getting to natural immunity without serious issues is the trick. If not yet infected by COVID, you must make your own decision on vaccination vs infection based on your own personal circumstances.

You can bet that the mainstream propaganda outlets and government sources will never mention this study.

And when top Harvard epidemiologist Martin Kulldorf makes a point of citing it, you can have a high degree of confidence that it’s the real deal.

Harvard Epidemiologist Says the Case for COVID Vaccine Passports Was Just Demolished

Harvard Medical School professor Martin Kulldorff said research showing that natural immunity offers exponentially more protection than vaccines means vaccine passports are both unscientific and discriminatory, since they disproportionately affect working class individuals.

“Prior COVID disease (many working class) provides better immunity than vaccines (many professionals), so vaccine mandates are not only scientific nonsense, they are also discriminatory and unethical,” Kulldorff, a biostatistician and epidemiologist, observed on Twitter.

* There are confounders, but the results are so compelling that it seems highly unlikely to change the conclusions.

Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections


Background: Reports of waning vaccine-induced immunity against COVID-19 have begun to surface. With that, the comparable long-term protection conferred by previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 remains unclear.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study comparing three groups: (1)SARS- CoV-2-naïve individuals who received a two-dose regimen of the BioNTech/Pfizer mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine, (2)previously infected individuals who have not been vaccinated, and (3)previously infected and single dose vaccinated individuals...

Results: SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13.06-fold (95% CI, 8.08 to 21.11) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected, when the first event (infection or vaccination) occurred during January and February of 2021. The increased risk was significant (P<0.001) for symptomatic disease as well... SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees were also at a greater risk for COVID-19-related-hospitalizations compared to those that were previously infected.

Conclusions: This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.


WIND: the p-value of (p=0.001) is compelling, being 50 times better than the lax standard of =-0.05 so often used to claim statistical significance, and 10X better than a fairly rigorous p=0.01.

Meanwhile, the feckless aholes in charge are demanding (based on no science at all) that those with natural immunity get vaxxed, taking on all the risks of vaccination for little benefit:

Individuals who were previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 seem to gain additional protection from a subsequent single-dose vaccine regimen. Though this finding corresponds to previous reports24,25, we could not demonstrate significance in our cohort.

In other words, this science says that getting vaxed after infection carries risks, but with no proven benefit. It is unethical and anti-scientific to call for vaccination after infection.

Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance

COVID-19, Glenn Greenwald: The Bizarre Refusal to Apply Cost-Benefit Analysis to COVID Debates

re: COVID-19
re: Glenn Greenwald

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

For 18 months now, this blog has covered the outrageous failure to apply risk management thinking (and by implication cost/benefit analysis) to the policies around COVID-19.

The Bizarre Refusal to Apply Cost-Benefit Analysis to COVID Debates

by Glenn Greenwald, 2021-08-25

Are those who oppose a ban on cars or a radical reduction in speed limits sociopaths, given the huge number of people they are knowingly consigning to death or maiming?

In virtually every realm of public policy, Americans embrace policies which they know will kill people, sometimes large numbers of people. They do so not because they are psychopaths but because they are rational: they assess that those deaths that will inevitably result from the policies they support are worth it in exchange for the benefits those policies provide. This rational cost-benefit analysis, even when not expressed in such explicit or crude terms, is foundational to public policy debates — except when it comes to COVID, where it has been bizarrely declared off-limits.

The quickest and most guaranteed way to save hundreds of thousands of lives with policy changes would be to ban the use of automobiles, or severely restrict their usage to those authorized by the state on the ground of essential need...

Given how many deaths and serious injuries would be prevented, why is nobody clamoring for a ban on cars, or at least severe restrictions on who can drive (essential purposes only) or how fast (25 mph)? Is it because most people are just sociopaths who do not care about the huge number of lives lost by the driving policies they support, and are perfectly happy to watch people die or be permanently maimed as long as their convenience is not impeded? Is it because they do not assign value to the lives of other people, and therefore knowingly support policies — allowing anyone above 15 years old to drive, at high speeds — that will kill many children along with adults?

That may explain the motivation scheme for a few people, but in general, the reason is much simpler and less sinister. It is because we employ a rational framework of cost-benefit analysis, whereby, when making public policy choices, we do not examine only one side of the ledger (number of people who will die if cars are permitted) but also consider the immense costs generated by policies that would prevent those deaths 

...It is impossible to overstate the costs imposed on children of all ages from the sustained, enduring and severe disruptions to their lives justified in the name of COVID. Entire books could be written, and almost certainly will be, on the multiple levels of damage children are sustaining, some of which — particularly the longer-term ones — are unknowable... One of the best mainstream news accounts documenting those costs was a January, 2021 BBC article headlined “Covid: The devastating toll of the pandemic on children.”

...The richer you are, the less likely you are to be affected by these harms from COVID restrictions. Wealth allows people to leave their homes, hire private tutors, temporarily live in the countryside or mountains, or enjoy outdoor space at home. It is the poor and the economically deprived who bear the worst of these deprivations, which — along with not having children at all — may be one reason they are assigned little to no weight in mainstream discourse...

Whatever is true about motives, what is unacceptable — sociopathic, really — is the insistence on assigning severe costs to just one side of the ledger (harms from COVID itself) while categorically refusing to recognize let alone value the costs on the other side of the ledger (from severe, enduring anti-COVID disruptions to and restrictions on life)...

WIND: spot-on.

Upgrade the memory of your 2020 iMac up to 128GB

COVID-19: Pfizer and Moderna Control Groups Gone, Renders Studies of Vaccine Side Effects Difficult

re: COVID-19
re: Long-Haul COVID

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

How can you legitimately give full approval to the Trump vaccines when the placebo control group was broken shortly after the studies began? This process started 6 months before full FDA approval of the Pfizer vaccine. Unprecedented?

Long-Term Studies Of COVID-19 Vaccines Hurt By Placebo Recipients Getting Immunized


Tens of thousands of people who volunteered to be in studies of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines are still participating in follow-up research. But some key questions won't be easily answered, because many people who had been in the placebo group have now opted to take the vaccine.

...So now Fierro has essentially no comparison group left for the ongoing study.

"It's a loss from a scientific standpoint, but given the circumstances I think it's the right thing to do," he says.

People signing up for these studies were not promised special treatment, but once the FDA authorized the vaccines, their developers decided to offer the shots. 

Dr. Steven Goodman, a clinical trials specialist at Stanford University, says losing those control groups makes it more difficult to answer some important questions about COVID-19 vaccines.

"We don't know how long protections lasts," he says. "We don't know efficacy against variants — for which we definitely need a good control arm — and we also don't know if there are any differences in any of these parameters by age or race or infirmity."


WIND: I’m totally 'good' with individuals knowing their status and getting the vaccine—it’s the ethical thing to do. It should be an individual right, every time.

But without a control group, it becomes possible to deny harm from the vaccines much more easily because inferring harm is much harder to do in a statistically valid way.

Mac or PC, iPhone/iPad accessories, more!

COVID-19: FDA Approves the Pfizer Jab, Does this Change Anything from a Medical Standpoint?

re: COVID-19
re: Long-Haul COVID

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

Now that the FDA has formally approved the Pfizer vaccine jab thus taking it off “experimental” status, what has changed? Nothing in a medical sense, except rocket fuel for the ruling class to extract punitive measures against those refusing the vaccine. Because formal approval changes absolutely nothing with regard to the science—it’s a bureaucratic stamp of approval in which no dissenting viewpoints are tolerated, and with powerful financial interests at stake.

You have to judge for yourself whether the risk of COVID or Long-Haul COVID exceeds the risk of the Trump vaccines for your own personal situation. This is what the government and “experts” demand you abandon—your personal judgment for your personal situation. Yet no doctor can make any guarantees about an individual other than statistics-based guesses. And statistics applied to an individual are a logical fallacy.

If things go 'south' for you with vaccination, you’re on your own—neither your doctor nor your government will take any responsibility whatsoever. Imagine you get vaccinated and then develop a neurological problem or auto-immune damage or disabling arthritis—“coincidences”. But you must also imagine getting COVID or Long-Haul COVID and be comfortable with your decision.

Since it is basically impossible to know either way, what it comes down to is a psychological decision. The psychological comfort with getting vaxxed or not is every bit as valid as other considerations, and no one should force anyone—it’s contemptibly unethical on so many levels.

Those considerations understood, I deem the risk of the vaccine(s) lower than that of the real thing for many people, certainly for obese or older people, those with diabetes or pulmonary issues, etc. Because credible data do show that severe outcomes are much lower among the vaccinated.

My wife and one daughter are vaccinated, but two daughters are not, for specific reasons. Nor am I, since (a) I believe I have natural immunity, and (b) I fear vaccination because I remain in severely weakened condition. A big  “f*ck you” to anyone who thinks they can demand we get vaccinated.

The unspoken truths no one in government will talk about

There is a lot of nuance that applies to at least tens of millions:

  • An estimated 120 million Americans now have natural immunity from having already had COVID (which might be 13X better protection than vaccination). For this cohort, the risks of vaccine reactions are higher and the benefits nil or nearly so. At the least, there is no credible science that vaccinating those with natural immunity outweighs the risks. Yet the government is demanding that these people take this greater risk for no benefit. This is bad science, bad medicine and fascist in nature.
  • The amount of dubious data out there is outrageous. In particular, hospitalization “with COVID” vs “from COVID”. Poor data and worse data analysis, including highly selective disclosure are all part and parcel of the narrative. I find it very hard to trust the data given the shenanigans.
  • If you are young and healthy (particularly teens), it’s not at all clear that the benefits outweigh the risks. It’s so outrageously unfounded that I deem it medical malpractice and child abuse.
  • If you are among the unlucky ones to see death or permanent disability from the vaccines (20K people or so) or even arthritic problems, the government doesn’t give a damn—you’re on your own and SOL.
  • Notice that the narrative has no interest in aggressively investigating treatments but focuses solely on demanding vaccination? Notice that the FDA and CDC have no random sampling for natural immunity and other outcomes? It’s stupefyingly incompetent at every level. Follow the money. It’s about compliance, not about seeking out the best possible solutions.
  • It is inherently vicious to demand that someone else takes risks for your statistical benefit. What should not be surprising is that with half the country in favor of socialism, self-immolation with no compensation is deemed a virtue.

Since Pfizer and Moderna have broken disclosure on its control group, we cannot even track vaccine side effects against a control group. Maybe this is the only fair thing to do for those people, but lacking a control group we will never have objective data on the vaccine side effects.

In spite of all this, I will repeat: I deem the Trump vaccines the odds-on favorite for many people.

See also: Matt Taibbi: NPR Trashes Free Speech. A Brief Response.

Restoring credibility

These are the bare minimum to restore confidence and that’s the real government-created problem here—being lied to all this time. Sadly, the probability of these happening hover somewhere close to zero.

  • Those with proven natural immunity should have a vaccine exemption and be treated equally with vaccinated people.
  • The data have to be collected in credible ways, and with full and fair analysis.
  • At least a million dollars of compensation for those seriously harmed by the vaccine, and without jumping through massive bureaucratic hoops.
  • Vaccine side effects need aggressive tracking for short and medium/long term effects.
OWC Easy SSD Upgrade Guide
MacBook Pro and MacBook Air
iMac, Mac Pro, MacMini, more!

100 Million Vaccine-Hesitant Americans Will Get the Shot Now That a Government Agency Said It’s OK

re: The Babylon Bee

Alrighty then.

Babylon Bee: 100 Million Vaccine-Hesitant Americans Will Get The Shot Now That A Government Agency Said It’s OK


U.S.—100 million Americans who were previously hesitant to get vaccinated are rejoicing today after the FDA approved it, proving that everything is totally safe.

According to sources, the Food and Drug Administration is completely trustworthy and has never approved harmful drugs for the public before. Those sources further confirmed that the FDA is a part of the government, which has never lied or been incompetent or corrupt in any way.


WIND: history shows gross incompetence of the FDA to judge safety of a drug or vaccine—that’s the point of this satire. But you knew that, right?

See also Doctors Announce They Will No Longer Treat Car Accident Victims Who Didn't Wear Their Seat Belt.

Blood clotting may be the root cause of Long COVID syndrome, research shows

re: Long COVID or Post-acute Sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC): An Overview of Biological Factors That May Contribute to Persistent Symptoms
re: Investigation of Long COVID Prevalence and Its Relationship to Epstein-Barr Virus Reactivation
re: Long-Haul COVID

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

Makes some sense, but IMO there is a lot more going on, and this might be a red herring for many cases of Long-Haul COVID, or only one of many factors.

Science News: Blood clotting may be the root cause of Long COVID syndrome, research shows


New evidence shows that patients with Long COVID syndrome continue to have higher measures of blood clotting, which may help explain their persistent symptoms, such as reduced physical fitness and fatigue.

New evidence shows that patients with Long COVID syndrome continue to have higher measures of blood clotting, which may help explain their persistent symptoms, such as reduced physical fitness and fatigue...

...researchers examined 50 patients with symptoms of Long COVID syndrome to better understand if abnormal blood clotting is involved... clotting markers were significantly elevated in the blood of patients with Long COVID syndrome compared with healthy controls. These clotting markers were higher in patients who required hospitalisation with their initial COVID-19 infection, but they also found that even those who were able to manage their illness at home still had persistently high clotting markers.

The researchers observed that higher clotting was directly related to other symptoms of Long COVID syndrome, such as reduced physical fitness and fatigue. Even though markers of inflammation had all returned to normal levels, this increased clotting potential was still present in Long COVID patients.


WIND: to suggest that clotting is a root cause based on such a small study is quite stretch, especially given this much more thorough analysis. And it just seems highly unlikely to have one root cause. But it cannot be ruled out as a factor.

What’s lacking here is how “clotting markers” relate to the clinical problems. I’d like to see some direct cause/effect shown.

Reader Comment: COVID-19 Vaccine Worsens Arthritis, Kill Career and Retirement Plans

re: Injured by COVID-19 Vaccine? You’re SOL
re: COVID-19 Experimental Vaccines: Much Stronger Responses and Side Effects Given to Those Who Already Had COVID
re: Vaccine Safety: “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported”
re: Sebastian Rushworth MD: Do drug trials underestimate side effects?
re: ethics in medicine

Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.

You’re SOL if the Trump COVID vaccines harm you. You will 'own' the damage to your life and all the financial costs too. No authority will give a damn, and no one will compensate you.

Crazy as it sounds, the vaccines were not tested on the groups most likely to suffer harm! Yup, test on healthy young people, then dose the untested at-risk group. Great science!

Weigh that risk against risk of COVID itself, and Long-Haul COVID.

BTW, if you had COVID already (natural immunity), getting vaccinated is nutty, barring special circumstances. I’d say “talk to your doctor”, but that would disingenuous, since few doctors can speak freely (even if they have the capability of free thinking). The science and data give no support to the idea of being vaxxed after having COVID.

Reader Walt writes:

Read your comments about the vaccine and have similar concerns.

After taking the vaccine my wife seems to be more sensitive to the arthritis in her hands.

A neighbor, known for 15 years, who is a female electrician foreman for a large corporation has taken the shot shortly after her mother dies of COVID 19. (Her mother was infected on April 1, dead on April 8.) She had recently bought a $26,000 Harley motorcycle planning to retire in two years and has been developing a vineyard near here in Washington. She had/has psoriasis well before the shot and that can contribute to problems later in life.

Talked to her the other day and her hands (arthritis) are so bad they cannot grip tools used by electricians. As a foreman it is possible to avoid heavy use of the hands. But then she has to climb ladders, etc. What is a real problem is her inability to use the clutch on the Harley. Also the vineyard cannot be worked anymore - small yard. There go the retirement plans!

It took two weeks after the shot for the hands to become immobilized.

WIND: these anecdotal reports will surely be dismissed by doctors as “coincidence” and never looked into by the FDA or CDC. It could be coincidence, but coincidences have a curious way of occuring non-randomly.

The body can be primed and "on the edge" and all it takes is one shock to send it over. The spike proteins of the mRNA vaccines send the immune system into overdrive. So that ggravation of auto-immune conditions by the vaccines seems a high-probability outcome,. Until there are well-done studies on the matter who can say—and even then the clinical data could be done subjectively, or fail to look at more than a small range of effects.

In cases like the above, how would you even know what caused the change? Biological systems exist in homeostatis, and any disruption can make all sorts of things happen.

When a young healthy and fit friend in his 30’s is taken down for ten days by the Astra Zeneca vaccine, you have to wonder just how badly the occassional older and unfit person might respond, not to mention other younger people.

We were told during the trials that neurological problems seen were coincidence, and later it was found to be a real side effect, now ackowledged as a 'rare' risk (probably a lot less rare than claimed). There are lots of risks and that information is being suppressed—just look at the early unexplained VAERS data—where is the thorough analysis?

Any doctor or medical person who asserts the side effects are rare is either a liar or a fool. No good data on the matter exists, the bias is both to ignore side effects on top of failing to look for them, and to dismiss most of them as coincidences.

Vaccine Safety: “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported”
Sebastian Rushworth MD: Do drug trials underestimate side effects?

The research data on side effects of the COVID vaccines is in its infancy. Only the worst effects will end up being studied, and by the time this is done, the confounders will be too great to make any non-debatable conclusions, since most of the population being vaxxed will leave no control group.

Can you trust Big Pharma to evaluate safety of their own product? Follow the money and the long history of criminal behavior by Pfizer alone.

Dozens of different harms could be occuring from the COVID vaccines, and the public is being misled to believe that it’s either 100% OK, or very rare serious problems. To assume this binary outcome is idiotic—in health and biology there is always a continuum. Your choice is to weigh those unknown risks against the risks of COVID itself.

Upgrade the memory of your 2020 iMac up to 128GB

World of Panasonic

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__