The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Alternative Timeline November 2020

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

This is very old news and doesn’t have much to do with the more important questions going forward as everything keeps changing, but smart centrists like Nate Silver are finally recalling that during the 2020 campaign Democrats were spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt about vaccines in order to postpone announcement of the success of Trump’s vaccine strategy until after the election. Pfizer’s announcement of the high efficacy seen in its clinical was announced on 11/9/2020, six days after the election.

I’m aware of three politically-related delays in the mRNA clinical trials. Please note that safety, diversity, and efficacy are somewhat separate issues.

– Safety: The decision to require two months of safety data, pushing Pfizer’s first date for an application back to 11/17/2020. The campaign for this, as spelled out in the letter above, was clearly motivated by Democratic concerns to deny Trump his October Surprise on the vaccine front, but … safety is important. So I’m not as worked up over this as some libertarian economists are.

– Diversity: The Trump Administration’s decision in late summer to require Moderna to delay its clinical trial by a month to recruit a more racially diverse set of volunteers to test the safety and efficacy of the vaccine on different races. I’m sympathetic toward this delay: as I may have mentioned once or twice over the years, human biodiversity can be important in a variety of settings. Ironically, however, as far as we can tell now, HBD doesn’t matter much for vaccines: racial equality more or less reigns in terms of response to mRNA vaccines. So the one month slowdown of Moderna by the Trump Administration in the name of diversity cost Trump his October Surprise, delaying Moderna’s announcement of its high efficacy until 11/16/2020.

– Efficacy: Finally, the vastly underpublicized decision by Pfizer to shut down lab processing of clinical trial samples from late October until 11/4/2020, the day after the election. Pfizer had published to investors a trial protocol calling for unblinding of control vs. test samples after first 32 cases, then 62, then 92. To stop from hitting their checkmarks, Pfizer shut down processing for roughly a week and wound up with 94 cases when they did announce on 11/9/2020, blowing past the first three published checkpoints. One could argue that the initial published checkpoint of only 32 cases across the two arms of the test seemed too small for PR reasons, so Pfizer decided to wait until 62 cases. But they didn’t do that, they stopped processing altogether samples in late October (presumably so they could argue in court to outraged investors that they hadn’t altered their published plan for when to announce, they just hadn’t known.) Pfizer wound up blowing through even the third checkpoint when they let their lab get back to work the day after the election. This lab shutdown strikes me as the most egregious of the three politics-related interventions. The first two called for More Data but the third led to Less Data during a critical week at the beginning of 2020’s Winter Surge.

I’m generally a fan of More Data, although I’m aware of the problem of Paralysis Through Analysis. The Pfizer lab shutdown until the day after the election led to Less Data during a critical week. So I think the Pfizer lab shutdown is the most morally indefensible of the three causes of delay.

Pfizer announced their vaccine’s spectacular efficacy results on Monday 11/9/2020, after shutting down all lab processing of vaccine clinical trial samples from late October until the day after the election, according to William Gruber, Pfizer’s senior vice president of vaccine clinical research and development, in an 11/9/2020 interview with Stat News’ Matthew Herper:

https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/09/covid-19-vaccine-from-pfizer-and-biontech-is-strongly-effective-early-data-from-large-trial-indicate/

And here’s my 11/11/2020 analysis of Stat News’ reporting:

https://www.takimag.com/article/the-new-normal-by-any-means-necessary/

Without the lab shutdown, my best guess is that Pfizer would have announced the very high efficacy of its vaccine on Monday, 11/2/2020, the day before the election. Trump would then have spent the last 24 hours of the campaign trumpeting the success of his vaccine strategy.

Would that have switched enough voters in Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada to cause a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College and cast the decision to the House of Representatives with one vote for each delegation, probably favoring Trump? Or would there have been a violent and/or corrupt intervention to deny Trump a second term?

Who knows?

On the other hand, I don’t think Pfizer’s lab shutdown delayed the rollout of the vaccine by much more than one week and maybe just a few days.

The government decision had already been made due to the Democrats’ anti-VAXX fear, uncertainty and doubt campaign in the fall to require, in effect, until November 17, 2020 for enough safety data to be available to begin government processing of the application. However, announcement of efficacy on 11/2 rather than 11/9 would have given states and localities an extra week to focus on the big challenge of the vaccine rollout, which most botched until about the second half of January.

So I could imagine the vaccine rollout running a few days ahead without the Pfizer lab shutdown. The number of lives lost due to the lab shutdown sounds to me like in the hundreds but probably not in the thousands.

But who knows? Perhaps if Pfizer hadn’t shut down its lab processing, Democrats would have been the anti-vaxxers in 2021?

The alternative potential timelines rapidly spin in multiple directions.

To understand the importance of Pfizer’s shutdown of its clinical trial from late October until the day after the election, consider this Sunday, November 1, 2020 New York Times article crowing that the vaccine hadn’t been announced in time to be Trump’s October Surprise:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/01/us/politics/trump-october.html

Welcome to November. For Trump, the October Surprise Never Came.

Trump’s hope that an economic recovery, a Covid vaccine or a Biden scandal could shake up the race faded with the last light of October.

President Trump at a rally in Butler, Pa., on Saturday. For months, Democrats have worried that Mr. Trump might try to gin up a game-changing moment to disrupt the election.

By Shane Goldmacher and Adam Nagourney
Published Nov. 1, 2020
Updated Nov. 3, 2020

President Trump began the fall campaign rooting for, and trying to orchestrate, a last-minute surprise that would vault him ahead of Joseph R. Biden Jr.

A coronavirus vaccine. A dramatic economic rebound. A blockbuster Justice Department investigation. A grievous misstep by a rival he portrayed as faltering. A scandal involving Mr. Biden and his son Hunter.

But as the campaign nears an end, and with most national and battleground-state polls showing Mr. Trump struggling, the cavalry of an October surprise that helped him overtake Hillary Clinton in 2016 has not arrived.

That has left Mr. Trump running on a record of an out-of-control pandemic …

On the other hand, how big of a difference would it have made in voting if Pfizer had announced on the day before the election that it had efficacious results after, say, its second checkpoint of 62 cases?

The most plausible route for Trump to win in an election with tons of early voting would have been to flip Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada, leading to a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College. The Constitution says in that case that the House would choose the winner, with each state’s delegation getting one vote. I believe Trump would have therefore been re-elected on a strict party line vote.

But would that actually have happened? Consider how much financial, moral, blackmail, and violent pressure there would have been to flip one of 269 Trump Electoral College voters.

And, if that didn’t work, it’s hard not to imagine that The Establishment wouldn’t have organized a storming of the Capitol to intimidate the House into electing Biden.

In that timeline, we’d ever since be reading non-stop tributes in the Washington Post to the Heroes of January 6 Who Saved Democracy by charging into the House past the fascist Capitol Police and physically keeping the GOP from hijacking the election by Republicans acting all nit-picky over the precise wording of the Constitution. Sorry about all the arson in the Capitol by overly enthusiastic antifa, but as President Biden said in his State of the Union address held in the Temporary Capitol in the Washington Wizards arena, we will Build Back Better.

 
Hide 231 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. “the success of Trump’s vaccine strategy”

    Orwellian.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    @Mike Tre

    As the nyt crowed:


    A coronavirus vaccine. A dramatic economic rebound. A blockbuster Justice Department investigation. A grievous misstep by a rival he portrayed as faltering. A scandal involving Mr. Biden and his son Hunter.
     
    None of it matters one whit. All that matters is how the people who own the megaphone want to slant it.

    Biden was going to rescue us all from the dreaded Trump Virus! Now, a year later, we have more deaths in 2021 than in 2020. The MSM are virtually silent about that. Put your masks on and stfu.
    , @Travis
    @Mike Tre

    https://twitter.com/LegendaryEnergy/status/1474183782001483780?s=20

    UK has 12 confirmed Omicron deaths out of 45k confirmed cases.
    Fatality rate of 0.027% would get Omicron FDA approval. "Standardized Mortality Rates after dose 1 were 0.42 & 0.37 for Pfizer & Moderna, and were 0.35 & 0.34 after dose 2"
    Omicron is safer than Pfizer or Moderna.

    , @SunBakedSuburb
    @Mike Tre

    "Orwellian"

    Whilst grazing online this morning I noticed two media outlets -- NBC affiliates in the W zone -- using the term "Vaccinated Vulnerable." From "Safe and Effective" to "Vaccinated Vulnerable." In both stories the scapegoat unvaccinated are to blame for the failure of the vaccines. Public Health bureaucrats could've saved the world from bucketloads of misery and grief by identifying the Pfizer and Moderna products as therapeutics. Therapeutics with dangerous and likely long-term side-effects.

  2. Would that have switched enough voters in Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada to cause a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College and cast the decision to the House of Representatives with one vote for each delegation, probably favoring Trump? Or would there have been a violent and/or corrupt intervention to deny Trump a second term?

    Or, would the Democratic party volunteers on Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada election vote counting teams have had to spend another half day printing up enough mail-in ballots from people who didn’t know they’d even participated? There’s your alternate history. Same old same old.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Achmed E. Newman

    All that matters: in the timeline discussed, are Republicans vertebrates or invertebrates?

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Agree.

    Original timeline November 4th
    Midnight: Ballot counting shut down in key swing states for nebulous reasons.
    3:00 AM: Ballot counting reopens with statistically absurd Biden surge.
    Biden "elected".

    Alternative timeline November 4th
    Midnight: Ballot counting shut down in key swing states for nebulous reasons.
    3:30 AM: Ballot counting reopens with even more statistically absurd Biden surge.
    Return to original timeline.

    , @MLK
    @Achmed E. Newman

    You succinctly get to what always takes me many more words. The anyone who is anybody "Trump Must Go!" alignment, domestic and foreign, had four years to learn from their failure of planning and will in 2016.

    As they openly demonstrated over and over in 2020, the Unstoppable Force was not going to give way to the Immoveable Object, no matter the cost and danger to the republic.

    Thus whether the delayed Pfizer news, or the Soviet-style censorship and disinformation regarding the Biden Crime Family, an October Surprise(s) were merely a problem in terms of post-Election Day salesmanship of the steal. The Fake News wouldn't have missed a beat on Pfizer if it had come out. They would have labeled it good news for Trump that just wasn't good enough, early voting and all that.

    It's fun to think about discrete counterfactuals. However, if you haven't figured out in the instant case that they were prepared to apply whatever level of malicious force to not fail this time then you weren't paying attention.

    Am I the only one that remembers the Fake News shouting beginning in the summer of the "sieges" planned in all fifty state capitals beginning in September and amping up their violence until Trump was gone? It was quickly memory-holed but on 1/6, CNN and MSNBC were live reporting that "Trump supporters" were attacking at least one state capital.

    By giving way, Trump saved us from a mass casualty false flag that would have been blamed on him and MAGA, and resulted in quick passage of the totalitarian, bye-bye to the Constitution, domestic Patriot Act they had ready to go.

    He then saved the republic again by refusing to concede, allowing the illegitimate regime cards to
    play. Rasmussen reported the other day that even 41% of Democrats question the election result.

    Say what you will about Trump, but he has courageously teed up a win-win by, in effect, making election integrity law changes at the state level under the rubric of "so 2020 can never happen again," the only way to let air out of the 'Put him back where he rightfully belongs' balloon.

    He's added the additional threat of becoming Speaker in the next (Republican-controlled) Congress, which is designed to get Democrats to sail dictator Pelosi's ship tout de suite. Then "the nastiest old woman in Washington," aka Mitch McConnell will quickly follow. Otherwise, unless I miss my mark, they're going to buy themselves Speaker Trump putting the wood to the Democrats and RINO filth like nobody's business.

  3. I don’t care who is in the white house or when the vaccine was rolled out. I had covid and I’m not taking the f’ing clot shot

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @interesting

    Exactly.

    I had it, and it was sicker than I had ever been. But I had never been very sick before. I am not at all worried ahout catching COVID again. The clot shots scare me to death though.

    , @JR Ewing
    @interesting

    I have been warring with my wife for the last half of the year over the wisdom of getting my 14 year old son injected. Neither he nor I are vaccinated and neither of us have any intention to be due to both having antibodies and confirmed cases earlier this year.

    My wife and I recently reached a detente on this issue due to the too-hard-to-hide failure of the vaccines to prevent transmission and the clear evidence that the mRNA is more dangerous to young people than the disease itself. She cannot disagree with my position that neither one of us needs the shot, even if she doesn't like it, so she has quit harping over it lately.

    I was hoping this uneasy truce would persist indefinitely, but to my chagrin, last night at Christmas Eve dinner, my in-laws announced that they had rescheduled the family vacation Alaskan cruise of 2020 that had been canceled two years ago. We're going to Alaska in July 2022! GREAT!

    Except that cruise ships all require vax passes and unless the mask nonsense is repealed there is no way I'm getting on a plane for 6+ hours and enduring that humiliation. No f'ing way. I can pray that all of the restrictions are lifted beforehand, but the intractable culture war nature of this makes that very unlikely.

    My father in law is usually pretty reasonable about this kind of stuff and in the past has asked first to confirm dates and interest etc etc, but I'm pretty sure his wife - my mother in law who thinks anything announced by network news is divine truth - probably insisted that it be sprung on us this time so as to put me on the spot.

    So this vax battle is going to heat up again for me in the forthcoming months. My wife and her parents are going to claim that I'm being ungrateful for not wanting to go on vacation with them and I also will be accused of "polluting" my son's mind with my rightwing politics for not forcing him to go get the shot and risk his health over an illness that is not a threat to him.

    HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ME!

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @sayless, @Jack D

    , @Corvinus
    @interesting

    “I don’t care who is in the white house or when the vaccine was rolled out. I had covid and I’m not taking the f’ing clot shot“

    They say that selfishness only jeopardizes the health of those around you.

    Happy Holidays!

  4. There was just no way the Establishment could or would tolerate Trump and even worse, Deplorables. They have a plan, it is called cut down all the White trees. Heck look at the Democratic Party leadership, its all blacks and people from India and Somalia and such, and all women. Women drastically underestimate violence and how it can spiral as they’ve never really been in knock-down drag out fights. The Viking Icelandic Sagas are full of women egging on counter-atrocities for the sheer “fun” of it. Never figuring they’d be victims too.

    Right now you have a thinly veiled threat from the Joint Chiefs that if Republicans win in either 2022 or 2024 they will mount a coup, with the “op-ed” by three retired Generals who don’t cough or sneeze without first asking permission. Already the NYT is suggesting that Congress simply refuse to seat any Republican in the next election, citing “insurrection” and support for same by “all Republicans.” So I’d say the odds of a coup by the left / Dems / Military (all the same now) are very, very high.

    Does anyone think Ilhan Omar or Woke Milley is going to tolerate Deplorables even having a say in Congress? Of course not, it will be Cut Down the White Trees. And don’t kid yourself — the military will happily obey. Obedience is a habit. Any order given particularly against the Deplorables who as we know are genetically evil and bear hereditary blood guilt will be obeyed. These are very stupid people but their power and technology insulates them from any real consequence.

  5. Does Trump have a goatee in this alternate universe?

    • Replies: @anon
    @Known Fact

    your agonizer please.

    Replies: @Known Fact

    , @thenon
    @Known Fact

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvGmOZ5T6_Y

  6. A. Pfizer announcements aren’t worth the paper they are printed on.
    B. Fixed elections do not get unfixed by lab shutdowns or opening ups.

    • Troll: Clyde
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @obwandiyag

    I was not sad throughout 2021 because of the plague, the deaths, the business closures, or the collapse of American international credibility, but I was devastated (more so than normal) because all of my rights were taken away without a process, and what life I retain is an accident, relying on the clumsiness and sloppiness of bureaucrats in the Peter Chickenfather mold of -- oh okay so actually I'm pretty safe, those guys are pretty sloppy.

    Replies: @Athenian Gentleman

  7. Speaking of ChiCom parasites:

    Put a smile on your face.

    • Replies: @Athenian Gentleman
    @Joe Stalin

    Re: Image for second video ("Top 5 Guns"): Firearms are fun 'n games? Kids' play?


    Put a smile on your face.
     
    No smile here.

    Replies: @Anon, @The Alarmist

    , @restless94110
    @Joe Stalin

    The gun video is terrific!

  8. Centrist?

    Come on, man.

    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @James Braxton

    Steve desperately wants to believe that we can still reform the system so he sees what he wants to see.

    It's the same with how he continues to believe that some people in Hollywood are secret conservatives, putting dissident messages in their movies. It's insane, but it allows Steve to avoid the hard choice of supporting or rejecting white identity politics.

    White identity politics is the question of our time, yet Steve assiduously avoids it. Why?

    Replies: @EuroNat, @silviosilver, @Corvinus

  9. LOL.

    LOL.

  10. Phil Griffin and sex criminal Jeffrey Zucker need to be arrested and tried for treason for their parts in pushing the Russia Hoax, the Impeachment Hoax, and the Rigged Vote.

    Just as guilty as everyone in Congress who voted for the impeachment farces or who spent more than a moment supporting the Russia Hoax as “serious”.

    That’s a timeline I could love living in.

  11. That has left Mr. Trump running on a record of an out-of-control pandemic …

    Trump’s hope that an economic recovery, a Covid vaccine or a Biden scandal could shake up the race faded with the last light of October.

    Actually, there were 2 October surprises: The vaccine roll out, which was deliberately delayed, and Hunter Biden’s hard drive/laptop, which confirmed a 30 year history of influence peddling which dwarfed in significance even the stuff they fabricated about Trump and “Russia, Russia, Russia.”

    But these things didn’t happen because the liberal media didn’t want them to happen. Full stop.

    • Replies: @Pericles
    @Patrick in SC

    True, apart from delaying the vaxx, the suppression of Hunter's laptop was heavyhanded too, and they then had to subvert and steal the election even so. But at least you now have the President-Legit!

    , @Sick of Orcs
    @Patrick in SC

    During the debates, Trump brought up the hunter laptop, but had no more to add and was shut down.

    "High-energy" means nothing when you don't prepare.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Patrick in SC

    , @JR Ewing
    @Patrick in SC

    "I know everyone is worried about this variant that is floating around that we supposedly don't know anything about and that appears to be at least somewhat resistant to the vaccines, but even if we don't know anything about it the best thing you can do is get another shot of our excellent vaccine! Ka-ching!"

  12. @obwandiyag
    A. Pfizer announcements aren't worth the paper they are printed on.
    B. Fixed elections do not get unfixed by lab shutdowns or opening ups.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    I was not sad throughout 2021 because of the plague, the deaths, the business closures, or the collapse of American international credibility, but I was devastated (more so than normal) because all of my rights were taken away without a process, and what life I retain is an accident, relying on the clumsiness and sloppiness of bureaucrats in the Peter Chickenfather mold of — oh okay so actually I’m pretty safe, those guys are pretty sloppy.

    • Replies: @Athenian Gentleman
    @J.Ross


    I was devastated (more so than normal) because all of my rights were taken away without a process,
     
    Is there a functioning country that has not, in times of national emergency, (a) suspended rights, and (b) done so without bypassing, to a considerable if not total degree, usual legal/ bureaucratic process? Can you name a single example of such a place?

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix, @Pericles, @J.Ross

  13. The CEO of Pfizer and our CDC and FDA are clearly evil people. This is reason #15 I refuse to get vaccinated. I refuse to pad the coffers of Pfizer and Fauci.

    • Agree: JR Ewing
  14. It’s all such a mystery:

    https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/pfizer-inc/summary?id=D000000138

    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pfizer-unions-others-donated-618-mln-bidens-inaugural-2021-04-21/

    By the way, Pfizer donated money to 275 Congressional candidates in 2020, 164 Democrats (including Bernie Sanders – who’s he kidding with that (I) crap), and 111 Republicans. So it’s pretty clear they’re just bribing Congress – there’s really no other way to wash it. And such a bargain too.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Mr. Anon

    Bernie became a Democrat to run for POTUS as a Democrat.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    , @silviosilver
    @Mr. Anon


    So it’s pretty clear they’re just bribing Congress – there’s really no other way to wash it. And such a bargain too.
     
    That's one of the more remarkable aspects of American decline - how cheap it actually is to subvert American democracy. If I were China, I'd pull back on military production, and invest those funds into buying off Congress. They've clearly signaled they're for sale, so the Chinese could achieve their geopolitical goals, avert war, and save trillions. What's not to like?
  15. @Achmed E. Newman

    Would that have switched enough voters in Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada to cause a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College and cast the decision to the House of Representatives with one vote for each delegation, probably favoring Trump? Or would there have been a violent and/or corrupt intervention to deny Trump a second term?
     
    Or, would the Democratic party volunteers on Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada election vote counting teams have had to spend another half day printing up enough mail-in ballots from people who didn't know they'd even participated? There's your alternate history. Same old same old.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Almost Missouri, @MLK

    All that matters: in the timeline discussed, are Republicans vertebrates or invertebrates?

    • Agree: Nicholas Stix
  16. If the Vaccine trials had lasted 9 months the vaccines never would have been approved. Sadly they eliminated the control group after 4 months so we will never know the true failure of the vaccines. Thus far we have more COVID deaths in 2021 than last year when nobody was vaccinated and treatments were less effective. Currently they admit the vaccines offer zero protection against Omicron, and they hope the boosters will offer some protection against the new variants. The vaccines have failed to reduce deaths or hospitalizations. We were deceived by Big Pharma again. The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.

    • Replies: @Rob
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco


    The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.
     
    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    2021 was worse than 2020 because social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020. In ‘21, cons got all oppositional defiant disordered. They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed. Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize. Here’s where I did my own research — viruses? They ain’t got no nerves! It is imaginable that ivermectin works against COVID by a totally different mechanism than its effect on ion channels, but there is a ton more evidence that the vaccines work. The vast majority of chemicals researchers try out at various stages of testing do not work. Ivermectin for COVID is at the “large-ish random small molecule with functional groups” stage of testing for treating any virus. The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But cons were all about it. Despite that, as you say, there were more COVID deaths in ‘21 than ‘20. Those libs? They done been owned!

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA. COVID is deadlier than the flu, so maybe the trade-off is worthwhile? Personally, I think a short course of a drug that might cause point mutations is unlikely to cause cancer, but I could be wrong, Omicron seems to be less deadly, likely because it does not activate innate and Th2 immunity as strongly as previous variants, giving the genomes that manage to tamp down the cellular antiviral response an intrahost selective advantage. The benefit to you is that the immune reaction does not kill you. My theory explains why (some) respiratory viruses tend to evolve to be less lethal over short periods of time. A Nobel-worthy theory of someone fleshes it out if I can toot my own horn. This only applies if some non-lethal immune mechanism can keep the virus from turning you into goo, of course.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @D. K., @Known Fact, @HA, @Mr. Anon, @vinteuil, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Rob, @The Alarmist, @Alden

    , @Dutch Boy
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco

    Too true. Typically, a new vaccine is pulled from the market if it is associated with >50 deaths via VAERS (e.g., the Swine Flu vaccine in 1976). The Covid vaccines are at 19,000+ and counting.

    , @Triteleia Laxa
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco

    You're an idiot. Look at the divergence between Covid deaths rates now, covid case rates and how they used to be pre-vaccine. The vaccine makes it 10× less likely that you will die. The vaccine also has ridiculously infrequent serious side effects. It has saved countless lives and allowed us freedom again. Truly, anti-vaxxers going into 2022, are some of the world's stupidest people.

    It is OK to admit that you were wrong. You are not exactly an expert. You should expect to be wrong a lot.

    Replies: @Wokechoke

  17. As if two months of safety data for a relatively untested medical technology are anywhere near enough. Up til 2020, at least five years, if not ten, on smaller controlled groups that represented the broader population would have been required for actual approval for mass use in the population.

    Instead, they short-circuited long-standing practises by allowing a mass rollout under an Emergency Use Authorisation for an illness that has an average Infection Fatality Rate on par with the seasonal flu. BTW, Phase 3 trials end in 2023, and the only vaxx with actual FDA approval is not yet available in the US because that particular formulation does not yet have liability indemnification.

    If you took the vaxxes, you are literally a test subject in the largest Phase 3 medical study ever undertaken.

    Good luck with that.

    • Replies: @Rob
    @The Alarmist

    Nucleic acid vaccines are (relatively) untested on people, that is true. None were approved, but some had been in phase II, maybe even III testing. But they have been extensively tested on several species, including monkeys and chimpanzees. The vaccines used a somewhat novel base analog, N1-methyl pseudouridine instead of uracil to reduce innate intracellular immunogenicity. I am willing to bet that this gets metabolized into something pretty nontoxic that you pee out. Not to mention, the total dose of mRNA in three shots is low compared to what you would get in the two oral covid drugs (soon to be?) approved. Both of which are base analogs, but mutagenic ones. If you want to avoid weird chemicals, it would be best to minimize your chances of needing post-infection treatment,

    The lipids in the nanoparticles, which I assume are cationic lipids, though I have not looked, are um, possibly a bit dangerous? They are probably the adjuvant, the chemical that gives the immune system the danger signal that couples “new protein” to “make an immune response” in the body. I watched a short video where Bret Weinstein said his plumber(?) got the vaccine and two minutes later had a heart attack. Well, that was not due to the “toxic” spike protein chunk that the mRNA codes for. No way it could have entered cells, escaped the endosome, been translated, transported to the cell surface, broken off, either from a protease or in apoptotic fragments, then reached his heart in a couple of minutes. Hour, maybe two, minimum. Again, all these things are in tiny doses. The mRNA is translated multiple times, so you get more bang for each injection.

    I got the Pfizer booster (2 Modernas to start) a few weeks ago. Felt fine for about two hours then felt like I had the flu, then shivered and slept for 5-6 hours. Convinced me that a) I had an immune reaction, so it was probably a real vaccine (who trusts CVS?) and b) I sooo do not want covid.

    The dose of “chemicals” in any vaccine is low. At most, you get a flu shot every year. Other vaccines are either live-attenuated and good for a lifetime or on a five-to-ten-year booster schedule. If you are diabetic, you probably get more “chemicals” in a week of insulin shots. Though I hope you don’t have diabetes.

    Please get vaccinated! You, and everyone else, will get covid. You might avoid it if you get vaccinated, if not, you can turn a ~1% chance of death into a ~0.1% chance. With fresh vaccination (or a booster) your chance with omicron is likely even better. You would be in “just the flu, bro” territory, which would be a nice place to be.

    Good luck, whether I convinced you or not. Yeah, I know I didn’t… A man must try.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Alrenous, @D. K., @Mike1

  18. Garett Jones tweets about the 2020 MIT Technology Review article:

    https://twitter.com/GarettJones/status/1473080738006417414

    https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/10/19/1010646/campaign-stop-covid-19-vaccine-trump-election-day/

    One doctor’s campaign to stop a covid-19 vaccine being rushed through before Election Day

    How heart doctor Eric Topol used his social-media account to kill off Trump’s October surprise.

    By Antonio Regalado
    October 19, 2020

    [MORE]

    After being released from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center on October 5, US President Donald Trump praised the doctors who treated him for covid-19 and promised that the public would soon have a vaccine against the deadly coronavirus. “We have the best medicines in the world, and very shortly they are all getting approved, and the vaccines are coming momentarily,” he said in a video statement shared with millions of Twitter followers.

    Across the country, in California, a doctor named Eric Topol was responding in real time on social media. He questioned the president’s health, his doctors’ actions, and even his mental status.

    By that point Topol, a heart expert and researcher with a huge Twitter following of his own, was already weeks into a personal campaign to make sure the administration could not rush a covid-19 vaccine through regulatory authorization before Election Day on November 3.
    [bold emphasis added, as below]

    … Topol led online calls for FDA commissioner Steve Hahn to resign after his agency was criticized for cowing to political pressure—and then phoned Hahn a number of times to urge him to resist Trump’s influence. Topol also targeted Pfizer, the only pharmaceutical company likely to seek approval of its vaccine before Election Day, which eventually set up a meeting for him with its vaccine team.

    … all signs indicate that Topol urged Hahn to defy the White House effort to deliver a vaccine by Election Day. “I came to respect him,” says Topol. “I was convinced he’d do the right thing.” An FDA spokesperson declined to comment on the phone calls.

    A “choke point”

    To stop rush authorization of a vaccine before the election, Topol also began working on another front. The US has poured billions into Operation Warp Speed, which includes funding for a half-dozen trials to study potential covid-19 vaccines. Those trials won’t have efficacy data on the vaccines until late in the year, at the earliest.

    But one company—Pfizer—never joined the federal program and has been running ahead of the companies that did. Its CEO, Bourla, had boldly said for months that its study of a genetic vaccine would have early efficacy results in October. If Trump could anoint any vaccine as the winner, it would have to be Pfizer’s. On the other hand, if no company actually applied for authorization before November 3, then no announcement could be made. Pfizer was the “choke point,” Topol believed.

    On September 25, Topol joined 60 other experts in sending a letter to Pfizer’s CEO, asking that the company not apply for an EUA before late November, when there would be more safety data. Topol says he also peppered some of Pfizer’s board members with his concerns. The company later reached out to him, arranging an early October Zoom meeting with Kathrin Jansen, its vaccine chief, and her team. Pfizer confirmed the meeting, saying its staff regularly meets with “key opinion leaders.”

    “Whether you are Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, or Moderna, you want to win the race. But that is a different motivation than Trump has. He’s in a different contest,” says Topol. “Trump wants to win, but we need all the companies to win, because none can make enough vaccine [on] their own.”

    Any push to rush through a vaccine approval, in other words, would be motivated politically more than medically. Even though the pandemic is killing more than 600 people a day in the US, Topol doesn’t believe very much can be gained by declaring success a few weeks early.

    • Thanks: HammerJack, ic1000
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Don't forget. Never, ever forget these people.

    Bearing that in mind, the whole "Trump could have won but for..." discussion is akin to "Justinian would have revived the empire without bubonic plague". It's not wholly inaccurate, but rather than making me see them as victims of circumstance, it leads to the question of why they embraced policy decisions that relied on good fortune: and then doubled down on bad policy when the crisis came. The Donald's recent explanation of why he kept Fauci-to prevent the Left from complaining-says it all. Nobody forced him to keep Fauci. Anymore than anybody forced him to keep Kushner. Trump was just lazy, TBH.

    One of the reasons DeSantis has a good shot in 2024 is the fact that he's one of the few Republicans who was willing to buck Trump's administration when it came to lockdowns and the like while emphasizing that he still wasn't siding with Con Inc.

    Replies: @Alrenous, @Dan Hayes

  19. That’s the way it goes as far as who gets elected president. After all, what if Nixon had shaved before the 1960 debate?

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    @40 Lashes Less One

    Nixon didn’t need to shave: He needed to man-up and let them put TV makeup on him. Real men don’t do TV without makeup.

  20. Oct 1965

    Nov 3 2020…the demographic nullification of the Native White Working Class Vote…

  21. @Joe Stalin
    Speaking of ChiCom parasites:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yHIDOfd1x8

    Put a smile on your face.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOlWmE7xuzc

    Replies: @Athenian Gentleman, @restless94110

    Re: Image for second video (“Top 5 Guns”): Firearms are fun ‘n games? Kids’ play?

    Put a smile on your face.

    No smile here.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Athenian Gentleman

    Wow, a genuine Michael Moore-style socialist

    Replies: @Alfa158

    , @The Alarmist
    @Athenian Gentleman

    Lighten up, Frances.

    When police are telling people they’re essentially on their own vis à vis the thugs, it’s nice to know there are women and girls who can defend themselves when average menfolk on the streets are waiting for 911 to pick up the phone.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7Zmi0s6x-4

    Replies: @Athenian Gentleman

  22. Steve muses:

    Consider how much financial, moral, blackmail, and violent pressure there would have been to flip one of 269 Trump Electoral College voters.

    And, if that didn’t work, it’s hard not to imagine that The Establishment wouldn’t have organized a storming of the Capitol to intimidate the House into electing Biden.

    In that timeline, we’d ever since be reading non-stop tributes in the Washington Post to the Heroes of January 6 Who Saved Democracy by charging into the House past the fascist Capitol Police and physically keeping the GOP from hijacking the election …

    LOL. Cute, but Trump would declare a state of emergency and would not step down.

    • Replies: @JMcG
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    He’d have done whatever his daughter and her creep of a husband told him to do.

    , @The Alarmist
    @Jenner Ickham Errican


    Cute, but Trump would declare a state of emergency and would not step down.
     
    Honestly, I cannot tell how that would be any worse than the current trajectory.
  23. This is very old news and doesn’t have much to do with the more important questions going forward as everything keeps changing

    What are “the more important questions going forward”?

  24. ***

    Welcome to November. For Trump, the October Surprise Never Came.

    Trump’s hope that an economic recovery, a Covid vaccine or a Biden scandal could shake up the race faded with the last light of October.

    ***

    There was a Biden scandal, of course, but the corporate propaganda media and the social-media oligarchs suppressed it for the benefit of their candidate.

    ***

    But as the campaign nears an end, and with most national and battleground-state polls showing Mr. Trump struggling, the cavalry of an October surprise that helped him overtake Hillary Clinton in 2016 has not arrived.

    ***

    Funny, I remember my predicting to my skeptical family– split between SJW sisters and Trump True Believer sisters– that Trump was going to win; but, I have no recollection of an October surprise, in 2016!?!?!

    • Replies: @Jason Roberts
    @D. K.

    Media would have us believe it was either/both Comey reopening the Clinton email investigation or/and wikileaks publishing the Podesta/DNC emails.

    Replies: @D. K.

  25. It was the most openly fraudulent presidential election in American history. The list is almost endless–Russia hoax, FBI, CIA, the Republican establishment, Ukraine and Hunter Biden, Covid nonsense, “public health authorities”, Fauci, gain-of-function and the lab leak, Cuomo the savior, George Floyd lies, other assorted BLM lies, the Democrat’s mostly-peaceful-protests, Kenosha, Joe Biden’s dementia, Kamala Harris’s history and career path, Twitter, Google, Facebook, “covid emergency” election law suspensions, Pfizer vax antics, ballot harvesting and midnight ballot dumps.

    But end of the day … the person who lost it: Donald J. Trump.

    Trump had the money and independence and attitude … but “Art of the Deal” boy, gets his program rolled by Paul Ryan, doesn’t fire Fauci, hires his son-in-law–a mediocre, Democrat, globalist–as his political advisor, can’t make the obvious “Democrat riots” rule-of-law case, does nothing to stop-the-steal beforehand and debates like a 3rd grader hyped on adderall.

    Better nationalists please.

    • Thanks: Alden
    • Troll: Corvinus
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @AnotherDad

    Trump is the nationalist Americans deserve: an über-narcissistic, ungodly materialistic conman whose idea of haute cuisine is Diet Coke and McDonald's, and who worships blacks and Jews despite being widely perceived as a white supremacist. Trump is arguably the quintessential American.

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @AnotherDad

    You forgot the stupid own goal of coming out with the "Platinum Plan" idea to give $500,000,000,000 of our money to blacks about 3 months before the election. That had to lose some White people who finally figured "f__k this guy".

    That said, the D's could just have cheated that much harder. Once you see the pattern of these last minute complete about-faces in the election results of key outstanding States, you really lose faith in the integrity of it all. If they can come up with a few hundred thousand or a million perfectly aimed votes, why not 5 or 10 million? It's not like we're running out of trees.

    , @silviosilver
    @AnotherDad


    Better nationalists please.
     
    What can I say? You go into election battles with the billionaires you have, not the billionaires you dream of. So for the future, it's not better nationalists you need, but better billionaires.
  26. The Trump Administration’s decision in late summer to require Moderna to delay its clinical trial by a month to recruit a more racially diverse set of volunteers to test the safety and efficacy of the vaccine on different races.

    Is it possible that someone in the Administration delayed Moderna on behalf of some of Moderna’s competitors?

    Was Kushner involved?

  27. @Athenian Gentleman
    @Joe Stalin

    Re: Image for second video ("Top 5 Guns"): Firearms are fun 'n games? Kids' play?


    Put a smile on your face.
     
    No smile here.

    Replies: @Anon, @The Alarmist

    Wow, a genuine Michael Moore-style socialist

    • Replies: @Alfa158
    @Anon

    It would be refreshing to have more old school leftist/liberals engaging in debate here. However they don’t want to risk ideological contamination by stepping outside their echo chambers, so we only get an occasional one. Instead we have guys like Tiny Duck LARPing as a deranged SJW so he can mock them.
    For that matter how about some Jeb Bush Republicuck civic nationalist types as well?
    We’re largely taking to ourselves here.

    Replies: @Mark G.

  28. @D. K.
    ***

    Welcome to November. For Trump, the October Surprise Never Came.

    Trump’s hope that an economic recovery, a Covid vaccine or a Biden scandal could shake up the race faded with the last light of October.

    ***

    There was a Biden scandal, of course, but the corporate propaganda media and the social-media oligarchs suppressed it for the benefit of their candidate.

    ***

    But as the campaign nears an end, and with most national and battleground-state polls showing Mr. Trump struggling, the cavalry of an October surprise that helped him overtake Hillary Clinton in 2016 has not arrived.

    ***

    Funny, I remember my predicting to my skeptical family-- split between SJW sisters and Trump True Believer sisters-- that Trump was going to win; but, I have no recollection of an October surprise, in 2016!?!?!

    Replies: @Jason Roberts

    Media would have us believe it was either/both Comey reopening the Clinton email investigation or/and wikileaks publishing the Podesta/DNC emails.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Jason Roberts

    "Media would have us believe it was either/both Comey reopening the Clinton email investigation or/and wikileaks publishing the Podesta/DNC emails."

    Thanks! I had forgotten that those particular e-mails had been published that late in the campaign. As for the Hillary investigation's being reopened, all that happened, and was announced, was that new e-mails had been discovered, and that they needed to be read and evaluated-- not that new evidence of any actual wrongdoing had been discovered. She was (wrongly) cleared-- yet again-- three days before the election. Regardless, as the chart at Real Clear Politics shows . . .

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

    . . . there was no "October surprise" that actually appeared to turn the election in Trump's favor. I was in a distinct minority of non-partisan observers who had predicted a Trump victory, on the eve of the 2016 presidential election.

  29. @AnotherDad
    It was the most openly fraudulent presidential election in American history. The list is almost endless--Russia hoax, FBI, CIA, the Republican establishment, Ukraine and Hunter Biden, Covid nonsense, "public health authorities", Fauci, gain-of-function and the lab leak, Cuomo the savior, George Floyd lies, other assorted BLM lies, the Democrat's mostly-peaceful-protests, Kenosha, Joe Biden's dementia, Kamala Harris's history and career path, Twitter, Google, Facebook, "covid emergency" election law suspensions, Pfizer vax antics, ballot harvesting and midnight ballot dumps.

    But end of the day ... the person who lost it: Donald J. Trump.

    Trump had the money and independence and attitude ... but "Art of the Deal" boy, gets his program rolled by Paul Ryan, doesn't fire Fauci, hires his son-in-law--a mediocre, Democrat, globalist--as his political advisor, can't make the obvious "Democrat riots" rule-of-law case, does nothing to stop-the-steal beforehand and debates like a 3rd grader hyped on adderall.

    Better nationalists please.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Achmed E. Newman, @silviosilver

    Trump is the nationalist Americans deserve: an über-narcissistic, ungodly materialistic conman whose idea of haute cuisine is Diet Coke and McDonald’s, and who worships blacks and Jews despite being widely perceived as a white supremacist. Trump is arguably the quintessential American.

  30. How much effect could the delay have had considering that everyone voted early by mail because of Covid? If there are nefarious things to blame for Trump’s defeat, I’d tend to look at opportunities created for the left by the vast increase in early mail voters in that election.

  31. In the early days of Covid, Trump trusted China, which had been hitting his key states with economic sanctions to stop him being reelected. I’m sure Xi was not unaware that a pandemic was going to hurt Trumps chances of reelection more that Xi’s. But that is geopolitics, which Trump seems to have been poorly advised on. Like he was on the speed on vaccine development and the implications of failure to impose a strict and early quarantine. If you read Lewis’s the Fifth Risk, the governments experts are often have recent immigrant family background in; they all hated Trump. That would not have mattered if Trump had the people but he didn’t. His appointees like Wilbur Ross had not a clue what they were doing.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Sean

    Trump made terrible appointments. He and his team ignored applicants from around the country who would have been on board with his campaign themes, so we got an administration full of the usual gang of idiots plus family members and assorted New York goons.

    As Steve has written, Trump's talent as a New York real estate developer included the ability to convince needed participants that all other needed participants are already committed, even when nobody is yet. He could convince bank presidents to pony up millions even when the cement contractors were holding back and the city wouldn't yet give its blessings.

    He applied this talent to persuade voters and some operators to get on board.

    And then he did nothing, either because he really didn't have the other necessary parts or because he really didn't care.

    Stop and think: You've been conned. So have I. I was a big supporter because I saw no alternative. There wasn't, and there isn't one now.

    BTW Trump had bankers so wrapped up in his casinos that they had no choice but to stay in and keep him involved. Voters had no such obligation.

    , @Pericles
    @Sean

    I consider Trump geopolitically sound, indeed more than sound. He nearly solved North Korea, he ended Afghanistan, he ended Syria, and best of all islamic terrorism in Europe took a yuge downturn. He was at various points betrayed by prolapsed deep state officials and the MIC (e.g. Syria) but will go to non-pozzed history as a genuine peacemaker.

    , @J.Ross
    @Sean

    Agree, Trump's real biggest flaw was not any of the media lies or any of his obnoxious personality traits (and certainly not his "ignorance" of beltway false knowledge, actually an advantage), his biggest error was neither having nor hiring an army of Americans to mercilessly replace the nationless bureaucrat scum who successfully mutinied against, sabotaged, and eventually unseated him.

  32. @Known Fact
    Does Trump have a goatee in this alternate universe?

    Replies: @anon, @thenon

    your agonizer please.

    • Replies: @Known Fact
    @anon

    The way things are going is agony enough!

  33. @Mike Tre
    "the success of Trump’s vaccine strategy"

    Orwellian.

    Replies: @HammerJack, @Travis, @SunBakedSuburb

    As the nyt crowed:

    A coronavirus vaccine. A dramatic economic rebound. A blockbuster Justice Department investigation. A grievous misstep by a rival he portrayed as faltering. A scandal involving Mr. Biden and his son Hunter.

    None of it matters one whit. All that matters is how the people who own the megaphone want to slant it.

    Biden was going to rescue us all from the dreaded Trump Virus! Now, a year later, we have more deaths in 2021 than in 2020. The MSM are virtually silent about that. Put your masks on and stfu.

    • Agree: Travis
  34. @Sean
    In the early days of Covid, Trump trusted China, which had been hitting his key states with economic sanctions to stop him being reelected. I'm sure Xi was not unaware that a pandemic was going to hurt Trumps chances of reelection more that Xi's. But that is geopolitics, which Trump seems to have been poorly advised on. Like he was on the speed on vaccine development and the implications of failure to impose a strict and early quarantine. If you read Lewis's the Fifth Risk, the governments experts are often have recent immigrant family background in; they all hated Trump. That would not have mattered if Trump had the people but he didn't. His appointees like Wilbur Ross had not a clue what they were doing.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Pericles, @J.Ross

    Trump made terrible appointments. He and his team ignored applicants from around the country who would have been on board with his campaign themes, so we got an administration full of the usual gang of idiots plus family members and assorted New York goons.

    As Steve has written, Trump’s talent as a New York real estate developer included the ability to convince needed participants that all other needed participants are already committed, even when nobody is yet. He could convince bank presidents to pony up millions even when the cement contractors were holding back and the city wouldn’t yet give its blessings.

    He applied this talent to persuade voters and some operators to get on board.

    And then he did nothing, either because he really didn’t have the other necessary parts or because he really didn’t care.

    Stop and think: You’ve been conned. So have I. I was a big supporter because I saw no alternative. There wasn’t, and there isn’t one now.

    BTW Trump had bankers so wrapped up in his casinos that they had no choice but to stay in and keep him involved. Voters had no such obligation.

    • Agree: Seneca44, mc23
  35. The Pfizer lab shutdown until the day after the election led to Less Data during a critical week. So I think the Pfizer lab shutdown is the most morally indefensible of the three causes of delay.I

    I

    This whole delay story is very interesting. This and the hunter biden-laptop were the biggies before the election. The possibility of a “Trump-vaccine”, as it was spoken of, made such a big impression on the left, that quite a few of them opposed publicly being vaccinated should thisdubious “Trump-vaccine” ever be cooked up…

    II

    This then was followed by big scale and precise election manipulations to secure the result.

  36. @Patrick in SC

    That has left Mr. Trump running on a record of an out-of-control pandemic …
     

    Trump’s hope that an economic recovery, a Covid vaccine or a Biden scandal could shake up the race faded with the last light of October.
     
    Actually, there were 2 October surprises: The vaccine roll out, which was deliberately delayed, and Hunter Biden's hard drive/laptop, which confirmed a 30 year history of influence peddling which dwarfed in significance even the stuff they fabricated about Trump and "Russia, Russia, Russia."

    But these things didn't happen because the liberal media didn't want them to happen. Full stop.

    Replies: @Pericles, @Sick of Orcs, @JR Ewing

    True, apart from delaying the vaxx, the suppression of Hunter’s laptop was heavyhanded too, and they then had to subvert and steal the election even so. But at least you now have the President-Legit!

  37. @AnotherDad
    It was the most openly fraudulent presidential election in American history. The list is almost endless--Russia hoax, FBI, CIA, the Republican establishment, Ukraine and Hunter Biden, Covid nonsense, "public health authorities", Fauci, gain-of-function and the lab leak, Cuomo the savior, George Floyd lies, other assorted BLM lies, the Democrat's mostly-peaceful-protests, Kenosha, Joe Biden's dementia, Kamala Harris's history and career path, Twitter, Google, Facebook, "covid emergency" election law suspensions, Pfizer vax antics, ballot harvesting and midnight ballot dumps.

    But end of the day ... the person who lost it: Donald J. Trump.

    Trump had the money and independence and attitude ... but "Art of the Deal" boy, gets his program rolled by Paul Ryan, doesn't fire Fauci, hires his son-in-law--a mediocre, Democrat, globalist--as his political advisor, can't make the obvious "Democrat riots" rule-of-law case, does nothing to stop-the-steal beforehand and debates like a 3rd grader hyped on adderall.

    Better nationalists please.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Achmed E. Newman, @silviosilver

    You forgot the stupid own goal of coming out with the “Platinum Plan” idea to give $500,000,000,000 of our money to blacks about 3 months before the election. That had to lose some White people who finally figured “f__k this guy”.

    That said, the D’s could just have cheated that much harder. Once you see the pattern of these last minute complete about-faces in the election results of key outstanding States, you really lose faith in the integrity of it all. If they can come up with a few hundred thousand or a million perfectly aimed votes, why not 5 or 10 million? It’s not like we’re running out of trees.

    • Agree: Adam Smith
  38. @J.Ross
    @obwandiyag

    I was not sad throughout 2021 because of the plague, the deaths, the business closures, or the collapse of American international credibility, but I was devastated (more so than normal) because all of my rights were taken away without a process, and what life I retain is an accident, relying on the clumsiness and sloppiness of bureaucrats in the Peter Chickenfather mold of -- oh okay so actually I'm pretty safe, those guys are pretty sloppy.

    Replies: @Athenian Gentleman

    I was devastated (more so than normal) because all of my rights were taken away without a process,

    Is there a functioning country that has not, in times of national emergency, (a) suspended rights, and (b) done so without bypassing, to a considerable if not total degree, usual legal/ bureaucratic process? Can you name a single example of such a place?

    • Replies: @Nicholas Stix
    @Athenian Gentleman

    Just what was the national emergency that justified suspending the rights of American citizen-voters? I didn't think so.

    , @Pericles
    @Athenian Gentleman


    Is there a functioning country that has not, in times of national emergency, (a) suspended rights, and (b) done so without bypassing, to a considerable if not total degree, usual legal/ bureaucratic process?

     

    Btw, has anyone noted that we live in a permanented state of emergency these days?
    , @J.Ross
    @Athenian Gentleman

    >in times of national emergency

    [INAPPROPRIATE STARING]

  39. @Achmed E. Newman

    Would that have switched enough voters in Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada to cause a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College and cast the decision to the House of Representatives with one vote for each delegation, probably favoring Trump? Or would there have been a violent and/or corrupt intervention to deny Trump a second term?
     
    Or, would the Democratic party volunteers on Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada election vote counting teams have had to spend another half day printing up enough mail-in ballots from people who didn't know they'd even participated? There's your alternate history. Same old same old.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Almost Missouri, @MLK

    Agree.

    Original timeline November 4th
    Midnight: Ballot counting shut down in key swing states for nebulous reasons.
    3:00 AM: Ballot counting reopens with statistically absurd Biden surge.
    Biden “elected”.

    Alternative timeline November 4th
    Midnight: Ballot counting shut down in key swing states for nebulous reasons.
    3:30 AM: Ballot counting reopens with even more statistically absurd Biden surge.
    Return to original timeline.

    • Agree: Alrenous, James Braxton
  40. Anonymous[423] • Disclaimer says:

    Let’s see… Biden has not yet ordered the at home Covid tests from the manufacturer, so we won’t be getting them for quite a while, which makes Phizer’s new Covid pill worthless, since you have to take them within 5 days of catching Covid, the sooner the better, to save your ass. Meanwhile the newest virus is just getting started.

    For an emergency boost in morale, quick-thinking White House Chief of Staff, Ron Klain, hired dancing nurses to come into the East Room to deliver a performance for the First Lady.

    And… many of us… are going to die… aren’t we…

    • LOL: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @Barnard
    @Anonymous

    How far removed from reality do these people have to be to think the nurses doing TikTok videos in empty hospitals was well received by the public?

  41. @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco
    If the Vaccine trials had lasted 9 months the vaccines never would have been approved. Sadly they eliminated the control group after 4 months so we will never know the true failure of the vaccines. Thus far we have more COVID deaths in 2021 than last year when nobody was vaccinated and treatments were less effective. Currently they admit the vaccines offer zero protection against Omicron, and they hope the boosters will offer some protection against the new variants. The vaccines have failed to reduce deaths or hospitalizations. We were deceived by Big Pharma again. The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.

    Replies: @Rob, @Dutch Boy, @Triteleia Laxa

    The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.

    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    2021 was worse than 2020 because social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020. In ‘21, cons got all oppositional defiant disordered. They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed. Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize. Here’s where I did my own research — viruses? They ain’t got no nerves! It is imaginable that ivermectin works against COVID by a totally different mechanism than its effect on ion channels, but there is a ton more evidence that the vaccines work. The vast majority of chemicals researchers try out at various stages of testing do not work. Ivermectin for COVID is at the “large-ish random small molecule with functional groups” stage of testing for treating any virus. The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But cons were all about it. Despite that, as you say, there were more COVID deaths in ‘21 than ‘20. Those libs? They done been owned!

    [MORE]

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA. COVID is deadlier than the flu, so maybe the trade-off is worthwhile? Personally, I think a short course of a drug that might cause point mutations is unlikely to cause cancer, but I could be wrong, Omicron seems to be less deadly, likely because it does not activate innate and Th2 immunity as strongly as previous variants, giving the genomes that manage to tamp down the cellular antiviral response an intrahost selective advantage. The benefit to you is that the immune reaction does not kill you. My theory explains why (some) respiratory viruses tend to evolve to be less lethal over short periods of time. A Nobel-worthy theory of someone fleshes it out if I can toot my own horn. This only applies if some non-lethal immune mechanism can keep the virus from turning you into goo, of course.

    • Agree: Inquiring Mind
    • Disagree: Jenner Ickham Errican
    • Thanks: Athenian Gentleman
    • LOL: Alrenous
    • Troll: AndrewR
    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
    @Rob

    They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    Well, from a public health standpoint that's kind of the whole idea. Otherwise the vaccine is just a leaky allergy shot.

    The mask hypothesis is absurd.

    Replies: @HA, @Rob

    , @D. K.
    @Rob

    "In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company."

    Henry 'Hammerin' Hank' Aaron and 'Marvelous' Marvin Hagler are both unavailable for comment.

    https://visionlaunch.com/20000-deaths-reported-to-vaers-following-covid-vaccines/

    , @Known Fact
    @Rob

    Subject matter side, we can truly admire a post that gets Agree, Thanks, LOL, Troll and Replies. It's like the epic game where Lemieux scored a goal all five ways: power play, shorty, even-strength, penalty shot and empty net

    , @HA
    @Rob

    "However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. "

    For those still trying to make us believe that it was the "gene-altering" capabilities of mRNA vaccines -- or whatever hogwash it was to hide from the fact that after a year of telling schooling everyone about the importance of not being terrified, they were wetting their panties in terror over a needle (way to go, "lions") -- there's the recently approved Novavax which has done as well or better than the mRNA vaccines. Will that convince any of the truthers to get jabbed? Unlikely -- it's easier to simply scrape up some other lame excuse from their backsides. The fact that no one believes their earlier ones didn't stop them.


    In this context, the success of the Novavax vaccine should be A1 news. The recent results confirm that it has roughly the same efficacy as the two authorized mRNA vaccines, with the added benefit of being based on an older, more familiar science. The protein-subunit approach used by Novavax was first implemented for the hepatitis B vaccine, which has been used in the U.S. since 1986. The pertussis vaccine, which is required for almost all children in U.S. public schools, is also made this way.
     

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @Mike Tre

    , @Mr. Anon
    @Rob


    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread.
     
    Except they didn't. Vaccinated people can get and spread COVID too. And remember, anybody who dies of COVID with only one shot of Pfizer or Moderna is "unvaccinated".

    They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed.
     
    As opposed to liberals who blindly trust "The Science" - i.e. whatever NPR tells them that Anthony Fauci said this morning.

    Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize.
     
    Remdesivir is a (twice) repurposed drug too. Ivermectin appears to be far more successful in preventing hospitalization and death than Remdesivir.

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.
     
    No, they can also be attributed to liberals, who masked up, locked down, got jabbed.................and still died of COVID.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA.
     
    Yeah........what could go wrong with that. Knock yourself out.

    Replies: @HA

    , @vinteuil
    @Rob


    ...social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020...
     
    Rubbish.

    The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi.
     
    What utter drivel.

    Even on YouTube there are still easily accessible sources (though they have to tread very carefully) who have intelligent, measured things to say about ivermectin and other promising therapeutics - e.g., John Campbell, Bret Weinstein.

    Since you're obviously completely unable and/or unwilling honestly to paraphrase the positions of those who take more nuanced positions than your own, may I suggest that you try quoting their best arguments directly? Then try to refute them?

    The sort of straw-manning you engage in here is contemptible.

    Replies: @HA

    , @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Rob

    I didn’t actually read your TLDR, I just wanted to complete the tag tower.

    Merry Christmas, everyone!

    , @Rob
    @Rob

    • Agree:...
    • Disagree:...
    • Thanks:...
    • LOL:...
    • Troll:...
    • Replies:...

    Yes! I collected them all in a single comment! I advance another level in UnzQuest.

    Oh, you didn’t know we are playing UnzQuest? Well, you are very far behind.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    , @The Alarmist
    @Rob


    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate.
     
    Well, maybe if you ignore that the death count stats include 2020, where there was significant mortality displacement, e.g. culling, of “low hanging fruit,” e.g. the sickest and oldest as a huge part of the unvaxxed count.

    Stats restricted to the period when vaxxes commenced and not counting partially-vaxxed or those within 14 days of second dose as unvaxxed blow that 1/11th number out of the water.

    The benefits of the vaxxes are significantly overstated.

    Replies: @HA

    , @Alden
    @Rob

    Ivermectin cures more than worms. Many medications cure more than one disease. For instance Prozac. It was originally developed as a diet pill . By increasing supplies of serotonin in the brain. Turns out serotonin is a natural happiness supply to the brain. Thus the serotonin also causes decreased appetite. Similar to how cigarettes cause increased serotonin and a cheerful little lift to get one through the day and decreased appetite.

    So now Prozac is a widely prescribed and effective anti depressant.

    There’s plenty more examples of dual or much more than dual purpose medications. Prozac is the first one I thought of. Benadryl prevents hives bug bites skin allergies from getting really dangerous. For someone severely allergic to bee stings, a four ounce slug of Benadryl will keep them alive till they get to the ER. It also slows the system down enough to alleviate coughing and induce sleep.

    Muscle relaxers aren’t prescribed as sleeping pills or pain pills. But they are very effective pain and sleeping pills.

    There are plenty more meds that cure or alleviate many diseases. Ivermectin is one.

    Ask Mr google or looking for an online pharmacology site. Or look in any pharmacology book. You’ll find lots of multi use medications.

    Replies: @Rob

  42. @Patrick in SC

    That has left Mr. Trump running on a record of an out-of-control pandemic …
     

    Trump’s hope that an economic recovery, a Covid vaccine or a Biden scandal could shake up the race faded with the last light of October.
     
    Actually, there were 2 October surprises: The vaccine roll out, which was deliberately delayed, and Hunter Biden's hard drive/laptop, which confirmed a 30 year history of influence peddling which dwarfed in significance even the stuff they fabricated about Trump and "Russia, Russia, Russia."

    But these things didn't happen because the liberal media didn't want them to happen. Full stop.

    Replies: @Pericles, @Sick of Orcs, @JR Ewing

    During the debates, Trump brought up the hunter laptop, but had no more to add and was shut down.

    “High-energy” means nothing when you don’t prepare.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @Sick of Orcs

    Chris Wallace wouldn't let him talk about the laptop. He cut him off. He thought it was more important to ask him, "Will you denounce white supremacy?" a question he had also asked him during the 2016 debate he moderated. It's one of those, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" questions. Apparently, you can't ask it often enough.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @SunBakedSuburb

    , @Patrick in SC
    @Sick of Orcs

    Correct.

    I recall Trump clumsily asking Biden about a payment to Hunter from the mayor of Moscow while the female moderator started panicking, "Hold on, hold on...." and quickly cutting Trump off.

    Then Biden responded with something about 55 or 51 "former Intelligence officials" saying the laptop and its contents were "Russian disinformation."

    He actually said that.

    Has anyone in the mainstream media followed up with him on that claim? Even after the laptop and its contents were authenticated.

    Of course not.

    Remember the Atlantic story with the fabrications about Trump calling WWI soldiers "losers"? "Much more" was supposed to be forthcoming from the guy who fabricated the "story." (Goldberg?) There wasn't. It was a lie.

    Hence my earlier comment. There wasn't going to be an "October surprise" for Trump because the media wasn't going to let another "Comey-Hillary bombshell" such as came out in 2016 happen again.

    Replies: @Wokechoke

  43. @Athenian Gentleman
    @J.Ross


    I was devastated (more so than normal) because all of my rights were taken away without a process,
     
    Is there a functioning country that has not, in times of national emergency, (a) suspended rights, and (b) done so without bypassing, to a considerable if not total degree, usual legal/ bureaucratic process? Can you name a single example of such a place?

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix, @Pericles, @J.Ross

    Just what was the national emergency that justified suspending the rights of American citizen-voters? I didn’t think so.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Thanks: Achmed E. Newman
  44. we’d ever since be reading non-stop tributes in the Washington Post to the Heroes of January 6 Who Saved Democracy by charging into the House past the fascist Capitol Police and physically keeping the GOP from hijacking the election by Republicans

    NPR and the networks constantly mention January 6. They never remind their listeners of Memorial Day weekend 2020, when a mob of violent protestors threatened to storm the White House. They set fires and threw rocks and bottles at the Secret Service agents blocking them, 60 of whom were injured, 12 sufficiently to require hospitalization. At the time, the reaction of the progressive media was to mock Trump for “cowering in the bunker.”

    The most important question about January 6 will not be raised at the show-trial hearings: “Why did Pelosi leave the Capitol essentially unguarded, knowing the size of the expected protest?” Trump claims that he advised her to bring in 10,000 National Guard troops to protect it. The progressive media says he did not, but that’s what they would say. They have no credibility. No thinking person expects to hear truth from them anymore.

    Pelosi is so sinister I’m convinced that she saw great opportunity in the January 6 protest and had federal agents directing the crowds, but who imagines that we will ever learn the truth about this and so many other events, now that our media is so corrupt?

    • Thanks: ic1000
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Harry Baldwin

    Agree but no way was it just Pelosi.

    , @Jim Don Bob
    @Harry Baldwin

    Revolver has a new, long but good, article that confirms my suspicions that the storming of the Capitol 1/6/2021 was instigated by the Feds and its toadies.

    https://www.revolver.news/2021/12/damning-new-details-massive-web-unindicted-operators-january-6/

  45. @Sean
    In the early days of Covid, Trump trusted China, which had been hitting his key states with economic sanctions to stop him being reelected. I'm sure Xi was not unaware that a pandemic was going to hurt Trumps chances of reelection more that Xi's. But that is geopolitics, which Trump seems to have been poorly advised on. Like he was on the speed on vaccine development and the implications of failure to impose a strict and early quarantine. If you read Lewis's the Fifth Risk, the governments experts are often have recent immigrant family background in; they all hated Trump. That would not have mattered if Trump had the people but he didn't. His appointees like Wilbur Ross had not a clue what they were doing.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Pericles, @J.Ross

    I consider Trump geopolitically sound, indeed more than sound. He nearly solved North Korea, he ended Afghanistan, he ended Syria, and best of all islamic terrorism in Europe took a yuge downturn. He was at various points betrayed by prolapsed deep state officials and the MIC (e.g. Syria) but will go to non-pozzed history as a genuine peacemaker.

    • Agree: S. Anonyia
  46. @Sick of Orcs
    @Patrick in SC

    During the debates, Trump brought up the hunter laptop, but had no more to add and was shut down.

    "High-energy" means nothing when you don't prepare.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Patrick in SC

    Chris Wallace wouldn’t let him talk about the laptop. He cut him off. He thought it was more important to ask him, “Will you denounce white supremacy?” a question he had also asked him during the 2016 debate he moderated. It’s one of those, “Have you stopped beating your wife?” questions. Apparently, you can’t ask it often enough.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Harry Baldwin

    A terrible moderator like Wallace can be a boon for a smart debater. Trump completely missed the chance to throw Wallace's question back in his face.

    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Harry Baldwin

    Wallace is loyal to his tribe. Once that's understood, everything makes sense.

    Our tribe should learn the lessons of his tribe.

    Replies: @Athenian Gentleman, @Athenian Gentleman

    , @SunBakedSuburb
    @Harry Baldwin

    "Chris Wallace wouldn't let him talk about the laptop."

    See what Steve did here? He craftily combined three hot-button! topics that he knows occupies the brains of iSteve fans -- COVID vaccine, 1/6, Trump -- to generate the kind of traffic that Joan Didion just can't draw. But Steve's a half-ass manipulator: he neglected to end the post with a fundraising pitch.

  47. @Athenian Gentleman
    @J.Ross


    I was devastated (more so than normal) because all of my rights were taken away without a process,
     
    Is there a functioning country that has not, in times of national emergency, (a) suspended rights, and (b) done so without bypassing, to a considerable if not total degree, usual legal/ bureaucratic process? Can you name a single example of such a place?

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix, @Pericles, @J.Ross

    Is there a functioning country that has not, in times of national emergency, (a) suspended rights, and (b) done so without bypassing, to a considerable if not total degree, usual legal/ bureaucratic process?

    Btw, has anyone noted that we live in a permanented state of emergency these days?

  48. @The Alarmist
    As if two months of safety data for a relatively untested medical technology are anywhere near enough. Up til 2020, at least five years, if not ten, on smaller controlled groups that represented the broader population would have been required for actual approval for mass use in the population.

    Instead, they short-circuited long-standing practises by allowing a mass rollout under an Emergency Use Authorisation for an illness that has an average Infection Fatality Rate on par with the seasonal flu. BTW, Phase 3 trials end in 2023, and the only vaxx with actual FDA approval is not yet available in the US because that particular formulation does not yet have liability indemnification.

    If you took the vaxxes, you are literally a test subject in the largest Phase 3 medical study ever undertaken.

    Good luck with that.

    Replies: @Rob

    Nucleic acid vaccines are (relatively) untested on people, that is true. None were approved, but some had been in phase II, maybe even III testing. But they have been extensively tested on several species, including monkeys and chimpanzees. The vaccines used a somewhat novel base analog, N1-methyl pseudouridine instead of uracil to reduce innate intracellular immunogenicity. I am willing to bet that this gets metabolized into something pretty nontoxic that you pee out. Not to mention, the total dose of mRNA in three shots is low compared to what you would get in the two oral covid drugs (soon to be?) approved. Both of which are base analogs, but mutagenic ones. If you want to avoid weird chemicals, it would be best to minimize your chances of needing post-infection treatment,

    The lipids in the nanoparticles, which I assume are cationic lipids, though I have not looked, are um, possibly a bit dangerous? They are probably the adjuvant, the chemical that gives the immune system the danger signal that couples “new protein” to “make an immune response” in the body. I watched a short video where Bret Weinstein said his plumber(?) got the vaccine and two minutes later had a heart attack. Well, that was not due to the “toxic” spike protein chunk that the mRNA codes for. No way it could have entered cells, escaped the endosome, been translated, transported to the cell surface, broken off, either from a protease or in apoptotic fragments, then reached his heart in a couple of minutes. Hour, maybe two, minimum. Again, all these things are in tiny doses. The mRNA is translated multiple times, so you get more bang for each injection.

    I got the Pfizer booster (2 Modernas to start) a few weeks ago. Felt fine for about two hours then felt like I had the flu, then shivered and slept for 5-6 hours. Convinced me that a) I had an immune reaction, so it was probably a real vaccine (who trusts CVS?) and b) I sooo do not want covid.

    The dose of “chemicals” in any vaccine is low. At most, you get a flu shot every year. Other vaccines are either live-attenuated and good for a lifetime or on a five-to-ten-year booster schedule. If you are diabetic, you probably get more “chemicals” in a week of insulin shots. Though I hope you don’t have diabetes.

    Please get vaccinated! You, and everyone else, will get covid. You might avoid it if you get vaccinated, if not, you can turn a ~1% chance of death into a ~0.1% chance. With fresh vaccination (or a booster) your chance with omicron is likely even better. You would be in “just the flu, bro” territory, which would be a nice place to be.

    Good luck, whether I convinced you or not. Yeah, I know I didn’t… A man must try.

    • Thanks: Inquiring Mind
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Rob

    My general impression is that people who are very vulnerable to dying from COVID might benefit from the injections, but the vast majority of people would not experience a net benefit. Even my 84 year old aunt caught COVID last Christmas before she was vaccinated and she was fine.

    , @Alrenous
    @Rob


    A man must try.
     
    "...because I'm being paid."

    Or if not, hot damn: start getting paid. Don't pull this crud for free when there's money on the table.

    The arguments are either fallacious or empirically false. E.g. the actual survival rate for ncov is something like 99.96%, not 99%. As they say: missing a zero there. E.g. does a disease with a 99% survival rate sound like an unprecedented crisis to you, requiring all-hands-on-deck emergency measures? How about one less than 1/10th as deadly?

    Bonus round: lockdowns didn't work because folk were already self-isolating before the measures, so there was nobody walking around to be kept inside. Sorry, didn't need the government to ride to the rescue, even if it was a disease which killed more than 1% of infected.

    They want you to take the vaccine, which has not been proven to be safe, instead of ivermectin, a 30-year old drug. We know everything about taking ivermectin safely, but the vaccine is under patent and thus expensive and profitable, you see.

    Also vitamin D. It doesn't work as an intervention, but as a prophylactic it's even cheaper than ivermectin and affects every virus - rhinovirus, influenza virus, even chicken pox - not just coronavirus. Oh, and bacteria too. If everyone had enough vitamin D, pharma profits would crash hard, so they absolutely hate it. Note that you can casually "take" 20,000 IU by going outside near noon in summer, and the "safe upper dose" is supposed to be 4000. Do you trust government scientists, or millions of years of evolution?

    The medically advised minimum level of vitamin D is 50 nmol/L, but you start seeing serious immune boosting at around the 100 nmol/L range.
    Study: take 9000 IU. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4210929/
    Study: take 10,000 IU. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/13/10/3596/htm
    (100 nmol/L = 50 ng/mL)

    Is this guy misinformed about off-label medication uses, or is he being deliberately disingenuous? Ignorant, or a liar?

    When ADHD patients take amphetamine stimulants, they calm down. Nicotine is also either a stimulant or a relaxant depending on dose and who's taking it, among other paradoxical indications. The idea that pathological parasites and other, smaller pathological parasites might both dislike the same chemical is downright tame. They found the anti-ncov indication because someone was already taking it for parasites and then caught ncov, then fixed ncov during their scheduled dose. It wasn't a theory => conclusion thing, it was an accident.
    , @D. K.
    @Rob

    "I got the Pfizer booster (2 Modernas to start) a few weeks ago. Felt fine for about two hours then felt like I had the flu, then shivered and slept for 5-6 hours. Convinced me that a) I had an immune reaction, so it was probably a real vaccine (who trusts CVS?) and b) I sooo do not want covid."

    Just out of curiosity: How old are you? What is your body-mass index? Which (actual) diseases do you have as comorbidities, if you should happen to contract the deadly Omicron mutation of the virus? How much sunshine vitamin D do you get? Do you smoke cigarettes? Does your home use a humidifier?

    Replies: @Rob

    , @Mike1
    @Rob

    How truly dumb progressives are has never be on display until now. What you are saying is medical gibberish. I sincerely hope you don't work in the medical field.

    "You might avoid it if you get vaccinated, if not, you can turn a ~1% chance of death into a ~0.1% chance. With fresh vaccination (or a booster) your chance with omicron is likely even better. " Data is showing the complete opposite. The vaccinated are getting sick and dying at higher rates everywhere. Advocating a vaccine for Omicron is a "we should talk about taking Grandpa's keys" moment.

    Replies: @HA, @Rob

  49. @Harry Baldwin
    @Sick of Orcs

    Chris Wallace wouldn't let him talk about the laptop. He cut him off. He thought it was more important to ask him, "Will you denounce white supremacy?" a question he had also asked him during the 2016 debate he moderated. It's one of those, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" questions. Apparently, you can't ask it often enough.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @SunBakedSuburb

    A terrible moderator like Wallace can be a boon for a smart debater. Trump completely missed the chance to throw Wallace’s question back in his face.

  50. @Mr. Anon
    It's all such a mystery:

    https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/pfizer-inc/summary?id=D000000138

    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pfizer-unions-others-donated-618-mln-bidens-inaugural-2021-04-21/

    By the way, Pfizer donated money to 275 Congressional candidates in 2020, 164 Democrats (including Bernie Sanders - who's he kidding with that (I) crap), and 111 Republicans. So it's pretty clear they're just bribing Congress - there's really no other way to wash it. And such a bargain too.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @silviosilver

    Bernie became a Democrat to run for POTUS as a Democrat.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Hibernian


    Bernie became a Democrat to run for POTUS as a Democrat.
     
    He switched back to "Independent" after he dropped out of the race; at least he did in 2016. He maintains the non-party affiliation because he is an avowed socialist. But the fact is that he caucuses with the Democrats and the most left-wing Democrats in Congress are no different than him in outlook.
  51. @Rob
    @The Alarmist

    Nucleic acid vaccines are (relatively) untested on people, that is true. None were approved, but some had been in phase II, maybe even III testing. But they have been extensively tested on several species, including monkeys and chimpanzees. The vaccines used a somewhat novel base analog, N1-methyl pseudouridine instead of uracil to reduce innate intracellular immunogenicity. I am willing to bet that this gets metabolized into something pretty nontoxic that you pee out. Not to mention, the total dose of mRNA in three shots is low compared to what you would get in the two oral covid drugs (soon to be?) approved. Both of which are base analogs, but mutagenic ones. If you want to avoid weird chemicals, it would be best to minimize your chances of needing post-infection treatment,

    The lipids in the nanoparticles, which I assume are cationic lipids, though I have not looked, are um, possibly a bit dangerous? They are probably the adjuvant, the chemical that gives the immune system the danger signal that couples “new protein” to “make an immune response” in the body. I watched a short video where Bret Weinstein said his plumber(?) got the vaccine and two minutes later had a heart attack. Well, that was not due to the “toxic” spike protein chunk that the mRNA codes for. No way it could have entered cells, escaped the endosome, been translated, transported to the cell surface, broken off, either from a protease or in apoptotic fragments, then reached his heart in a couple of minutes. Hour, maybe two, minimum. Again, all these things are in tiny doses. The mRNA is translated multiple times, so you get more bang for each injection.

    I got the Pfizer booster (2 Modernas to start) a few weeks ago. Felt fine for about two hours then felt like I had the flu, then shivered and slept for 5-6 hours. Convinced me that a) I had an immune reaction, so it was probably a real vaccine (who trusts CVS?) and b) I sooo do not want covid.

    The dose of “chemicals” in any vaccine is low. At most, you get a flu shot every year. Other vaccines are either live-attenuated and good for a lifetime or on a five-to-ten-year booster schedule. If you are diabetic, you probably get more “chemicals” in a week of insulin shots. Though I hope you don’t have diabetes.

    Please get vaccinated! You, and everyone else, will get covid. You might avoid it if you get vaccinated, if not, you can turn a ~1% chance of death into a ~0.1% chance. With fresh vaccination (or a booster) your chance with omicron is likely even better. You would be in “just the flu, bro” territory, which would be a nice place to be.

    Good luck, whether I convinced you or not. Yeah, I know I didn’t… A man must try.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Alrenous, @D. K., @Mike1

    My general impression is that people who are very vulnerable to dying from COVID might benefit from the injections, but the vast majority of people would not experience a net benefit. Even my 84 year old aunt caught COVID last Christmas before she was vaccinated and she was fine.

  52. @interesting
    I don't care who is in the white house or when the vaccine was rolled out. I had covid and I'm not taking the f'ing clot shot

    Replies: @AndrewR, @JR Ewing, @Corvinus

    Exactly.

    I had it, and it was sicker than I had ever been. But I had never been very sick before. I am not at all worried ahout catching COVID again. The clot shots scare me to death though.

  53. @Athenian Gentleman
    @J.Ross


    I was devastated (more so than normal) because all of my rights were taken away without a process,
     
    Is there a functioning country that has not, in times of national emergency, (a) suspended rights, and (b) done so without bypassing, to a considerable if not total degree, usual legal/ bureaucratic process? Can you name a single example of such a place?

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix, @Pericles, @J.Ross

    >in times of national emergency

    [INAPPROPRIATE STARING]

    • Agree: Hangnail Hans
  54. @Harry Baldwin
    we’d ever since be reading non-stop tributes in the Washington Post to the Heroes of January 6 Who Saved Democracy by charging into the House past the fascist Capitol Police and physically keeping the GOP from hijacking the election by Republicans

    NPR and the networks constantly mention January 6. They never remind their listeners of Memorial Day weekend 2020, when a mob of violent protestors threatened to storm the White House. They set fires and threw rocks and bottles at the Secret Service agents blocking them, 60 of whom were injured, 12 sufficiently to require hospitalization. At the time, the reaction of the progressive media was to mock Trump for "cowering in the bunker."

    The most important question about January 6 will not be raised at the show-trial hearings: "Why did Pelosi leave the Capitol essentially unguarded, knowing the size of the expected protest?" Trump claims that he advised her to bring in 10,000 National Guard troops to protect it. The progressive media says he did not, but that's what they would say. They have no credibility. No thinking person expects to hear truth from them anymore.

    Pelosi is so sinister I'm convinced that she saw great opportunity in the January 6 protest and had federal agents directing the crowds, but who imagines that we will ever learn the truth about this and so many other events, now that our media is so corrupt?

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Jim Don Bob

    Agree but no way was it just Pelosi.

  55. @Sean
    In the early days of Covid, Trump trusted China, which had been hitting his key states with economic sanctions to stop him being reelected. I'm sure Xi was not unaware that a pandemic was going to hurt Trumps chances of reelection more that Xi's. But that is geopolitics, which Trump seems to have been poorly advised on. Like he was on the speed on vaccine development and the implications of failure to impose a strict and early quarantine. If you read Lewis's the Fifth Risk, the governments experts are often have recent immigrant family background in; they all hated Trump. That would not have mattered if Trump had the people but he didn't. His appointees like Wilbur Ross had not a clue what they were doing.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Pericles, @J.Ross

    Agree, Trump’s real biggest flaw was not any of the media lies or any of his obnoxious personality traits (and certainly not his “ignorance” of beltway false knowledge, actually an advantage), his biggest error was neither having nor hiring an army of Americans to mercilessly replace the nationless bureaucrat scum who successfully mutinied against, sabotaged, and eventually unseated him.

  56. Here is the only alternative history you need to concern yourself with:

    Anyone who reads and understands real science rather than the politicized doppelganger thereof—which seems not to include most people here—would have known that there has never been a successful vaccine for a coronavirus and that the whole concept of mRNA vaccines is preposterous to begin with. Therefore, they would have known from the very moment that Pfizer made its announcement that they were lying, that political games were afoot, and that we were in for some very dark times of social destruction and tyranny.

    For anyone who claims to understand “The Real Science of Genetics!™”, whether they be HBD quant bloggers or members of the official medical-academic-bureaucratic establishment, it is absolutely inexcusable that you ever went along with this thing for one damn minute. There was more than enough preexisting information out there to establish the fact that what drug companies and governments were claiming about vaccine efficacy (and about the pandemic in general) could not possibly be true.

    Why were you fooled? Why did you sin? Ask yourself that, and then rewrite history with a spirit of penance.

  57. The most important lesson of delaying the Pfizer vaccine is that our betters are perfectly content to let the masses suffer if it serves their political goals. Even if the ultimate number of people who may have gotten very ill or died due to this isn’t enough to fill a high school gym, it doesn’t change the fact that in 2020 the ruling class watched billions of property and economic damage unfold, dozens of direct homicides from rioting, and likely thousands of incremental deaths occur so that they got the political outcome they wanted.

    Obviously there are many people who do not see these events this way, but on the other hand based on the shift in Latino voting patterns and the millions of people of all stripes who were suddenly interested in owning a firearms, many do understand this in one way or another. If the GOP was smart, they would realize that unabashedly focusing on masculine virtues they would grow their voter base. Latinos like strength in their politicians and even chipping the traditional black voter performance for Dems down to 85% rather than 90% (which is entirely possible) would cause enormous problems for the left in statewide elections.

    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Arclight

    You started out so well but then fell back into believing in the system.

    We're not voting our way out of this. Sure, whites could score a few rear guard victories as we withdraw, but we're never going to be free in the current system.

    Replies: @Arclight

    , @Johann Ricke
    @Arclight


    Latinos like strength in their politicians
     
    I don't doubt that Biden is a strong president. He's pretty strong in terms of insisting that only black lives matter, and that a bunch of people strolling through the Capitol is the equivalent of the storming of the Bastille. I don't think Hispanics want strength - they want murderers killed and criminals who aren't murderers imprisoned. Again, this is a fairly traditional stance that both parties supported to varying extents, until the Democrats embraced crime sprees and Trump muddled the GOP's long-standing tough-on-crime image by backing a drug dealer amnesty.
    , @Johann Ricke
    @Arclight

    And when I say Hispanics want murderers killed, I am referring to a number of surveys I have read of in the past:


    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/01/24/mexico-death-penalty-texas-execution/4817247/


    Surveys by polling firms and media outlets in Mexico over the past seven years show that support for the death penalty has increased to a point where a majority would like to see it reinstated. Recent polls found 70%-80% would like to see the death penalty imposed for crimes such as murder and kidnapping, a rate above the majority support for the death penalty in the USA.
     
    I expect these polls are less cherry-picked than similar polls commissioned by abolitionist groups stateside.
    , @Johann Ricke
    @Arclight


    Latinos like strength in their politicians
     
    The real bottom line is that Hispanics, like other voters, like obedience in their politicians. Since Democrats have become obedient primarily to black voters, who want free rein to engage in mayhem at will, from shoplifting on up to and including murder, Hispanics are balking, just like deplorables. This is especially critical to Hispanics, since so many of them tend to be lower-income and working class and have to live in areas blessed with large percentages of black residents. Giving blacks free passes for mayhem doesn't play well with people who have to deal with it on a daily basis, and a lot of those people are workaday Hispanics.
  58. @Rob
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco


    The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.
     
    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    2021 was worse than 2020 because social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020. In ‘21, cons got all oppositional defiant disordered. They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed. Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize. Here’s where I did my own research — viruses? They ain’t got no nerves! It is imaginable that ivermectin works against COVID by a totally different mechanism than its effect on ion channels, but there is a ton more evidence that the vaccines work. The vast majority of chemicals researchers try out at various stages of testing do not work. Ivermectin for COVID is at the “large-ish random small molecule with functional groups” stage of testing for treating any virus. The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But cons were all about it. Despite that, as you say, there were more COVID deaths in ‘21 than ‘20. Those libs? They done been owned!

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA. COVID is deadlier than the flu, so maybe the trade-off is worthwhile? Personally, I think a short course of a drug that might cause point mutations is unlikely to cause cancer, but I could be wrong, Omicron seems to be less deadly, likely because it does not activate innate and Th2 immunity as strongly as previous variants, giving the genomes that manage to tamp down the cellular antiviral response an intrahost selective advantage. The benefit to you is that the immune reaction does not kill you. My theory explains why (some) respiratory viruses tend to evolve to be less lethal over short periods of time. A Nobel-worthy theory of someone fleshes it out if I can toot my own horn. This only applies if some non-lethal immune mechanism can keep the virus from turning you into goo, of course.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @D. K., @Known Fact, @HA, @Mr. Anon, @vinteuil, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Rob, @The Alarmist, @Alden

    They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    Well, from a public health standpoint that’s kind of the whole idea. Otherwise the vaccine is just a leaky allergy shot.

    The mask hypothesis is absurd.

    • Disagree: Corvinus
    • Replies: @HA
    @The Anti-Gnostic

    "Well, from a public health standpoint [stopping transmission is] kind of the whole idea."

    The hundreds of millions of people who have been getting flu vaccines for many years before COVID came along ("51.8% of people ages six months and older", during the 2019-2020 flu season) must have missed that memo. As with the COVID vaccines, the flu vaccine doesn't magically prevent you from catching the flu, lasts about six months, and needs to be re-administered and reformulated every flu season to keep up with variants.

    But even if you do get a breakthrough infection, the flu vaccine will “reduce severity of illness in people who get vaccinated but still get sick.” Which is why doctors keep recommending it, year after year, with little to no controversy.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic

    , @Rob
    @The Anti-Gnostic

    Herd immunity only works if enough of the herd get vaccinated. We’re at like 60% right now. It may be that the vaccine is so leaky that 100% coverage would still leave the virus infecting more than one person per person who caught it, but probably that would have worked.

    We won’t be able to clear 75% without martial law and the crack-up coming early.

    Replies: @JMcG, @Mike Tre

  59. @Anonymous
    Let’s see… Biden has not yet ordered the at home Covid tests from the manufacturer, so we won’t be getting them for quite a while, which makes Phizer's new Covid pill worthless, since you have to take them within 5 days of catching Covid, the sooner the better, to save your ass. Meanwhile the newest virus is just getting started.

    For an emergency boost in morale, quick-thinking White House Chief of Staff, Ron Klain, hired dancing nurses to come into the East Room to deliver a performance for the First Lady.

    And… many of us… are going to die… aren’t we…

    https://twitter.com/TheFirstonTV/status/1474066126229295105?s=20

    Replies: @Barnard

    How far removed from reality do these people have to be to think the nurses doing TikTok videos in empty hospitals was well received by the public?

  60. I’m told America’s “elites” are stupid and insane.

    Actual results:
    1) installed POTUS of choice.
    2) record pharma profits (again).
    3) woke companies paid for by blackrock.
    ∞) this list could go on forever.

    Damn, that sounds like me. I also don’t work hard and get paid anyway. I guess I’m stupid too.

    Being smart is apparently about getting your stuff pushed in and always being confused about what’s happening. Thank God I’m not smart.

  61. @James Braxton
    Centrist?

    Come on, man.

    Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country

    Steve desperately wants to believe that we can still reform the system so he sees what he wants to see.

    It’s the same with how he continues to believe that some people in Hollywood are secret conservatives, putting dissident messages in their movies. It’s insane, but it allows Steve to avoid the hard choice of supporting or rejecting white identity politics.

    White identity politics is the question of our time, yet Steve assiduously avoids it. Why?

    • Replies: @EuroNat
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    The answer is easy:

    1. Steve is, with all due respect, a bit of an intellectual featherweight, does not matter how hard he tries to publish pretendedly high brow cultural articles. He simply is not articulate enough to lash out at EuroAms' ethnic adversaries without sounding racist or "antisemitic". And honestly I dont even know if there is a way to do it, because the words "racist" and "antisemite" have come to mean "bad for blacks" and "bad for the Jews" respectively.

    2. Steve is like Trump, in the sense that he was never up to the task that some conservative Americans believe he should be up to. If Steve was Jewish instead of "legacy", he probably would do more of this particular ethnic activism you want him to do, most possibly in Jews behalf. Alas he is not, and neither are legacy Americans calling the shots in DC anymore. BS walks and money talks. And guess who's got the shekels and the network to buy the necessary DC and state politicos to get stuff done?

    3. Steve is completely dependant on donations, and he intuits many of his big donors are either Jewish or have a big Crimestop reaction when fingers are pointed at Jews. Therefore he understands that in order to keep this flow of donations as wide and abundant as possible he must make some concessions, including being very careful with Jews. Now how could anyone do some serious pro-EuroAm activism without mentioning the greatests and best organised of EuroAms' adversaries ie wihout touching the JQ?

    4. He is a bit of a coward, and I think he has admitted as much himself if memory serves me, and also he has not the brains to make money with his content without having to regularly panhandle.

    In an alternative timeline, would a Steve with FU money be a more explicitly pro-EuroAm activist? Honestly I am not so sure, but I bet he would be a bit snarkier towards the mostly not "wholesome" Jewish influence to the American political and cultural status quo. Including of course foreign policy.

    Replies: @Athenian Gentleman, @Jack D

    , @silviosilver
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    White identity politics is the question of our time, yet Steve assiduously avoids it. Why?
     
    What do you want from him? If tomorrow Sailer sounds that clarion, you know what will happen? Sweet fuck all. It's not as if millions of hitherto apprehensive whites would suddenly spring into action.

    I'm not going to tell Sailer what to think or do, but I can say that I'm happier having him doing what he is doing - which is bridging the divide between white identitarians and white cuckservatives - than yet further reducing his influence and relevance by going full white right.

    At least this way, some of those cucks, and even the odd libtard here and there, will actually think, hmm, I might not agree with everything I'm hearing, but boy, those pro-white types are correct that there sure is whole lot of anti-white bullshit out there; why should anyone have to live like this?

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Corvinus
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    “White identity politics is the question of our time, yet Steve assiduously avoids it. Why?“

    It’s the question for YOU. Ever thought that most whites view it differently on their behalf and volition, that there hasn’t been this Jewish propaganda conspiracy to hijack “our proper place in society”.

  62. Subject to whim, did anyone else Notice that there’s no mention of how the “spectacular[,] very high” efficacy of the Pfizer product was calculated?

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    @Greta Handel


    Subject to whim, did anyone else Notice that there’s no mention of how the “spectacular[,] very high” efficacy of the Pfizer product was calculated?
     
    Nah, I was too busy noticing the Absolute Risk Reduction was only from 0.84% in the control group down to 0.04% in the vaxx group ... oh, that and the actual all-cause death count in the control group was actually lower than in the vaxx group before they hurriedly cut the study off.

    Replies: @Greta Handel

  63. @Arclight
    The most important lesson of delaying the Pfizer vaccine is that our betters are perfectly content to let the masses suffer if it serves their political goals. Even if the ultimate number of people who may have gotten very ill or died due to this isn't enough to fill a high school gym, it doesn't change the fact that in 2020 the ruling class watched billions of property and economic damage unfold, dozens of direct homicides from rioting, and likely thousands of incremental deaths occur so that they got the political outcome they wanted.

    Obviously there are many people who do not see these events this way, but on the other hand based on the shift in Latino voting patterns and the millions of people of all stripes who were suddenly interested in owning a firearms, many do understand this in one way or another. If the GOP was smart, they would realize that unabashedly focusing on masculine virtues they would grow their voter base. Latinos like strength in their politicians and even chipping the traditional black voter performance for Dems down to 85% rather than 90% (which is entirely possible) would cause enormous problems for the left in statewide elections.

    Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Johann Ricke, @Johann Ricke, @Johann Ricke

    You started out so well but then fell back into believing in the system.

    We’re not voting our way out of this. Sure, whites could score a few rear guard victories as we withdraw, but we’re never going to be free in the current system.

    • Replies: @Arclight
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    So what alternative do you see to the current system and what gets us there?

  64. @Harry Baldwin
    @Sick of Orcs

    Chris Wallace wouldn't let him talk about the laptop. He cut him off. He thought it was more important to ask him, "Will you denounce white supremacy?" a question he had also asked him during the 2016 debate he moderated. It's one of those, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" questions. Apparently, you can't ask it often enough.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @SunBakedSuburb

    Wallace is loyal to his tribe. Once that’s understood, everything makes sense.

    Our tribe should learn the lessons of his tribe.

    • Disagree: Athenian Gentleman
    • Replies: @Athenian Gentleman
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    Wallace is loyal to his tribe.
     
    If Wallace has a "tribe", it would be his socio-economic and political class. And that includes plenty who are not Jews, while excluding plenty who are.

    Viewing the world through a cartoon-level simplistic "Jews vs. Goyim" lens is silly. Silly citizens make for a silly country.

    Replies: @silviosilver, @Hangnail Hans, @silviosilver

    , @Athenian Gentleman
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    Let's analyze Citizen of a Silly Country's (CoaSC) comment in some greater detail for a moment, shall we?

    A review of CoaSC's comment in the context it was made[1] would reveal that he clearly was implicitly asserting that moderator Chris Wallace, in disadvantaging Donald Trump during the Presidential debate, was acting in the interest of "The Jews" [TM] (i.e., the entity that Mr. CoaSC was obviously alluding-to in his reference to what he termed Wallace's "tribe").

    How does such an assertion fit with the relevant facts? Let us review them and consider.

    Throughout his Presidency as well as both of his campaigns for said office, Donald J. Trump had considerable support from many Jews. As President, many of his appointees, administration members, advisors and confidants were Jews. Among Orthodox Jews, Mr. Trump received a majority of the vote, in some communities as high as upwards of 80% or more. (It would perhaps be relevant to point-out here that it is the Orthodox who are the single subset of Jews who most strongly and consistently identify as such.)

    Moreover, Mr. Trump has had extensive ties-to and close, friendly relationships with many Jews from long before there was any talk of him running for the Presidency. We're talking about a man who, by all available evidence that I am aware of, was never less-than fully accepting, even embracing, of his daughter not only choosing to marry a Jew but but even to convert to Judaism (at least ostensibly) herself. Mr. Trump had also served as Grand Marshall of the annual Salute to Israel Parade in his native New York City.[2]

    All that I have cited above should be more than sufficient to demonstrate the absurdity of characterizing either opposition to or support for Donald Trump (or, for that matter, just about any given established or viable political figure or entity in the present-day US) as categorically either for or against the interest of "The Jews". Jews are not monolithic and there is no consensus even on what constitutes "Jewish interests", much less what advances them.

    NOTES and ADDENDA

    [1] A review of the full, chronological context follows.
    Sick of Orcs had written,


    During the debates, Trump brought up the hunter laptop, but had no more to add and was shut down.

    “High-energy” means nothing when you don’t prepare.
     

    Harry Baldwin had replied,

    Chris Wallace wouldn’t let him talk about the laptop. He cut him off. He thought it was more important to ask him, “Will you denounce white supremacy?” a question he had also asked him during the 2016 debate he moderated. It’s one of those, “Have you stopped beating your wife?” questions. Apparently, you can’t ask it often enough.
     
    To the above, Citizen of a Silly Country replied,

    Wallace is loyal to his tribe. Once that’s understood, everything makes sense.

    Our tribe should learn the lessons of his tribe.
     

    [2] Granted, Judaism should not be conflated with Zionism*, nor Jews with Zionists**. Nonetheless, there is obviously extensive overlap between all of the aforementioned entities, and there would appear to be a fairly high positive correlation between favorable views toward any one of them to favorable views toward the others.

    *In fact, many Jews, not least of whom many prominent rabbis, maintain that Zionism is actually antithetical to Judaism.

    **Zionists include many who are not Jews, and exclude many who are (including some of the most devout Orthodox Jews).

  65. @Known Fact
    Does Trump have a goatee in this alternate universe?

    Replies: @anon, @thenon

  66. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Garett Jones tweets about the 2020 MIT Technology Review article:

    https://twitter.com/GarettJones/status/1473080738006417414


    https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/10/19/1010646/campaign-stop-covid-19-vaccine-trump-election-day/

    One doctor’s campaign to stop a covid-19 vaccine being rushed through before Election Day

    How heart doctor Eric Topol used his social-media account to kill off Trump’s October surprise.

    By Antonio Regalado
    October 19, 2020
     


    After being released from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center on October 5, US President Donald Trump praised the doctors who treated him for covid-19 and promised that the public would soon have a vaccine against the deadly coronavirus. “We have the best medicines in the world, and very shortly they are all getting approved, and the vaccines are coming momentarily,” he said in a video statement shared with millions of Twitter followers.

    Across the country, in California, a doctor named Eric Topol was responding in real time on social media. He questioned the president’s health, his doctors’ actions, and even his mental status.

    By that point Topol, a heart expert and researcher with a huge Twitter following of his own, was already weeks into a personal campaign to make sure the administration could not rush a covid-19 vaccine through regulatory authorization before Election Day on November 3.
    [bold emphasis added, as below]
     


    … Topol led online calls for FDA commissioner Steve Hahn to resign after his agency was criticized for cowing to political pressure—and then phoned Hahn a number of times to urge him to resist Trump’s influence. Topol also targeted Pfizer, the only pharmaceutical company likely to seek approval of its vaccine before Election Day, which eventually set up a meeting for him with its vaccine team.
     

    … all signs indicate that Topol urged Hahn to defy the White House effort to deliver a vaccine by Election Day. “I came to respect him,” says Topol. “I was convinced he’d do the right thing.” An FDA spokesperson declined to comment on the phone calls.
     

    A “choke point”

    To stop rush authorization of a vaccine before the election, Topol also began working on another front. The US has poured billions into Operation Warp Speed, which includes funding for a half-dozen trials to study potential covid-19 vaccines. Those trials won’t have efficacy data on the vaccines until late in the year, at the earliest.

    But one company—Pfizer—never joined the federal program and has been running ahead of the companies that did. Its CEO, Bourla, had boldly said for months that its study of a genetic vaccine would have early efficacy results in October. If Trump could anoint any vaccine as the winner, it would have to be Pfizer’s. On the other hand, if no company actually applied for authorization before November 3, then no announcement could be made. Pfizer was the “choke point,” Topol believed.

    On September 25, Topol joined 60 other experts in sending a letter to Pfizer’s CEO, asking that the company not apply for an EUA before late November, when there would be more safety data. Topol says he also peppered some of Pfizer’s board members with his concerns. The company later reached out to him, arranging an early October Zoom meeting with Kathrin Jansen, its vaccine chief, and her team. Pfizer confirmed the meeting, saying its staff regularly meets with “key opinion leaders.”

    “Whether you are Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, or Moderna, you want to win the race. But that is a different motivation than Trump has. He’s in a different contest,” says Topol. “Trump wants to win, but we need all the companies to win, because none can make enough vaccine [on] their own.”

    Any push to rush through a vaccine approval, in other words, would be motivated politically more than medically. Even though the pandemic is killing more than 600 people a day in the US, Topol doesn’t believe very much can be gained by declaring success a few weeks early.
     

    Replies: @nebulafox

    Don’t forget. Never, ever forget these people.

    Bearing that in mind, the whole “Trump could have won but for…” discussion is akin to “Justinian would have revived the empire without bubonic plague”. It’s not wholly inaccurate, but rather than making me see them as victims of circumstance, it leads to the question of why they embraced policy decisions that relied on good fortune: and then doubled down on bad policy when the crisis came. The Donald’s recent explanation of why he kept Fauci-to prevent the Left from complaining-says it all. Nobody forced him to keep Fauci. Anymore than anybody forced him to keep Kushner. Trump was just lazy, TBH.

    One of the reasons DeSantis has a good shot in 2024 is the fact that he’s one of the few Republicans who was willing to buck Trump’s administration when it came to lockdowns and the like while emphasizing that he still wasn’t siding with Con Inc.

    • Replies: @Alrenous
    @nebulafox


    The Donald’s recent explanation of why he kept Fauci-to prevent the Left from complaining-says it all.
     
    My sides. Hey! I was using those sides! I need them to keep my organs in!

    "Well, I was going to drain the swamp, but the swamp would complain if I did, so..."
    , @Dan Hayes
    @nebulafox

    I can’t get over the fact that as governor, DeSantis conducted official Florida business from his Israeli bunker. But in retrospect, maybe that’s what necessary to be a successful Florida pol!

  67. C’mon man! Biden got 81,000,000 votes. Changes in the vaccine status wouldn’t have changed the settings in the Dominion voting machines one bit.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  68. @Rob
    @The Alarmist

    Nucleic acid vaccines are (relatively) untested on people, that is true. None were approved, but some had been in phase II, maybe even III testing. But they have been extensively tested on several species, including monkeys and chimpanzees. The vaccines used a somewhat novel base analog, N1-methyl pseudouridine instead of uracil to reduce innate intracellular immunogenicity. I am willing to bet that this gets metabolized into something pretty nontoxic that you pee out. Not to mention, the total dose of mRNA in three shots is low compared to what you would get in the two oral covid drugs (soon to be?) approved. Both of which are base analogs, but mutagenic ones. If you want to avoid weird chemicals, it would be best to minimize your chances of needing post-infection treatment,

    The lipids in the nanoparticles, which I assume are cationic lipids, though I have not looked, are um, possibly a bit dangerous? They are probably the adjuvant, the chemical that gives the immune system the danger signal that couples “new protein” to “make an immune response” in the body. I watched a short video where Bret Weinstein said his plumber(?) got the vaccine and two minutes later had a heart attack. Well, that was not due to the “toxic” spike protein chunk that the mRNA codes for. No way it could have entered cells, escaped the endosome, been translated, transported to the cell surface, broken off, either from a protease or in apoptotic fragments, then reached his heart in a couple of minutes. Hour, maybe two, minimum. Again, all these things are in tiny doses. The mRNA is translated multiple times, so you get more bang for each injection.

    I got the Pfizer booster (2 Modernas to start) a few weeks ago. Felt fine for about two hours then felt like I had the flu, then shivered and slept for 5-6 hours. Convinced me that a) I had an immune reaction, so it was probably a real vaccine (who trusts CVS?) and b) I sooo do not want covid.

    The dose of “chemicals” in any vaccine is low. At most, you get a flu shot every year. Other vaccines are either live-attenuated and good for a lifetime or on a five-to-ten-year booster schedule. If you are diabetic, you probably get more “chemicals” in a week of insulin shots. Though I hope you don’t have diabetes.

    Please get vaccinated! You, and everyone else, will get covid. You might avoid it if you get vaccinated, if not, you can turn a ~1% chance of death into a ~0.1% chance. With fresh vaccination (or a booster) your chance with omicron is likely even better. You would be in “just the flu, bro” territory, which would be a nice place to be.

    Good luck, whether I convinced you or not. Yeah, I know I didn’t… A man must try.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Alrenous, @D. K., @Mike1

    A man must try.

    “…because I’m being paid.”

    Or if not, hot damn: start getting paid. Don’t pull this crud for free when there’s money on the table.

    The arguments are either fallacious or empirically false. E.g. the actual survival rate for ncov is something like 99.96%, not 99%. As they say: missing a zero there. E.g. does a disease with a 99% survival rate sound like an unprecedented crisis to you, requiring all-hands-on-deck emergency measures? How about one less than 1/10th as deadly?

    Bonus round: lockdowns didn’t work because folk were already self-isolating before the measures, so there was nobody walking around to be kept inside. Sorry, didn’t need the government to ride to the rescue, even if it was a disease which killed more than 1% of infected.

    They want you to take the vaccine, which has not been proven to be safe, instead of ivermectin, a 30-year old drug. We know everything about taking ivermectin safely, but the vaccine is under patent and thus expensive and profitable, you see.

    Also vitamin D. It doesn’t work as an intervention, but as a prophylactic it’s even cheaper than ivermectin and affects every virus – rhinovirus, influenza virus, even chicken pox – not just coronavirus. Oh, and bacteria too. If everyone had enough vitamin D, pharma profits would crash hard, so they absolutely hate it. Note that you can casually “take” 20,000 IU by going outside near noon in summer, and the “safe upper dose” is supposed to be 4000. Do you trust government scientists, or millions of years of evolution?

    The medically advised minimum level of vitamin D is 50 nmol/L, but you start seeing serious immune boosting at around the 100 nmol/L range.
    Study: take 9000 IU. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4210929/
    Study: take 10,000 IU. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/13/10/3596/htm
    (100 nmol/L = 50 ng/mL)

    Is this guy misinformed about off-label medication uses, or is he being deliberately disingenuous? Ignorant, or a liar?

    When ADHD patients take amphetamine stimulants, they calm down. Nicotine is also either a stimulant or a relaxant depending on dose and who’s taking it, among other paradoxical indications. The idea that pathological parasites and other, smaller pathological parasites might both dislike the same chemical is downright tame. They found the anti-ncov indication because someone was already taking it for parasites and then caught ncov, then fixed ncov during their scheduled dose. It wasn’t a theory => conclusion thing, it was an accident.

  69. @nebulafox
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Don't forget. Never, ever forget these people.

    Bearing that in mind, the whole "Trump could have won but for..." discussion is akin to "Justinian would have revived the empire without bubonic plague". It's not wholly inaccurate, but rather than making me see them as victims of circumstance, it leads to the question of why they embraced policy decisions that relied on good fortune: and then doubled down on bad policy when the crisis came. The Donald's recent explanation of why he kept Fauci-to prevent the Left from complaining-says it all. Nobody forced him to keep Fauci. Anymore than anybody forced him to keep Kushner. Trump was just lazy, TBH.

    One of the reasons DeSantis has a good shot in 2024 is the fact that he's one of the few Republicans who was willing to buck Trump's administration when it came to lockdowns and the like while emphasizing that he still wasn't siding with Con Inc.

    Replies: @Alrenous, @Dan Hayes

    The Donald’s recent explanation of why he kept Fauci-to prevent the Left from complaining-says it all.

    My sides. Hey! I was using those sides! I need them to keep my organs in!

    “Well, I was going to drain the swamp, but the swamp would complain if I did, so…”

  70. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Steve muses:

    Consider how much financial, moral, blackmail, and violent pressure there would have been to flip one of 269 Trump Electoral College voters.

    And, if that didn’t work, it’s hard not to imagine that The Establishment wouldn’t have organized a storming of the Capitol to intimidate the House into electing Biden.

    In that timeline, we’d ever since be reading non-stop tributes in the Washington Post to the Heroes of January 6 Who Saved Democracy by charging into the House past the fascist Capitol Police and physically keeping the GOP from hijacking the election ...
     

    LOL. Cute, but Trump would declare a state of emergency and would not step down.

    Replies: @JMcG, @The Alarmist

    He’d have done whatever his daughter and her creep of a husband told him to do.

  71. @nebulafox
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Don't forget. Never, ever forget these people.

    Bearing that in mind, the whole "Trump could have won but for..." discussion is akin to "Justinian would have revived the empire without bubonic plague". It's not wholly inaccurate, but rather than making me see them as victims of circumstance, it leads to the question of why they embraced policy decisions that relied on good fortune: and then doubled down on bad policy when the crisis came. The Donald's recent explanation of why he kept Fauci-to prevent the Left from complaining-says it all. Nobody forced him to keep Fauci. Anymore than anybody forced him to keep Kushner. Trump was just lazy, TBH.

    One of the reasons DeSantis has a good shot in 2024 is the fact that he's one of the few Republicans who was willing to buck Trump's administration when it came to lockdowns and the like while emphasizing that he still wasn't siding with Con Inc.

    Replies: @Alrenous, @Dan Hayes

    I can’t get over the fact that as governor, DeSantis conducted official Florida business from his Israeli bunker. But in retrospect, maybe that’s what necessary to be a successful Florida pol!

  72. @Anon
    @Athenian Gentleman

    Wow, a genuine Michael Moore-style socialist

    Replies: @Alfa158

    It would be refreshing to have more old school leftist/liberals engaging in debate here. However they don’t want to risk ideological contamination by stepping outside their echo chambers, so we only get an occasional one. Instead we have guys like Tiny Duck LARPing as a deranged SJW so he can mock them.
    For that matter how about some Jeb Bush Republicuck civic nationalist types as well?
    We’re largely taking to ourselves here.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    @Alfa158


    It would be refreshing to have more old school leftist/liberals engaging in debate here.
     
    One thing that has been interesting to me has been the flip over who supports the natural health movement. My local hippie health food store that has been there for decades sold organic food for people who didn't want to eat food with pesticides and additives sold by Big Agriculture. They sold nutritional supplements for people who wanted an alternative to the drugs and vaccines offered by Big Pharma.

    Now you see that the left has abandoned any skepticism when it comes to this area. There are a few old school leftists around like Robert Kennedy Jr. here in the U.S. or Jeremy Corbyn in the U.K. who don't support forced vaccinations but most of the left have turned into shills for Big Pharma. Their leaders have been completely corrupted by big corporate political donations from companies who desire profits from having the government force people to use their products. Large parts of the right seem to be slowing turning into what the old school left used to be. The Democrats have turned into the party of Big Pharma, Big Agriculture, Big Tech, the Military-Industrial Complex, the Higher Education Complex and Wall Street. They are the party of the parasitic elites that are destroying this country.

  73. @40 Lashes Less One
    That's the way it goes as far as who gets elected president. After all, what if Nixon had shaved before the 1960 debate?

    Replies: @The Alarmist

    Nixon didn’t need to shave: He needed to man-up and let them put TV makeup on him. Real men don’t do TV without makeup.

  74. @Athenian Gentleman
    @Joe Stalin

    Re: Image for second video ("Top 5 Guns"): Firearms are fun 'n games? Kids' play?


    Put a smile on your face.
     
    No smile here.

    Replies: @Anon, @The Alarmist

    Lighten up, Frances.

    When police are telling people they’re essentially on their own vis à vis the thugs, it’s nice to know there are women and girls who can defend themselves when average menfolk on the streets are waiting for 911 to pick up the phone.

    • Thanks: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Athenian Gentleman
    @The Alarmist

    Where did I express any objection to anyone being trained in the proper use of firearms? My objection was specifically to the way that, in the image representing the video-in-question, firearms were being treated as toys. Isn't that completely contrary to what is a basic principle of proper firearm training and usage: the proper solemnity and respect that such objects, as instruments capable of severe and ultimate harm, demand?

    @Alfa158:

    1.) I agree that too much of an echo-chamber-like environment typically prevails in the comment threads here. The number of people who seem ready to actually consider and engage thoughtfully and substantively with a position or viewpoint that fundamentally and profoundly contradicts or challenges one they are commited-to would appear few. In fairness, this is pretty endemic to the human condition; hardly unique to this forum, or even particularly egregious here.

    2.) Did you not find Anon[136]'s characterization of me rather absurd? I suppose that for his sake, I can only hope that he did not actually conclude from my comment that I was "a genuine Michael Moore-style socialist".

  75. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Steve muses:

    Consider how much financial, moral, blackmail, and violent pressure there would have been to flip one of 269 Trump Electoral College voters.

    And, if that didn’t work, it’s hard not to imagine that The Establishment wouldn’t have organized a storming of the Capitol to intimidate the House into electing Biden.

    In that timeline, we’d ever since be reading non-stop tributes in the Washington Post to the Heroes of January 6 Who Saved Democracy by charging into the House past the fascist Capitol Police and physically keeping the GOP from hijacking the election ...
     

    LOL. Cute, but Trump would declare a state of emergency and would not step down.

    Replies: @JMcG, @The Alarmist

    Cute, but Trump would declare a state of emergency and would not step down.

    Honestly, I cannot tell how that would be any worse than the current trajectory.

  76. @Mike Tre
    "the success of Trump’s vaccine strategy"

    Orwellian.

    Replies: @HammerJack, @Travis, @SunBakedSuburb

    UK has 12 confirmed Omicron deaths out of 45k confirmed cases.
    Fatality rate of 0.027% would get Omicron FDA approval. “Standardized Mortality Rates after dose 1 were 0.42 & 0.37 for Pfizer & Moderna, and were 0.35 & 0.34 after dose 2”
    Omicron is safer than Pfizer or Moderna.

  77. @Sick of Orcs
    @Patrick in SC

    During the debates, Trump brought up the hunter laptop, but had no more to add and was shut down.

    "High-energy" means nothing when you don't prepare.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Patrick in SC

    Correct.

    I recall Trump clumsily asking Biden about a payment to Hunter from the mayor of Moscow while the female moderator started panicking, “Hold on, hold on….” and quickly cutting Trump off.

    Then Biden responded with something about 55 or 51 “former Intelligence officials” saying the laptop and its contents were “Russian disinformation.”

    He actually said that.

    Has anyone in the mainstream media followed up with him on that claim? Even after the laptop and its contents were authenticated.

    Of course not.

    Remember the Atlantic story with the fabrications about Trump calling WWI soldiers “losers”? “Much more” was supposed to be forthcoming from the guy who fabricated the “story.” (Goldberg?) There wasn’t. It was a lie.

    Hence my earlier comment. There wasn’t going to be an “October surprise” for Trump because the media wasn’t going to let another “Comey-Hillary bombshell” such as came out in 2016 happen again.

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
    @Patrick in SC

    October surprises are a media bullshit. Largely fake.

    However vaccine approvals in October would have levelled the playing field for Trump. It’s disgusting to see how the Pharmaceutical companies kneecapped Trump with this delay in announcements and claims. It was a corporate blackmail.

  78. @anon
    @Known Fact

    your agonizer please.

    Replies: @Known Fact

    The way things are going is agony enough!

  79. @Rob
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco


    The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.
     
    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    2021 was worse than 2020 because social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020. In ‘21, cons got all oppositional defiant disordered. They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed. Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize. Here’s where I did my own research — viruses? They ain’t got no nerves! It is imaginable that ivermectin works against COVID by a totally different mechanism than its effect on ion channels, but there is a ton more evidence that the vaccines work. The vast majority of chemicals researchers try out at various stages of testing do not work. Ivermectin for COVID is at the “large-ish random small molecule with functional groups” stage of testing for treating any virus. The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But cons were all about it. Despite that, as you say, there were more COVID deaths in ‘21 than ‘20. Those libs? They done been owned!

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA. COVID is deadlier than the flu, so maybe the trade-off is worthwhile? Personally, I think a short course of a drug that might cause point mutations is unlikely to cause cancer, but I could be wrong, Omicron seems to be less deadly, likely because it does not activate innate and Th2 immunity as strongly as previous variants, giving the genomes that manage to tamp down the cellular antiviral response an intrahost selective advantage. The benefit to you is that the immune reaction does not kill you. My theory explains why (some) respiratory viruses tend to evolve to be less lethal over short periods of time. A Nobel-worthy theory of someone fleshes it out if I can toot my own horn. This only applies if some non-lethal immune mechanism can keep the virus from turning you into goo, of course.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @D. K., @Known Fact, @HA, @Mr. Anon, @vinteuil, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Rob, @The Alarmist, @Alden

    “In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.”

    Henry ‘Hammerin’ Hank’ Aaron and ‘Marvelous’ Marvin Hagler are both unavailable for comment.

    https://visionlaunch.com/20000-deaths-reported-to-vaers-following-covid-vaccines/

  80. @Rob
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco


    The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.
     
    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    2021 was worse than 2020 because social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020. In ‘21, cons got all oppositional defiant disordered. They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed. Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize. Here’s where I did my own research — viruses? They ain’t got no nerves! It is imaginable that ivermectin works against COVID by a totally different mechanism than its effect on ion channels, but there is a ton more evidence that the vaccines work. The vast majority of chemicals researchers try out at various stages of testing do not work. Ivermectin for COVID is at the “large-ish random small molecule with functional groups” stage of testing for treating any virus. The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But cons were all about it. Despite that, as you say, there were more COVID deaths in ‘21 than ‘20. Those libs? They done been owned!

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA. COVID is deadlier than the flu, so maybe the trade-off is worthwhile? Personally, I think a short course of a drug that might cause point mutations is unlikely to cause cancer, but I could be wrong, Omicron seems to be less deadly, likely because it does not activate innate and Th2 immunity as strongly as previous variants, giving the genomes that manage to tamp down the cellular antiviral response an intrahost selective advantage. The benefit to you is that the immune reaction does not kill you. My theory explains why (some) respiratory viruses tend to evolve to be less lethal over short periods of time. A Nobel-worthy theory of someone fleshes it out if I can toot my own horn. This only applies if some non-lethal immune mechanism can keep the virus from turning you into goo, of course.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @D. K., @Known Fact, @HA, @Mr. Anon, @vinteuil, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Rob, @The Alarmist, @Alden

    Subject matter side, we can truly admire a post that gets Agree, Thanks, LOL, Troll and Replies. It’s like the epic game where Lemieux scored a goal all five ways: power play, shorty, even-strength, penalty shot and empty net

    • LOL: Gabe Ruth
  81. @Rob
    @The Alarmist

    Nucleic acid vaccines are (relatively) untested on people, that is true. None were approved, but some had been in phase II, maybe even III testing. But they have been extensively tested on several species, including monkeys and chimpanzees. The vaccines used a somewhat novel base analog, N1-methyl pseudouridine instead of uracil to reduce innate intracellular immunogenicity. I am willing to bet that this gets metabolized into something pretty nontoxic that you pee out. Not to mention, the total dose of mRNA in three shots is low compared to what you would get in the two oral covid drugs (soon to be?) approved. Both of which are base analogs, but mutagenic ones. If you want to avoid weird chemicals, it would be best to minimize your chances of needing post-infection treatment,

    The lipids in the nanoparticles, which I assume are cationic lipids, though I have not looked, are um, possibly a bit dangerous? They are probably the adjuvant, the chemical that gives the immune system the danger signal that couples “new protein” to “make an immune response” in the body. I watched a short video where Bret Weinstein said his plumber(?) got the vaccine and two minutes later had a heart attack. Well, that was not due to the “toxic” spike protein chunk that the mRNA codes for. No way it could have entered cells, escaped the endosome, been translated, transported to the cell surface, broken off, either from a protease or in apoptotic fragments, then reached his heart in a couple of minutes. Hour, maybe two, minimum. Again, all these things are in tiny doses. The mRNA is translated multiple times, so you get more bang for each injection.

    I got the Pfizer booster (2 Modernas to start) a few weeks ago. Felt fine for about two hours then felt like I had the flu, then shivered and slept for 5-6 hours. Convinced me that a) I had an immune reaction, so it was probably a real vaccine (who trusts CVS?) and b) I sooo do not want covid.

    The dose of “chemicals” in any vaccine is low. At most, you get a flu shot every year. Other vaccines are either live-attenuated and good for a lifetime or on a five-to-ten-year booster schedule. If you are diabetic, you probably get more “chemicals” in a week of insulin shots. Though I hope you don’t have diabetes.

    Please get vaccinated! You, and everyone else, will get covid. You might avoid it if you get vaccinated, if not, you can turn a ~1% chance of death into a ~0.1% chance. With fresh vaccination (or a booster) your chance with omicron is likely even better. You would be in “just the flu, bro” territory, which would be a nice place to be.

    Good luck, whether I convinced you or not. Yeah, I know I didn’t… A man must try.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Alrenous, @D. K., @Mike1

    “I got the Pfizer booster (2 Modernas to start) a few weeks ago. Felt fine for about two hours then felt like I had the flu, then shivered and slept for 5-6 hours. Convinced me that a) I had an immune reaction, so it was probably a real vaccine (who trusts CVS?) and b) I sooo do not want covid.”

    Just out of curiosity: How old are you? What is your body-mass index? Which (actual) diseases do you have as comorbidities, if you should happen to contract the deadly Omicron mutation of the virus? How much sunshine vitamin D do you get? Do you smoke cigarettes? Does your home use a humidifier?

    • Replies: @Rob
    @D. K.

    I’m 42. I have high cholesterol, low iron, I had serious back surgery, and am disabled. I’m schizoaffective, which might explain some of what I post. Overweight but not quite obese. Blood sugar fine. I take 1g iron/day, 4 or 5000 iu vitamin D. Not much sun, though i walk 20 minutes outside every day.

    My friend had covid. He said it was like a horrible cold. To quote, it “knocked him on his ass. He lost his sense of smell completely, could not taste anything. Sounded unpleasant.

    Omicron seems to be less deadly,though who knows. Milder virus plus fully vaccinated and antivirals coming, it’s getting close to just the flu territory. Though one of the antivirals reduced hospitalization but not death.

    If two vaccine shots 6 months ago do not give your immune stystem enough head start with omicron it is possible that having had omicron will not protect you from delta. There are ~160 serotypes of rhinovirus...

    I’m ready for the pandemic to be over.

    Replies: @D. K., @Peter Lund

  82. • Thanks: Mr. Anon, Mike Tre
    • LOL: Patrick in SC, TWS
    • Replies: @res
    @Altai

    That Twitter account is great. Thanks!

  83. @Hibernian
    @Mr. Anon

    Bernie became a Democrat to run for POTUS as a Democrat.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    Bernie became a Democrat to run for POTUS as a Democrat.

    He switched back to “Independent” after he dropped out of the race; at least he did in 2016. He maintains the non-party affiliation because he is an avowed socialist. But the fact is that he caucuses with the Democrats and the most left-wing Democrats in Congress are no different than him in outlook.

  84. @Jason Roberts
    @D. K.

    Media would have us believe it was either/both Comey reopening the Clinton email investigation or/and wikileaks publishing the Podesta/DNC emails.

    Replies: @D. K.

    “Media would have us believe it was either/both Comey reopening the Clinton email investigation or/and wikileaks publishing the Podesta/DNC emails.”

    Thanks! I had forgotten that those particular e-mails had been published that late in the campaign. As for the Hillary investigation’s being reopened, all that happened, and was announced, was that new e-mails had been discovered, and that they needed to be read and evaluated– not that new evidence of any actual wrongdoing had been discovered. She was (wrongly) cleared– yet again– three days before the election. Regardless, as the chart at Real Clear Politics shows . . .

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

    . . . there was no “October surprise” that actually appeared to turn the election in Trump’s favor. I was in a distinct minority of non-partisan observers who had predicted a Trump victory, on the eve of the 2016 presidential election.

  85. @Rob
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco


    The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.
     
    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    2021 was worse than 2020 because social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020. In ‘21, cons got all oppositional defiant disordered. They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed. Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize. Here’s where I did my own research — viruses? They ain’t got no nerves! It is imaginable that ivermectin works against COVID by a totally different mechanism than its effect on ion channels, but there is a ton more evidence that the vaccines work. The vast majority of chemicals researchers try out at various stages of testing do not work. Ivermectin for COVID is at the “large-ish random small molecule with functional groups” stage of testing for treating any virus. The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But cons were all about it. Despite that, as you say, there were more COVID deaths in ‘21 than ‘20. Those libs? They done been owned!

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA. COVID is deadlier than the flu, so maybe the trade-off is worthwhile? Personally, I think a short course of a drug that might cause point mutations is unlikely to cause cancer, but I could be wrong, Omicron seems to be less deadly, likely because it does not activate innate and Th2 immunity as strongly as previous variants, giving the genomes that manage to tamp down the cellular antiviral response an intrahost selective advantage. The benefit to you is that the immune reaction does not kill you. My theory explains why (some) respiratory viruses tend to evolve to be less lethal over short periods of time. A Nobel-worthy theory of someone fleshes it out if I can toot my own horn. This only applies if some non-lethal immune mechanism can keep the virus from turning you into goo, of course.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @D. K., @Known Fact, @HA, @Mr. Anon, @vinteuil, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Rob, @The Alarmist, @Alden

    “However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. “

    For those still trying to make us believe that it was the “gene-altering” capabilities of mRNA vaccines — or whatever hogwash it was to hide from the fact that after a year of telling schooling everyone about the importance of not being terrified, they were wetting their panties in terror over a needle (way to go, “lions”) — there’s the recently approved Novavax which has done as well or better than the mRNA vaccines. Will that convince any of the truthers to get jabbed? Unlikely — it’s easier to simply scrape up some other lame excuse from their backsides. The fact that no one believes their earlier ones didn’t stop them.

    In this context, the success of the Novavax vaccine should be A1 news. The recent results confirm that it has roughly the same efficacy as the two authorized mRNA vaccines, with the added benefit of being based on an older, more familiar science. The protein-subunit approach used by Novavax was first implemented for the hepatitis B vaccine, which has been used in the U.S. since 1986. The pertussis vaccine, which is required for almost all children in U.S. public schools, is also made this way.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @HA


    For those still trying to make us believe that it was the “gene-altering” capabilities of mRNA vaccines — or whatever hogwash it was to hide from the fact that after a year of telling schooling everyone about the importance of not being terrified, they were wetting their panties in terror over a needle.
     
    You continue to peddle this lie. You are a contemptible liar.

    Nobody is afraid of needles.

    They are afraid of bio-security-state apologist psychopaths like you.

    Replies: @HA

    , @Mike Tre
    @HA

    The only people mentioning needles are you pro-vaccine commissars attempting to belittle people with your scared of needles bullshit.

    The popularity of tattoos has exploded over the last 20 years for better or for worse, as well as piercing just about any part of the body one can imagine. It's a bit difficult to reconcile that with people having a fear of needles. Most working class guys I know (which is a hell of a lot more than you know) both have tattoos and refuse to get the vaccine.

    You should keep quiet until Sailer thinks up a new false reason for people choosing not to receive the covid vaccine. Once he does, you can start parroting that for him as well.

    Replies: @HA

  86. Another few hours of printing would have fixed any voting deficit.

    • Agree: Gamecock
  87. @Rob
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco


    The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.
     
    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    2021 was worse than 2020 because social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020. In ‘21, cons got all oppositional defiant disordered. They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed. Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize. Here’s where I did my own research — viruses? They ain’t got no nerves! It is imaginable that ivermectin works against COVID by a totally different mechanism than its effect on ion channels, but there is a ton more evidence that the vaccines work. The vast majority of chemicals researchers try out at various stages of testing do not work. Ivermectin for COVID is at the “large-ish random small molecule with functional groups” stage of testing for treating any virus. The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But cons were all about it. Despite that, as you say, there were more COVID deaths in ‘21 than ‘20. Those libs? They done been owned!

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA. COVID is deadlier than the flu, so maybe the trade-off is worthwhile? Personally, I think a short course of a drug that might cause point mutations is unlikely to cause cancer, but I could be wrong, Omicron seems to be less deadly, likely because it does not activate innate and Th2 immunity as strongly as previous variants, giving the genomes that manage to tamp down the cellular antiviral response an intrahost selective advantage. The benefit to you is that the immune reaction does not kill you. My theory explains why (some) respiratory viruses tend to evolve to be less lethal over short periods of time. A Nobel-worthy theory of someone fleshes it out if I can toot my own horn. This only applies if some non-lethal immune mechanism can keep the virus from turning you into goo, of course.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @D. K., @Known Fact, @HA, @Mr. Anon, @vinteuil, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Rob, @The Alarmist, @Alden

    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread.

    Except they didn’t. Vaccinated people can get and spread COVID too. And remember, anybody who dies of COVID with only one shot of Pfizer or Moderna is “unvaccinated”.

    They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed.

    As opposed to liberals who blindly trust “The Science” – i.e. whatever NPR tells them that Anthony Fauci said this morning.

    Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize.

    Remdesivir is a (twice) repurposed drug too. Ivermectin appears to be far more successful in preventing hospitalization and death than Remdesivir.

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    No, they can also be attributed to liberals, who masked up, locked down, got jabbed……………..and still died of COVID.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA.

    Yeah……..what could go wrong with that. Knock yourself out.

  88. @HA
    @Rob

    "However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. "

    For those still trying to make us believe that it was the "gene-altering" capabilities of mRNA vaccines -- or whatever hogwash it was to hide from the fact that after a year of telling schooling everyone about the importance of not being terrified, they were wetting their panties in terror over a needle (way to go, "lions") -- there's the recently approved Novavax which has done as well or better than the mRNA vaccines. Will that convince any of the truthers to get jabbed? Unlikely -- it's easier to simply scrape up some other lame excuse from their backsides. The fact that no one believes their earlier ones didn't stop them.


    In this context, the success of the Novavax vaccine should be A1 news. The recent results confirm that it has roughly the same efficacy as the two authorized mRNA vaccines, with the added benefit of being based on an older, more familiar science. The protein-subunit approach used by Novavax was first implemented for the hepatitis B vaccine, which has been used in the U.S. since 1986. The pertussis vaccine, which is required for almost all children in U.S. public schools, is also made this way.
     

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @Mike Tre

    For those still trying to make us believe that it was the “gene-altering” capabilities of mRNA vaccines — or whatever hogwash it was to hide from the fact that after a year of telling schooling everyone about the importance of not being terrified, they were wetting their panties in terror over a needle.

    You continue to peddle this lie. You are a contemptible liar.

    Nobody is afraid of needles.

    They are afraid of bio-security-state apologist psychopaths like you.

    • Agree: Adam Smith
    • Replies: @HA
    @Mr. Anon

    "You continue to peddle this lie. You are a contemptible liar."

    Always such a delight to have the former self-appointed spokesman of the just-a-flu bros who once spoke on their behalf in first-person-plural, but who now wants us to believe he was never a member of that club chiming in to accuse other people of being contemptible liars. Sad to say, your ample experience on that topic hasn't given you much insight into others.

    And what clearer evidence could I offer of how dismally low the just-a-flu-bros have sunk when even their former self-appointed spokesmen now disavows them? So yeah, thanks for that. Always a delight.

    "They are afraid of bio-security-state..."

    At least we can agree that it is fear causing them to wet their panties. Whatever buzzwords you want to concoct and tack on afterwards doesn't make that fear any less abject, craven, or pathetic -- all of it still festering after a year and a half of telling people not to give in to fear and panic. What a way to sock it to the libs -- you sure showed them what's what.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

  89. @The Anti-Gnostic
    @Rob

    They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    Well, from a public health standpoint that's kind of the whole idea. Otherwise the vaccine is just a leaky allergy shot.

    The mask hypothesis is absurd.

    Replies: @HA, @Rob

    “Well, from a public health standpoint [stopping transmission is] kind of the whole idea.”

    The hundreds of millions of people who have been getting flu vaccines for many years before COVID came along (“51.8% of people ages six months and older”, during the 2019-2020 flu season) must have missed that memo. As with the COVID vaccines, the flu vaccine doesn’t magically prevent you from catching the flu, lasts about six months, and needs to be re-administered and reformulated every flu season to keep up with variants.

    But even if you do get a breakthrough infection, the flu vaccine will “reduce severity of illness in people who get vaccinated but still get sick.” Which is why doctors keep recommending it, year after year, with little to no controversy.

    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
    @HA

    The flu vaccine is from 40 - 60% efficacious; basically a coin toss, every year. That's why we still "vaccinate" for the flu pandemic we've been in since the early 20th century.

    The claim that the annual (bi-annual, tri-annual, nay, quadri-annual!) jabs "reduce severity of illness" is a counter-factual. There is no way to prove that a shot made the illness less severe with a virus that 99% of people recover from in a few days with orange juice and an OTC expectorant.

    Replies: @HA

  90. @HA
    @The Anti-Gnostic

    "Well, from a public health standpoint [stopping transmission is] kind of the whole idea."

    The hundreds of millions of people who have been getting flu vaccines for many years before COVID came along ("51.8% of people ages six months and older", during the 2019-2020 flu season) must have missed that memo. As with the COVID vaccines, the flu vaccine doesn't magically prevent you from catching the flu, lasts about six months, and needs to be re-administered and reformulated every flu season to keep up with variants.

    But even if you do get a breakthrough infection, the flu vaccine will “reduce severity of illness in people who get vaccinated but still get sick.” Which is why doctors keep recommending it, year after year, with little to no controversy.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic

    The flu vaccine is from 40 – 60% efficacious; basically a coin toss, every year. That’s why we still “vaccinate” for the flu pandemic we’ve been in since the early 20th century.

    The claim that the annual (bi-annual, tri-annual, nay, quadri-annual!) jabs “reduce severity of illness” is a counter-factual. There is no way to prove that a shot made the illness less severe with a virus that 99% of people recover from in a few days with orange juice and an OTC expectorant.

    • Replies: @HA
    @The Anti-Gnostic

    "The flu vaccine is from 40 – 60% efficacious..."

    As measured by way of breakthrough cases. The fact that you're less likely to die from flu even if you do get a breakthrough case -- same as with COVID vaccines -- means it's a jab still worth getting, something no one thought to complain about in past years. So clearly, your earlier claim about how preventing transmission is "kind of the whole idea” was just another swirl of ink like the kind a cornered squid squirts. And no, the regular flu caseload does not constitute a pandemic -- you even managed to bungle that one. You're really acing this whole "public health" category.


    "The claim that the annual (bi-annual, tri-annual, nay, quadri-annual!) jabs “reduce severity of illness” is a counter-factual."

    So maybe present some facts instead of lame evidence-free assertions. Like this one: "During the four-week sample size from this fall, unvaccinated people in their 30s were 48 times more likely to die of COVID-19 and people in their 40s were 63 times more likely than those who were vaccinated, according to the state [of Texas]"

    Or this one, based on a broader sample: "Unvaccinated people are about six times more likely to test positive than vaccinated people, nine times more likely to be hospitalized, and 14 times more likely to die from COVID-related complications,..."

    Or this one: Up to nine in 10 Covid patients in ICU in London are unjabbed and BEG for doctors to vaccinate them in hospital, [UK] medic claims..."

    But ignore that, because of some hand-waving assertions about what is and isn't counter-factual? I can't say it makes any sense, because it doesn't, but it goes a long way towards explaining your public health acumen.

  91. Jeez Steve, it’s just a bad case of the flu. OK, one financed by the US and engineered in a lab in Wuhan. What’s the big deal?

    I kid, I kid. Kind of.

  92. @Rob
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco


    The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.
     
    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    2021 was worse than 2020 because social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020. In ‘21, cons got all oppositional defiant disordered. They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed. Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize. Here’s where I did my own research — viruses? They ain’t got no nerves! It is imaginable that ivermectin works against COVID by a totally different mechanism than its effect on ion channels, but there is a ton more evidence that the vaccines work. The vast majority of chemicals researchers try out at various stages of testing do not work. Ivermectin for COVID is at the “large-ish random small molecule with functional groups” stage of testing for treating any virus. The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But cons were all about it. Despite that, as you say, there were more COVID deaths in ‘21 than ‘20. Those libs? They done been owned!

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA. COVID is deadlier than the flu, so maybe the trade-off is worthwhile? Personally, I think a short course of a drug that might cause point mutations is unlikely to cause cancer, but I could be wrong, Omicron seems to be less deadly, likely because it does not activate innate and Th2 immunity as strongly as previous variants, giving the genomes that manage to tamp down the cellular antiviral response an intrahost selective advantage. The benefit to you is that the immune reaction does not kill you. My theory explains why (some) respiratory viruses tend to evolve to be less lethal over short periods of time. A Nobel-worthy theory of someone fleshes it out if I can toot my own horn. This only applies if some non-lethal immune mechanism can keep the virus from turning you into goo, of course.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @D. K., @Known Fact, @HA, @Mr. Anon, @vinteuil, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Rob, @The Alarmist, @Alden

    …social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020…

    Rubbish.

    The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi.

    What utter drivel.

    Even on YouTube there are still easily accessible sources (though they have to tread very carefully) who have intelligent, measured things to say about ivermectin and other promising therapeutics – e.g., John Campbell, Bret Weinstein.

    Since you’re obviously completely unable and/or unwilling honestly to paraphrase the positions of those who take more nuanced positions than your own, may I suggest that you try quoting their best arguments directly? Then try to refute them?

    The sort of straw-manning you engage in here is contemptible.

    • Replies: @HA
    @vinteuil

    "Even on YouTube there are still easily accessible sources (though they have to tread very carefully) who have intelligent, measured things to say about ivermectin and other promising therapeutics."

    How much longer before we get past the "promising" stage? Hasn't it been close to a year or so since ivermectin eclipsed HCQ? And as for measured, yeah, you at least got that one right:


    Ivermectin, touted as a treatment of COVID by the anti-vaccine crowd, has "no effect," according to a major study.
     
    And Brett Weinstein was a biology professor before he turned to podcasting. According to Wikipedia: "In August of 2021, Weinstein said he had misstated that a study had shown a 100% effective ivermectin protocol for the prevention of COVID."

    So yeah, if that's your go-to ivermectin expert, that's "measured" indeed. Meanwhile, I'm waiting on how this "promising" new drug that has been touted for months but can't seem to do more than reduce the number of sick-days somewhat is going to be a gamechanger for COVID. If you want some, go ahead and take it -- I'm not knocking it, especially, given that it's a lot better than electroplating your molars with zinc or whatever else the truthers decide to do once ivermectin goes, like HCQ, down the memory-hole, but at this point, if this were anything close to what its advocates were claiming, we'd have more than vague talk about how "promising" it supposedly is.

    Replies: @vinteuil

  93. @The Anti-Gnostic
    @HA

    The flu vaccine is from 40 - 60% efficacious; basically a coin toss, every year. That's why we still "vaccinate" for the flu pandemic we've been in since the early 20th century.

    The claim that the annual (bi-annual, tri-annual, nay, quadri-annual!) jabs "reduce severity of illness" is a counter-factual. There is no way to prove that a shot made the illness less severe with a virus that 99% of people recover from in a few days with orange juice and an OTC expectorant.

    Replies: @HA

    “The flu vaccine is from 40 – 60% efficacious…”

    As measured by way of breakthrough cases. The fact that you’re less likely to die from flu even if you do get a breakthrough case — same as with COVID vaccines — means it’s a jab still worth getting, something no one thought to complain about in past years. So clearly, your earlier claim about how preventing transmission is “kind of the whole idea” was just another swirl of ink like the kind a cornered squid squirts. And no, the regular flu caseload does not constitute a pandemic — you even managed to bungle that one. You’re really acing this whole “public health” category.

    “The claim that the annual (bi-annual, tri-annual, nay, quadri-annual!) jabs “reduce severity of illness” is a counter-factual.”

    So maybe present some facts instead of lame evidence-free assertions. Like this one: “During the four-week sample size from this fall, unvaccinated people in their 30s were 48 times more likely to die of COVID-19 and people in their 40s were 63 times more likely than those who were vaccinated, according to the state [of Texas]”

    Or this one, based on a broader sample: “Unvaccinated people are about six times more likely to test positive than vaccinated people, nine times more likely to be hospitalized, and 14 times more likely to die from COVID-related complications,…”

    Or this one: Up to nine in 10 Covid patients in ICU in London are unjabbed and BEG for doctors to vaccinate them in hospital, [UK] medic claims…”

    But ignore that, because of some hand-waving assertions about what is and isn’t counter-factual? I can’t say it makes any sense, because it doesn’t, but it goes a long way towards explaining your public health acumen.

  94. @Rob
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco


    The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.
     
    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    2021 was worse than 2020 because social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020. In ‘21, cons got all oppositional defiant disordered. They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed. Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize. Here’s where I did my own research — viruses? They ain’t got no nerves! It is imaginable that ivermectin works against COVID by a totally different mechanism than its effect on ion channels, but there is a ton more evidence that the vaccines work. The vast majority of chemicals researchers try out at various stages of testing do not work. Ivermectin for COVID is at the “large-ish random small molecule with functional groups” stage of testing for treating any virus. The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But cons were all about it. Despite that, as you say, there were more COVID deaths in ‘21 than ‘20. Those libs? They done been owned!

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA. COVID is deadlier than the flu, so maybe the trade-off is worthwhile? Personally, I think a short course of a drug that might cause point mutations is unlikely to cause cancer, but I could be wrong, Omicron seems to be less deadly, likely because it does not activate innate and Th2 immunity as strongly as previous variants, giving the genomes that manage to tamp down the cellular antiviral response an intrahost selective advantage. The benefit to you is that the immune reaction does not kill you. My theory explains why (some) respiratory viruses tend to evolve to be less lethal over short periods of time. A Nobel-worthy theory of someone fleshes it out if I can toot my own horn. This only applies if some non-lethal immune mechanism can keep the virus from turning you into goo, of course.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @D. K., @Known Fact, @HA, @Mr. Anon, @vinteuil, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Rob, @The Alarmist, @Alden

    I didn’t actually read your TLDR, I just wanted to complete the tag tower.

    Merry Christmas, everyone!

  95. @Mike Tre
    "the success of Trump’s vaccine strategy"

    Orwellian.

    Replies: @HammerJack, @Travis, @SunBakedSuburb

    “Orwellian”

    Whilst grazing online this morning I noticed two media outlets — NBC affiliates in the W zone — using the term “Vaccinated Vulnerable.” From “Safe and Effective” to “Vaccinated Vulnerable.” In both stories the scapegoat unvaccinated are to blame for the failure of the vaccines. Public Health bureaucrats could’ve saved the world from bucketloads of misery and grief by identifying the Pfizer and Moderna products as therapeutics. Therapeutics with dangerous and likely long-term side-effects.

  96. @The Anti-Gnostic
    @Rob

    They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    Well, from a public health standpoint that's kind of the whole idea. Otherwise the vaccine is just a leaky allergy shot.

    The mask hypothesis is absurd.

    Replies: @HA, @Rob

    Herd immunity only works if enough of the herd get vaccinated. We’re at like 60% right now. It may be that the vaccine is so leaky that 100% coverage would still leave the virus infecting more than one person per person who caught it, but probably that would have worked.

    We won’t be able to clear 75% without martial law and the crack-up coming early.

    • Replies: @JMcG
    @Rob

    Ireland is over 90% vaccinated. High numbers boosted too. Infection rates are skyrocketing at the moment.

    Replies: @HA

    , @Mike Tre
    @Rob

    "Herd immunity only works if enough of the herd get vaccinated. "

    Wrong. Herd immunity is when a sufficient number of the population becomes immune, regardless of vaccination status. There is a thing known as natural immunity and it certainly applies to muh covid. Children are practically invulnerable to it.

    You're typically a much more sensible person about issues, but upon reading your post about your health concerns it explains your fears.* I probably finally got the corona about 6 weeks ago. Felt like a bad cold and my sense of taste and smell diminished. I didn't miss a day of work. I'm 46. But I'm in above average physical condition even for a 30 year old male.

    *Sailer's health history also explains his fears about the dreaded Beer Flu. But he likes to project his fears onto others with the "afraid of needles" nonsense.

    Replies: @HA

  97. @vinteuil
    @Rob


    ...social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020...
     
    Rubbish.

    The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi.
     
    What utter drivel.

    Even on YouTube there are still easily accessible sources (though they have to tread very carefully) who have intelligent, measured things to say about ivermectin and other promising therapeutics - e.g., John Campbell, Bret Weinstein.

    Since you're obviously completely unable and/or unwilling honestly to paraphrase the positions of those who take more nuanced positions than your own, may I suggest that you try quoting their best arguments directly? Then try to refute them?

    The sort of straw-manning you engage in here is contemptible.

    Replies: @HA

    “Even on YouTube there are still easily accessible sources (though they have to tread very carefully) who have intelligent, measured things to say about ivermectin and other promising therapeutics.”

    How much longer before we get past the “promising” stage? Hasn’t it been close to a year or so since ivermectin eclipsed HCQ? And as for measured, yeah, you at least got that one right:

    Ivermectin, touted as a treatment of COVID by the anti-vaccine crowd, has “no effect,” according to a major study.

    And Brett Weinstein was a biology professor before he turned to podcasting. According to Wikipedia: “In August of 2021, Weinstein said he had misstated that a study had shown a 100% effective ivermectin protocol for the prevention of COVID.”

    So yeah, if that’s your go-to ivermectin expert, that’s “measured” indeed. Meanwhile, I’m waiting on how this “promising” new drug that has been touted for months but can’t seem to do more than reduce the number of sick-days somewhat is going to be a gamechanger for COVID. If you want some, go ahead and take it — I’m not knocking it, especially, given that it’s a lot better than electroplating your molars with zinc or whatever else the truthers decide to do once ivermectin goes, like HCQ, down the memory-hole, but at this point, if this were anything close to what its advocates were claiming, we’d have more than vague talk about how “promising” it supposedly is.

    • Replies: @vinteuil
    @HA


    Brett [sic] Weinstein was a biology professor before he turned to podcasting. According to Wikipedia: “In August of 2021, Weinstein said he had misstated that a study had shown a 100% effective ivermectin protocol for the prevention of COVID.”
     
    One of the many admirable things about Bret Weinstein is that he corrects himself when he gets anything wrong. He is a scientist - not a propagandist.

    Unlike you.
  98. @Harry Baldwin
    @Sick of Orcs

    Chris Wallace wouldn't let him talk about the laptop. He cut him off. He thought it was more important to ask him, "Will you denounce white supremacy?" a question he had also asked him during the 2016 debate he moderated. It's one of those, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" questions. Apparently, you can't ask it often enough.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @SunBakedSuburb

    “Chris Wallace wouldn’t let him talk about the laptop.”

    See what Steve did here? He craftily combined three hot-button! topics that he knows occupies the brains of iSteve fans — COVID vaccine, 1/6, Trump — to generate the kind of traffic that Joan Didion just can’t draw. But Steve’s a half-ass manipulator: he neglected to end the post with a fundraising pitch.

  99. @Joe Stalin
    Speaking of ChiCom parasites:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yHIDOfd1x8

    Put a smile on your face.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOlWmE7xuzc

    Replies: @Athenian Gentleman, @restless94110

    The gun video is terrific!

  100. @D. K.
    @Rob

    "I got the Pfizer booster (2 Modernas to start) a few weeks ago. Felt fine for about two hours then felt like I had the flu, then shivered and slept for 5-6 hours. Convinced me that a) I had an immune reaction, so it was probably a real vaccine (who trusts CVS?) and b) I sooo do not want covid."

    Just out of curiosity: How old are you? What is your body-mass index? Which (actual) diseases do you have as comorbidities, if you should happen to contract the deadly Omicron mutation of the virus? How much sunshine vitamin D do you get? Do you smoke cigarettes? Does your home use a humidifier?

    Replies: @Rob

    I’m 42. I have high cholesterol, low iron, I had serious back surgery, and am disabled. I’m schizoaffective, which might explain some of what I post. Overweight but not quite obese. Blood sugar fine. I take 1g iron/day, 4 or 5000 iu vitamin D. Not much sun, though i walk 20 minutes outside every day.

    My friend had covid. He said it was like a horrible cold. To quote, it “knocked him on his ass. He lost his sense of smell completely, could not taste anything. Sounded unpleasant.

    Omicron seems to be less deadly,though who knows. Milder virus plus fully vaccinated and antivirals coming, it’s getting close to just the flu territory. Though one of the antivirals reduced hospitalization but not death.

    If two vaccine shots 6 months ago do not give your immune stystem enough head start with omicron it is possible that having had omicron will not protect you from delta. There are ~160 serotypes of rhinovirus…

    I’m ready for the pandemic to be over.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Rob

    You and I both need to get our BMIs down under 25. (A few years ago, when I was walking and swimming, most days, mine was down to about 20.8; now it is 26.0!) I was sick in February 2020, which my oral surgeon, the following month, retrospectively diagnosed as Covid-19; but, a test that I took, that May, said that I was negative for having had it. I finally got the J&J shot, at the beginning of this month, to please my hectoring family members. Before that, I could not find it available locally-- and I would not have gotten an mRNA shot, no matter how much hectoring my family and friends had done. The pandemic will be over when it runs its natural course; the so-called vaccines are not going to end it, as falsely advertised.

    Replies: @res

    , @Peter Lund
    @Rob


    I’m schizoaffective, which might explain some of what I post.
     
    Some of what you post is a bit weird, sure, but most of it is well-thought out and is clearly written by an intelligent and educated person. I'd like to take this opportunity to say thanks :)

    Replies: @Rob

  101. @Rob
    @The Alarmist

    Nucleic acid vaccines are (relatively) untested on people, that is true. None were approved, but some had been in phase II, maybe even III testing. But they have been extensively tested on several species, including monkeys and chimpanzees. The vaccines used a somewhat novel base analog, N1-methyl pseudouridine instead of uracil to reduce innate intracellular immunogenicity. I am willing to bet that this gets metabolized into something pretty nontoxic that you pee out. Not to mention, the total dose of mRNA in three shots is low compared to what you would get in the two oral covid drugs (soon to be?) approved. Both of which are base analogs, but mutagenic ones. If you want to avoid weird chemicals, it would be best to minimize your chances of needing post-infection treatment,

    The lipids in the nanoparticles, which I assume are cationic lipids, though I have not looked, are um, possibly a bit dangerous? They are probably the adjuvant, the chemical that gives the immune system the danger signal that couples “new protein” to “make an immune response” in the body. I watched a short video where Bret Weinstein said his plumber(?) got the vaccine and two minutes later had a heart attack. Well, that was not due to the “toxic” spike protein chunk that the mRNA codes for. No way it could have entered cells, escaped the endosome, been translated, transported to the cell surface, broken off, either from a protease or in apoptotic fragments, then reached his heart in a couple of minutes. Hour, maybe two, minimum. Again, all these things are in tiny doses. The mRNA is translated multiple times, so you get more bang for each injection.

    I got the Pfizer booster (2 Modernas to start) a few weeks ago. Felt fine for about two hours then felt like I had the flu, then shivered and slept for 5-6 hours. Convinced me that a) I had an immune reaction, so it was probably a real vaccine (who trusts CVS?) and b) I sooo do not want covid.

    The dose of “chemicals” in any vaccine is low. At most, you get a flu shot every year. Other vaccines are either live-attenuated and good for a lifetime or on a five-to-ten-year booster schedule. If you are diabetic, you probably get more “chemicals” in a week of insulin shots. Though I hope you don’t have diabetes.

    Please get vaccinated! You, and everyone else, will get covid. You might avoid it if you get vaccinated, if not, you can turn a ~1% chance of death into a ~0.1% chance. With fresh vaccination (or a booster) your chance with omicron is likely even better. You would be in “just the flu, bro” territory, which would be a nice place to be.

    Good luck, whether I convinced you or not. Yeah, I know I didn’t… A man must try.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Alrenous, @D. K., @Mike1

    How truly dumb progressives are has never be on display until now. What you are saying is medical gibberish. I sincerely hope you don’t work in the medical field.

    “You might avoid it if you get vaccinated, if not, you can turn a ~1% chance of death into a ~0.1% chance. With fresh vaccination (or a booster) your chance with omicron is likely even better. ” Data is showing the complete opposite. The vaccinated are getting sick and dying at higher rates everywhere. Advocating a vaccine for Omicron is a “we should talk about taking Grandpa’s keys” moment.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Mike1

    "The vaccinated are getting sick and dying at higher rates everywhere."

    Sorry, that's not a thing. If it were, you'd actually provide some evidence. Maybe if you forget about the notion of "per capita", or else try to lump death rates of 30 year olds in with death rates of 60-year-olds as Berenson did, you'd possibly convince those in your echo chamber, but elsewhere, it's the unvaxxed who -- per capita and in comparing consistent age ranges -- are doing the overwhelming share of the dying.

    , @Rob
    @Mike1

    Vaccinated are dying from omicron at higher rates everywhere? I wanna see a citation for that.

    Vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED) or vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD) at work? Know the mechanisms?

    Fact is, omicron has boomed in places where people are young and thin. Who knows what it’s going to do to Americans. A “milder” covid that overflows the hospitals because it’s so contagious would still be bad.

    Where do y’all get the idea that covid is worse for vaccinated people? Vox day seems to think the vaccines make you more vulnerable to covid snd sterilize you. Haven’t looked recently, has he added any new effects? Do you know how vaccines work? If omicron is worse for vaccinated people, then it is likely worse for people who caught another strain of covid. Is it?

    As far as a vaccine for a “mild” disease goes, if there were a polyvalent rhinovirus vaccine, I would take it in a second.

    I understand that the same media that celebrates white dispossession tells you that getting vaccinated is a good idea. But it really is

    Not to mention, omicron’s phenotype is not set in stone. Death is a side effect from the virus “point of view” dead host or recovered host is the same.

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Mark G., @Mike1

  102. @HA
    @Rob

    "However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. "

    For those still trying to make us believe that it was the "gene-altering" capabilities of mRNA vaccines -- or whatever hogwash it was to hide from the fact that after a year of telling schooling everyone about the importance of not being terrified, they were wetting their panties in terror over a needle (way to go, "lions") -- there's the recently approved Novavax which has done as well or better than the mRNA vaccines. Will that convince any of the truthers to get jabbed? Unlikely -- it's easier to simply scrape up some other lame excuse from their backsides. The fact that no one believes their earlier ones didn't stop them.


    In this context, the success of the Novavax vaccine should be A1 news. The recent results confirm that it has roughly the same efficacy as the two authorized mRNA vaccines, with the added benefit of being based on an older, more familiar science. The protein-subunit approach used by Novavax was first implemented for the hepatitis B vaccine, which has been used in the U.S. since 1986. The pertussis vaccine, which is required for almost all children in U.S. public schools, is also made this way.
     

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @Mike Tre

    The only people mentioning needles are you pro-vaccine commissars attempting to belittle people with your scared of needles bullshit.

    The popularity of tattoos has exploded over the last 20 years for better or for worse, as well as piercing just about any part of the body one can imagine. It’s a bit difficult to reconcile that with people having a fear of needles. Most working class guys I know (which is a hell of a lot more than you know) both have tattoos and refuse to get the vaccine.

    You should keep quiet until Sailer thinks up a new false reason for people choosing not to receive the covid vaccine. Once he does, you can start parroting that for him as well.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Mike Tre

    "It’s a bit difficult to reconcile that with people having a fear of needles."

    I didn't accuse all people, or people in general, of having a fear of needles. I accused panty-wetting little crybabies like you, convinced as you are that being told to wear a mask to Walmart is the "greatest seizure of civil liberties ever visited upon the American populace" -- even more so than the IRS, and forced conscription.

    Are we clear on that? You are the tantrum-throwing little sissy-pants I accused of being afraid of needles, and with good reason. Maybe it's just the drama of it, and the need for attention, that drives both that and whatever tattoos you've collected over the years, but trying to convince me of your overall mental soundness by appealing to your tats is not a particularly impressive comeback. Same goes for your muscle car, combover, pit bull, sock-in-the-underwear or whatever else you try to paper over your inadequacy issues.

    If it triggers you so much to have your crybaby hysteria exposed to the world, maybe do something to fix that instead of lashing out at those who point it out to you.

    Replies: @Anon

  103. @Rob
    @The Anti-Gnostic

    Herd immunity only works if enough of the herd get vaccinated. We’re at like 60% right now. It may be that the vaccine is so leaky that 100% coverage would still leave the virus infecting more than one person per person who caught it, but probably that would have worked.

    We won’t be able to clear 75% without martial law and the crack-up coming early.

    Replies: @JMcG, @Mike Tre

    Ireland is over 90% vaccinated. High numbers boosted too. Infection rates are skyrocketing at the moment.

    • Replies: @HA
    @JMcG

    "Ireland is over 90% vaccinated. High numbers boosted too. Infection rates are skyrocketing at the moment."

    And yet, despite those "skyrocketing" infections, the death toll in Ireland is tiny in comparison with earlier ones. In fact, they're not even bothering to give a daily update, and now just give a weekly roundup.

    Thanks for demonstrating -- yet again -- how well the vaccines do at keeping the death toll low, and making the hospitalizations a small fraction of what they would be otherwise.

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/ireland/#graph-deaths-daily

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/ireland/#graph-cases-daily

    Replies: @Wokechoke

  104. @Rob
    @The Anti-Gnostic

    Herd immunity only works if enough of the herd get vaccinated. We’re at like 60% right now. It may be that the vaccine is so leaky that 100% coverage would still leave the virus infecting more than one person per person who caught it, but probably that would have worked.

    We won’t be able to clear 75% without martial law and the crack-up coming early.

    Replies: @JMcG, @Mike Tre

    “Herd immunity only works if enough of the herd get vaccinated. ”

    Wrong. Herd immunity is when a sufficient number of the population becomes immune, regardless of vaccination status. There is a thing known as natural immunity and it certainly applies to muh covid. Children are practically invulnerable to it.

    You’re typically a much more sensible person about issues, but upon reading your post about your health concerns it explains your fears.* I probably finally got the corona about 6 weeks ago. Felt like a bad cold and my sense of taste and smell diminished. I didn’t miss a day of work. I’m 46. But I’m in above average physical condition even for a 30 year old male.

    *Sailer’s health history also explains his fears about the dreaded Beer Flu. But he likes to project his fears onto others with the “afraid of needles” nonsense.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Mike Tre

    "There is a thing known as natural immunity and it certainly applies to muh covid. Children are practically invulnerable to it."

    Children are not immune. They don't die from COVID, that's true, but they catch it and pass it on. Maybe you should first learn what immunity actually means before lecturing others about it.

    Replies: @Mike Tre

  105. @Rob
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco


    The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.
     
    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    2021 was worse than 2020 because social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020. In ‘21, cons got all oppositional defiant disordered. They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed. Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize. Here’s where I did my own research — viruses? They ain’t got no nerves! It is imaginable that ivermectin works against COVID by a totally different mechanism than its effect on ion channels, but there is a ton more evidence that the vaccines work. The vast majority of chemicals researchers try out at various stages of testing do not work. Ivermectin for COVID is at the “large-ish random small molecule with functional groups” stage of testing for treating any virus. The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But cons were all about it. Despite that, as you say, there were more COVID deaths in ‘21 than ‘20. Those libs? They done been owned!

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA. COVID is deadlier than the flu, so maybe the trade-off is worthwhile? Personally, I think a short course of a drug that might cause point mutations is unlikely to cause cancer, but I could be wrong, Omicron seems to be less deadly, likely because it does not activate innate and Th2 immunity as strongly as previous variants, giving the genomes that manage to tamp down the cellular antiviral response an intrahost selective advantage. The benefit to you is that the immune reaction does not kill you. My theory explains why (some) respiratory viruses tend to evolve to be less lethal over short periods of time. A Nobel-worthy theory of someone fleshes it out if I can toot my own horn. This only applies if some non-lethal immune mechanism can keep the virus from turning you into goo, of course.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @D. K., @Known Fact, @HA, @Mr. Anon, @vinteuil, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Rob, @The Alarmist, @Alden

    • Agree:
    • Disagree:
    • Thanks:
    • LOL:
    • Troll:
    • Replies:

    Yes! I collected them all in a single comment! I advance another level in UnzQuest.

    Oh, you didn’t know we are playing UnzQuest? Well, you are very far behind.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Rob

    Dear Rob:

    Thanks for your comments in 2021.

    Steve

    Replies: @Rob

  106. @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco
    If the Vaccine trials had lasted 9 months the vaccines never would have been approved. Sadly they eliminated the control group after 4 months so we will never know the true failure of the vaccines. Thus far we have more COVID deaths in 2021 than last year when nobody was vaccinated and treatments were less effective. Currently they admit the vaccines offer zero protection against Omicron, and they hope the boosters will offer some protection against the new variants. The vaccines have failed to reduce deaths or hospitalizations. We were deceived by Big Pharma again. The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.

    Replies: @Rob, @Dutch Boy, @Triteleia Laxa

    Too true. Typically, a new vaccine is pulled from the market if it is associated with >50 deaths via VAERS (e.g., the Swine Flu vaccine in 1976). The Covid vaccines are at 19,000+ and counting.

  107. @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco
    If the Vaccine trials had lasted 9 months the vaccines never would have been approved. Sadly they eliminated the control group after 4 months so we will never know the true failure of the vaccines. Thus far we have more COVID deaths in 2021 than last year when nobody was vaccinated and treatments were less effective. Currently they admit the vaccines offer zero protection against Omicron, and they hope the boosters will offer some protection against the new variants. The vaccines have failed to reduce deaths or hospitalizations. We were deceived by Big Pharma again. The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.

    Replies: @Rob, @Dutch Boy, @Triteleia Laxa

    You’re an idiot. Look at the divergence between Covid deaths rates now, covid case rates and how they used to be pre-vaccine. The vaccine makes it 10× less likely that you will die. The vaccine also has ridiculously infrequent serious side effects. It has saved countless lives and allowed us freedom again. Truly, anti-vaxxers going into 2022, are some of the world’s stupidest people.

    It is OK to admit that you were wrong. You are not exactly an expert. You should expect to be wrong a lot.

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
    @Triteleia Laxa

    Vulnerable 75+ diabetics obese etc can only be killed once.

  108. @Mr. Anon
    @HA


    For those still trying to make us believe that it was the “gene-altering” capabilities of mRNA vaccines — or whatever hogwash it was to hide from the fact that after a year of telling schooling everyone about the importance of not being terrified, they were wetting their panties in terror over a needle.
     
    You continue to peddle this lie. You are a contemptible liar.

    Nobody is afraid of needles.

    They are afraid of bio-security-state apologist psychopaths like you.

    Replies: @HA

    “You continue to peddle this lie. You are a contemptible liar.”

    Always such a delight to have the former self-appointed spokesman of the just-a-flu bros who once spoke on their behalf in first-person-plural, but who now wants us to believe he was never a member of that club chiming in to accuse other people of being contemptible liars. Sad to say, your ample experience on that topic hasn’t given you much insight into others.

    And what clearer evidence could I offer of how dismally low the just-a-flu-bros have sunk when even their former self-appointed spokesmen now disavows them? So yeah, thanks for that. Always a delight.

    “They are afraid of bio-security-state…”

    At least we can agree that it is fear causing them to wet their panties. Whatever buzzwords you want to concoct and tack on afterwards doesn’t make that fear any less abject, craven, or pathetic — all of it still festering after a year and a half of telling people not to give in to fear and panic. What a way to sock it to the libs — you sure showed them what’s what.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @HA


    Always such a delight to have the former self-appointed spokesman of the just-a-flu bros who once spoke on their behalf in first-person-plural, but who now wants us to believe he was never a member of that club chiming in to accuse other people of being contemptible liars. Sad to say, your ample experience on that topic hasn’t given you much insight into others.
     
    I've never said it was "'just a flu". And again, you prove yourself to be a contemptible liar.

    It is your like who have proven themselves to be vaporing hysterics. But also more than that - craven apologists for repression. Seriously, in the spirit of the season, allow me to say with all sincerity: F**k you.

    Replies: @HA

  109. @Mike Tre
    @HA

    The only people mentioning needles are you pro-vaccine commissars attempting to belittle people with your scared of needles bullshit.

    The popularity of tattoos has exploded over the last 20 years for better or for worse, as well as piercing just about any part of the body one can imagine. It's a bit difficult to reconcile that with people having a fear of needles. Most working class guys I know (which is a hell of a lot more than you know) both have tattoos and refuse to get the vaccine.

    You should keep quiet until Sailer thinks up a new false reason for people choosing not to receive the covid vaccine. Once he does, you can start parroting that for him as well.

    Replies: @HA

    “It’s a bit difficult to reconcile that with people having a fear of needles.”

    I didn’t accuse all people, or people in general, of having a fear of needles. I accused panty-wetting little crybabies like you, convinced as you are that being told to wear a mask to Walmart is the “greatest seizure of civil liberties ever visited upon the American populace” — even more so than the IRS, and forced conscription.

    Are we clear on that? You are the tantrum-throwing little sissy-pants I accused of being afraid of needles, and with good reason. Maybe it’s just the drama of it, and the need for attention, that drives both that and whatever tattoos you’ve collected over the years, but trying to convince me of your overall mental soundness by appealing to your tats is not a particularly impressive comeback. Same goes for your muscle car, combover, pit bull, sock-in-the-underwear or whatever else you try to paper over your inadequacy issues.

    If it triggers you so much to have your crybaby hysteria exposed to the world, maybe do something to fix that instead of lashing out at those who point it out to you.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @HA

    You can hear the lisp as he typed this.

    Replies: @HA

  110. @HA
    @Mr. Anon

    "You continue to peddle this lie. You are a contemptible liar."

    Always such a delight to have the former self-appointed spokesman of the just-a-flu bros who once spoke on their behalf in first-person-plural, but who now wants us to believe he was never a member of that club chiming in to accuse other people of being contemptible liars. Sad to say, your ample experience on that topic hasn't given you much insight into others.

    And what clearer evidence could I offer of how dismally low the just-a-flu-bros have sunk when even their former self-appointed spokesmen now disavows them? So yeah, thanks for that. Always a delight.

    "They are afraid of bio-security-state..."

    At least we can agree that it is fear causing them to wet their panties. Whatever buzzwords you want to concoct and tack on afterwards doesn't make that fear any less abject, craven, or pathetic -- all of it still festering after a year and a half of telling people not to give in to fear and panic. What a way to sock it to the libs -- you sure showed them what's what.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    Always such a delight to have the former self-appointed spokesman of the just-a-flu bros who once spoke on their behalf in first-person-plural, but who now wants us to believe he was never a member of that club chiming in to accuse other people of being contemptible liars. Sad to say, your ample experience on that topic hasn’t given you much insight into others.

    I’ve never said it was “‘just a flu”. And again, you prove yourself to be a contemptible liar.

    It is your like who have proven themselves to be vaporing hysterics. But also more than that – craven apologists for repression. Seriously, in the spirit of the season, allow me to say with all sincerity: F**k you.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Mr. Anon

    "I’ve never said it was 'just a flu'”.

    You replied as "we" to a comment specifically addressed to "all the 'just the flu, bro' guys". I'll let others draw their own obvious conclusions, given that doing so is evidently beyond your mental/moral capacity.

    In the future, if you're going to lie about things like that, don't leave a paper trail. And to repeat, if people have come to regard the prattle of a beagle-torturing bureaucrat to be more believable than whatever it is you're peddling, that says far more about you than it does about the beagle torturer.

  111. @Mr. Anon
    @Rob


    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread.
     
    Except they didn't. Vaccinated people can get and spread COVID too. And remember, anybody who dies of COVID with only one shot of Pfizer or Moderna is "unvaccinated".

    They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed.
     
    As opposed to liberals who blindly trust "The Science" - i.e. whatever NPR tells them that Anthony Fauci said this morning.

    Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize.
     
    Remdesivir is a (twice) repurposed drug too. Ivermectin appears to be far more successful in preventing hospitalization and death than Remdesivir.

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.
     
    No, they can also be attributed to liberals, who masked up, locked down, got jabbed.................and still died of COVID.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA.
     
    Yeah........what could go wrong with that. Knock yourself out.

    Replies: @HA

    “Vaccinated people can get and spread COVID too.”

    They can, they just do so in significantly fewer numbers.

    “Unvaccinated people are about six times more likely to test positive than vaccinated people, nine times more likely to be hospitalized, and 14 times more likely to die from COVID-related complications,…”

    I think the antibody differential in the second shot vs the first is something like a factor of five, according to one Israeli study, but that was a while ago. Even so, that need for the second dose might explain why, if you simply chickened out in sheer terror after your first one, you’re regarded as not really much different than the unvaxxed. I’m not saying that’s what happened — I’m more inclined to consider you too cowardly to take even one jab — but I wouldn’t rule it out.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @HA


    “Unvaccinated people are about six times more likely to test positive than vaccinated people, nine times more likely to be hospitalized, and 14 times more likely to die from COVID-related complications,…”
     
    Without addressing any confounding factors. Like - for example - with the role out of mandates, unvaccinated people are often required to get tested (with a test prone to false positives) when vaccinated people are not.

    Anyway, it's not as if the CDC or any other government agency has given me reason to believe them over the last couple of years. You do? Fine - believe what you like. It's a free country. Well, actually, not so much anymore - and largely because of twits like you.

    Replies: @HA

  112. @HA

    “Unvaccinated people are about six times more likely to test positive than vaccinated people, nine times more likely to be hospitalized, and 14 times more likely to die from COVID-related complications,…”

    Without addressing any confounding factors. Like – for example – with the role out of mandates, unvaccinated people are often required to get tested (with a test prone to false positives) when vaccinated people are not.

    Anyway, it’s not as if the CDC or any other government agency has given me reason to believe them over the last couple of years. You do? Fine – believe what you like. It’s a free country. Well, actually, not so much anymore – and largely because of twits like you.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Mr. Anon

    "Like – for example – with the role out of mandates, unvaccinated people are often required to get tested (with a test prone to false positives) when vaccinated people are not."

    You think that's enough to explain a 9-14 fold hospitalization/death-rate differential? You think the number of those who are hospitalized with COVID and later die there depends on how many tests they were forced to get at their workplace? Did all those nose swabs rob them of their precious bodily fluids to the extent they dehydrated away into nothing?

    Good luck making that theory work, though I have no doubt those in your echo chamber will gobble it up.

    I don't believe the beagle-torturer all that much. But if people like you are the alternative, then it's no wonder that that bio-state...this-or-that... came to be seen as the saner alternative, or whatever that specific cluster of nonsensical buzzwords was that you strung together to try and rationalize your cowardice and clueless inability to put together a coherent way forward. Moaning about your wet panties and stringing together nonsense buzzwords -- not to mention desperately grasping at straws -- is not really the sensible alternative you seem to think it is.

    Replies: @vinteuil

  113. @Rob
    @D. K.

    I’m 42. I have high cholesterol, low iron, I had serious back surgery, and am disabled. I’m schizoaffective, which might explain some of what I post. Overweight but not quite obese. Blood sugar fine. I take 1g iron/day, 4 or 5000 iu vitamin D. Not much sun, though i walk 20 minutes outside every day.

    My friend had covid. He said it was like a horrible cold. To quote, it “knocked him on his ass. He lost his sense of smell completely, could not taste anything. Sounded unpleasant.

    Omicron seems to be less deadly,though who knows. Milder virus plus fully vaccinated and antivirals coming, it’s getting close to just the flu territory. Though one of the antivirals reduced hospitalization but not death.

    If two vaccine shots 6 months ago do not give your immune stystem enough head start with omicron it is possible that having had omicron will not protect you from delta. There are ~160 serotypes of rhinovirus...

    I’m ready for the pandemic to be over.

    Replies: @D. K., @Peter Lund

    You and I both need to get our BMIs down under 25. (A few years ago, when I was walking and swimming, most days, mine was down to about 20.8; now it is 26.0!) I was sick in February 2020, which my oral surgeon, the following month, retrospectively diagnosed as Covid-19; but, a test that I took, that May, said that I was negative for having had it. I finally got the J&J shot, at the beginning of this month, to please my hectoring family members. Before that, I could not find it available locally– and I would not have gotten an mRNA shot, no matter how much hectoring my family and friends had done. The pandemic will be over when it runs its natural course; the so-called vaccines are not going to end it, as falsely advertised.

    • Replies: @res
    @D. K.


    You and I both need to get our BMIs down under 25. (A few years ago, when I was walking and swimming, most days, mine was down to about 20.8; now it is 26.0!)
     
    Under/just around 25 seems like a good goal. Be careful about the idea that lower is better for BMI. Mortality data typically indicates 25 or a bit over is optimal, but there is some debate about whether those results are driven by sickness (especially cancer) in the low BMI people.

    For one example, see the paper and figure at the last two links in this comment.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/predictions-from-1900/#comment-5082454

    Especially note the variation by height. The taller you are the lower the optimal BMI it seems (artifact of the calculation).

    And everyone remember that muscle/fat balance matters as well.

    The pandemic will be over when it runs its natural course; the so-called vaccines are not going to end it, as falsely advertised.
     
    Looks like that is the case. My major error during the Covidiocy was thinking the vaccines would end both the fear and the pandemic.

    If Omicron really is as mild as it appears it looks like that spreading widely is as good an end as we could see from here.

    Replies: @D. K.

  114. @Alfa158
    @Anon

    It would be refreshing to have more old school leftist/liberals engaging in debate here. However they don’t want to risk ideological contamination by stepping outside their echo chambers, so we only get an occasional one. Instead we have guys like Tiny Duck LARPing as a deranged SJW so he can mock them.
    For that matter how about some Jeb Bush Republicuck civic nationalist types as well?
    We’re largely taking to ourselves here.

    Replies: @Mark G.

    It would be refreshing to have more old school leftist/liberals engaging in debate here.

    One thing that has been interesting to me has been the flip over who supports the natural health movement. My local hippie health food store that has been there for decades sold organic food for people who didn’t want to eat food with pesticides and additives sold by Big Agriculture. They sold nutritional supplements for people who wanted an alternative to the drugs and vaccines offered by Big Pharma.

    Now you see that the left has abandoned any skepticism when it comes to this area. There are a few old school leftists around like Robert Kennedy Jr. here in the U.S. or Jeremy Corbyn in the U.K. who don’t support forced vaccinations but most of the left have turned into shills for Big Pharma. Their leaders have been completely corrupted by big corporate political donations from companies who desire profits from having the government force people to use their products. Large parts of the right seem to be slowing turning into what the old school left used to be. The Democrats have turned into the party of Big Pharma, Big Agriculture, Big Tech, the Military-Industrial Complex, the Higher Education Complex and Wall Street. They are the party of the parasitic elites that are destroying this country.

  115. @Mike1
    @Rob

    How truly dumb progressives are has never be on display until now. What you are saying is medical gibberish. I sincerely hope you don't work in the medical field.

    "You might avoid it if you get vaccinated, if not, you can turn a ~1% chance of death into a ~0.1% chance. With fresh vaccination (or a booster) your chance with omicron is likely even better. " Data is showing the complete opposite. The vaccinated are getting sick and dying at higher rates everywhere. Advocating a vaccine for Omicron is a "we should talk about taking Grandpa's keys" moment.

    Replies: @HA, @Rob

    “The vaccinated are getting sick and dying at higher rates everywhere.”

    Sorry, that’s not a thing. If it were, you’d actually provide some evidence. Maybe if you forget about the notion of “per capita”, or else try to lump death rates of 30 year olds in with death rates of 60-year-olds as Berenson did, you’d possibly convince those in your echo chamber, but elsewhere, it’s the unvaxxed who — per capita and in comparing consistent age ranges — are doing the overwhelming share of the dying.

  116. @Patrick in SC
    @Sick of Orcs

    Correct.

    I recall Trump clumsily asking Biden about a payment to Hunter from the mayor of Moscow while the female moderator started panicking, "Hold on, hold on...." and quickly cutting Trump off.

    Then Biden responded with something about 55 or 51 "former Intelligence officials" saying the laptop and its contents were "Russian disinformation."

    He actually said that.

    Has anyone in the mainstream media followed up with him on that claim? Even after the laptop and its contents were authenticated.

    Of course not.

    Remember the Atlantic story with the fabrications about Trump calling WWI soldiers "losers"? "Much more" was supposed to be forthcoming from the guy who fabricated the "story." (Goldberg?) There wasn't. It was a lie.

    Hence my earlier comment. There wasn't going to be an "October surprise" for Trump because the media wasn't going to let another "Comey-Hillary bombshell" such as came out in 2016 happen again.

    Replies: @Wokechoke

    October surprises are a media bullshit. Largely fake.

    However vaccine approvals in October would have levelled the playing field for Trump. It’s disgusting to see how the Pharmaceutical companies kneecapped Trump with this delay in announcements and claims. It was a corporate blackmail.

  117. @Mr. Anon
    @HA


    “Unvaccinated people are about six times more likely to test positive than vaccinated people, nine times more likely to be hospitalized, and 14 times more likely to die from COVID-related complications,…”
     
    Without addressing any confounding factors. Like - for example - with the role out of mandates, unvaccinated people are often required to get tested (with a test prone to false positives) when vaccinated people are not.

    Anyway, it's not as if the CDC or any other government agency has given me reason to believe them over the last couple of years. You do? Fine - believe what you like. It's a free country. Well, actually, not so much anymore - and largely because of twits like you.

    Replies: @HA

    “Like – for example – with the role out of mandates, unvaccinated people are often required to get tested (with a test prone to false positives) when vaccinated people are not.”

    You think that’s enough to explain a 9-14 fold hospitalization/death-rate differential? You think the number of those who are hospitalized with COVID and later die there depends on how many tests they were forced to get at their workplace? Did all those nose swabs rob them of their precious bodily fluids to the extent they dehydrated away into nothing?

    Good luck making that theory work, though I have no doubt those in your echo chamber will gobble it up.

    I don’t believe the beagle-torturer all that much. But if people like you are the alternative, then it’s no wonder that that bio-state…this-or-that… came to be seen as the saner alternative, or whatever that specific cluster of nonsensical buzzwords was that you strung together to try and rationalize your cowardice and clueless inability to put together a coherent way forward. Moaning about your wet panties and stringing together nonsense buzzwords — not to mention desperately grasping at straws — is not really the sensible alternative you seem to think it is.

    • Replies: @vinteuil
    @HA


    You think that’s enough to explain a 9-14 fold hospitalization/death-rate differential?
     
    Well, as they say, if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.
  118. @HA
    @vinteuil

    "Even on YouTube there are still easily accessible sources (though they have to tread very carefully) who have intelligent, measured things to say about ivermectin and other promising therapeutics."

    How much longer before we get past the "promising" stage? Hasn't it been close to a year or so since ivermectin eclipsed HCQ? And as for measured, yeah, you at least got that one right:


    Ivermectin, touted as a treatment of COVID by the anti-vaccine crowd, has "no effect," according to a major study.
     
    And Brett Weinstein was a biology professor before he turned to podcasting. According to Wikipedia: "In August of 2021, Weinstein said he had misstated that a study had shown a 100% effective ivermectin protocol for the prevention of COVID."

    So yeah, if that's your go-to ivermectin expert, that's "measured" indeed. Meanwhile, I'm waiting on how this "promising" new drug that has been touted for months but can't seem to do more than reduce the number of sick-days somewhat is going to be a gamechanger for COVID. If you want some, go ahead and take it -- I'm not knocking it, especially, given that it's a lot better than electroplating your molars with zinc or whatever else the truthers decide to do once ivermectin goes, like HCQ, down the memory-hole, but at this point, if this were anything close to what its advocates were claiming, we'd have more than vague talk about how "promising" it supposedly is.

    Replies: @vinteuil

    Brett [sic] Weinstein was a biology professor before he turned to podcasting. According to Wikipedia: “In August of 2021, Weinstein said he had misstated that a study had shown a 100% effective ivermectin protocol for the prevention of COVID.”

    One of the many admirable things about Bret Weinstein is that he corrects himself when he gets anything wrong. He is a scientist – not a propagandist.

    Unlike you.

    • Agree: Mr. Anon
  119. @Mike Tre
    @Rob

    "Herd immunity only works if enough of the herd get vaccinated. "

    Wrong. Herd immunity is when a sufficient number of the population becomes immune, regardless of vaccination status. There is a thing known as natural immunity and it certainly applies to muh covid. Children are practically invulnerable to it.

    You're typically a much more sensible person about issues, but upon reading your post about your health concerns it explains your fears.* I probably finally got the corona about 6 weeks ago. Felt like a bad cold and my sense of taste and smell diminished. I didn't miss a day of work. I'm 46. But I'm in above average physical condition even for a 30 year old male.

    *Sailer's health history also explains his fears about the dreaded Beer Flu. But he likes to project his fears onto others with the "afraid of needles" nonsense.

    Replies: @HA

    “There is a thing known as natural immunity and it certainly applies to muh covid. Children are practically invulnerable to it.”

    Children are not immune. They don’t die from COVID, that’s true, but they catch it and pass it on. Maybe you should first learn what immunity actually means before lecturing others about it.

    • Replies: @Mike Tre
    @HA

    Hey retard, if you reread the sentence of mine that you yourself quoted, I said children are invulnerable, not children are immune. Perhaps you should crack a dictionary when spouting your propaganda.

  120. @Mike1
    @Rob

    How truly dumb progressives are has never be on display until now. What you are saying is medical gibberish. I sincerely hope you don't work in the medical field.

    "You might avoid it if you get vaccinated, if not, you can turn a ~1% chance of death into a ~0.1% chance. With fresh vaccination (or a booster) your chance with omicron is likely even better. " Data is showing the complete opposite. The vaccinated are getting sick and dying at higher rates everywhere. Advocating a vaccine for Omicron is a "we should talk about taking Grandpa's keys" moment.

    Replies: @HA, @Rob

    Vaccinated are dying from omicron at higher rates everywhere? I wanna see a citation for that.

    Vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED) or vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD) at work? Know the mechanisms?

    Fact is, omicron has boomed in places where people are young and thin. Who knows what it’s going to do to Americans. A “milder” covid that overflows the hospitals because it’s so contagious would still be bad.

    Where do y’all get the idea that covid is worse for vaccinated people? Vox day seems to think the vaccines make you more vulnerable to covid snd sterilize you. Haven’t looked recently, has he added any new effects? Do you know how vaccines work? If omicron is worse for vaccinated people, then it is likely worse for people who caught another strain of covid. Is it?

    As far as a vaccine for a “mild” disease goes, if there were a polyvalent rhinovirus vaccine, I would take it in a second.

    I understand that the same media that celebrates white dispossession tells you that getting vaccinated is a good idea. But it really is

    Not to mention, omicron’s phenotype is not set in stone. Death is a side effect from the virus “point of view” dead host or recovered host is the same.

    • Replies: @vinteuil
    @Rob


    Fact is, omicron has boomed in places where people are young and thin. Who knows what it’s going to do to Americans. A “milder” covid that overflows the hospitals because it’s so contagious would still be bad.
     
    How many hours would it take me to unpack all of the foolishness & wickedness jammed into this amazingly stupid comment?

    More than I've got available, at the moment.
    , @Mark G.
    @Rob


    I understand that the same media that celebrates white dispossession tells you that getting vaccinated is a good idea. But it really is.
     
    Doesn't this really depend on what age group you are talking about? Certainly for those in high risk groups such as those over 60 getting vaccinated is a good idea.

    For those under 60, though, there is a 99.7% survival rate for Covid. We know there are some side effects in this group such as myocarditis from the vaccines. We don't know for sure how frequent these side effects are. The VAERS system may be under reporting the number of side effects. It's a voluntary system that requires doctors to learn how to use it and then spend the time, about a half hour each, to fill out the reports. Some doctors may not want to do this. Some doctors may also fear retaliation if they submit too many reports. Many doctors are now part of group practices connected to hospitals and have lost their previous independence.

    In addition to being uncertain how common the side effects are, we don't know what the long term effects of the vaccines are. Vaccines are normally tested 4 to 5 years but these were only tested for 8 months. The vaccine companies also demanded legal immunity against any lawsuits involving vaccine injuries. If the vaccines are safe, why would they need to do this? There have been no studies of the effects of repeated booster shots. Since no one has a crystal ball and can see the future, no one can be sure about what the long term effects of these vaccines are.

    Since we are unsure how common current side effects are and what they might be in the future, it is very difficult to do a cost-benefit analysis. Since our big public health agencies are potentially subject to regulatory capture by the companies they are regulating, that needs to be factored in as far as their ability to be objective in doing such a cost-benefit analysis too. It might be best to leave it up to individuals to make their own decisions here instead of pretending we have omniscient leaders who know what is best for us.

    Replies: @HA

    , @Mike1
    @Rob

    If you actually are interested Alex Berenson on Substack presents information in a way that non technical readers like yourself will be able to understand. You could also look at the raw data from the UK and Israel yourself if you do happen to have that skillset.

    However, I'm well aware the "I wanna see a citation for that" crowd are never interested in reality. If they were, they would have read the papers themselves already: you know, deadly pandemic and all.

    Replies: @Rob

  121. @Rob
    @Rob

    • Agree:...
    • Disagree:...
    • Thanks:...
    • LOL:...
    • Troll:...
    • Replies:...

    Yes! I collected them all in a single comment! I advance another level in UnzQuest.

    Oh, you didn’t know we are playing UnzQuest? Well, you are very far behind.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    Dear Rob:

    Thanks for your comments in 2021.

    Steve

    • Replies: @Rob
    @Steve Sailer

    Oh, wow. Thank you.

    Any chance i could get one of those gold boxes around a comment that people used to get?

    Replies: @res

  122. @HA
    @Mike Tre

    "There is a thing known as natural immunity and it certainly applies to muh covid. Children are practically invulnerable to it."

    Children are not immune. They don't die from COVID, that's true, but they catch it and pass it on. Maybe you should first learn what immunity actually means before lecturing others about it.

    Replies: @Mike Tre

    Hey retard, if you reread the sentence of mine that you yourself quoted, I said children are invulnerable, not children are immune. Perhaps you should crack a dictionary when spouting your propaganda.

  123. @HA
    @Mr. Anon

    "Like – for example – with the role out of mandates, unvaccinated people are often required to get tested (with a test prone to false positives) when vaccinated people are not."

    You think that's enough to explain a 9-14 fold hospitalization/death-rate differential? You think the number of those who are hospitalized with COVID and later die there depends on how many tests they were forced to get at their workplace? Did all those nose swabs rob them of their precious bodily fluids to the extent they dehydrated away into nothing?

    Good luck making that theory work, though I have no doubt those in your echo chamber will gobble it up.

    I don't believe the beagle-torturer all that much. But if people like you are the alternative, then it's no wonder that that bio-state...this-or-that... came to be seen as the saner alternative, or whatever that specific cluster of nonsensical buzzwords was that you strung together to try and rationalize your cowardice and clueless inability to put together a coherent way forward. Moaning about your wet panties and stringing together nonsense buzzwords -- not to mention desperately grasping at straws -- is not really the sensible alternative you seem to think it is.

    Replies: @vinteuil

    You think that’s enough to explain a 9-14 fold hospitalization/death-rate differential?

    Well, as they say, if you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.

  124. @Rob
    @Mike1

    Vaccinated are dying from omicron at higher rates everywhere? I wanna see a citation for that.

    Vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED) or vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD) at work? Know the mechanisms?

    Fact is, omicron has boomed in places where people are young and thin. Who knows what it’s going to do to Americans. A “milder” covid that overflows the hospitals because it’s so contagious would still be bad.

    Where do y’all get the idea that covid is worse for vaccinated people? Vox day seems to think the vaccines make you more vulnerable to covid snd sterilize you. Haven’t looked recently, has he added any new effects? Do you know how vaccines work? If omicron is worse for vaccinated people, then it is likely worse for people who caught another strain of covid. Is it?

    As far as a vaccine for a “mild” disease goes, if there were a polyvalent rhinovirus vaccine, I would take it in a second.

    I understand that the same media that celebrates white dispossession tells you that getting vaccinated is a good idea. But it really is

    Not to mention, omicron’s phenotype is not set in stone. Death is a side effect from the virus “point of view” dead host or recovered host is the same.

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Mark G., @Mike1

    Fact is, omicron has boomed in places where people are young and thin. Who knows what it’s going to do to Americans. A “milder” covid that overflows the hospitals because it’s so contagious would still be bad.

    How many hours would it take me to unpack all of the foolishness & wickedness jammed into this amazingly stupid comment?

    More than I’ve got available, at the moment.

  125. @Arclight
    The most important lesson of delaying the Pfizer vaccine is that our betters are perfectly content to let the masses suffer if it serves their political goals. Even if the ultimate number of people who may have gotten very ill or died due to this isn't enough to fill a high school gym, it doesn't change the fact that in 2020 the ruling class watched billions of property and economic damage unfold, dozens of direct homicides from rioting, and likely thousands of incremental deaths occur so that they got the political outcome they wanted.

    Obviously there are many people who do not see these events this way, but on the other hand based on the shift in Latino voting patterns and the millions of people of all stripes who were suddenly interested in owning a firearms, many do understand this in one way or another. If the GOP was smart, they would realize that unabashedly focusing on masculine virtues they would grow their voter base. Latinos like strength in their politicians and even chipping the traditional black voter performance for Dems down to 85% rather than 90% (which is entirely possible) would cause enormous problems for the left in statewide elections.

    Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Johann Ricke, @Johann Ricke, @Johann Ricke

    Latinos like strength in their politicians

    I don’t doubt that Biden is a strong president. He’s pretty strong in terms of insisting that only black lives matter, and that a bunch of people strolling through the Capitol is the equivalent of the storming of the Bastille. I don’t think Hispanics want strength – they want murderers killed and criminals who aren’t murderers imprisoned. Again, this is a fairly traditional stance that both parties supported to varying extents, until the Democrats embraced crime sprees and Trump muddled the GOP’s long-standing tough-on-crime image by backing a drug dealer amnesty.

  126. @Rob
    @Mike1

    Vaccinated are dying from omicron at higher rates everywhere? I wanna see a citation for that.

    Vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED) or vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD) at work? Know the mechanisms?

    Fact is, omicron has boomed in places where people are young and thin. Who knows what it’s going to do to Americans. A “milder” covid that overflows the hospitals because it’s so contagious would still be bad.

    Where do y’all get the idea that covid is worse for vaccinated people? Vox day seems to think the vaccines make you more vulnerable to covid snd sterilize you. Haven’t looked recently, has he added any new effects? Do you know how vaccines work? If omicron is worse for vaccinated people, then it is likely worse for people who caught another strain of covid. Is it?

    As far as a vaccine for a “mild” disease goes, if there were a polyvalent rhinovirus vaccine, I would take it in a second.

    I understand that the same media that celebrates white dispossession tells you that getting vaccinated is a good idea. But it really is

    Not to mention, omicron’s phenotype is not set in stone. Death is a side effect from the virus “point of view” dead host or recovered host is the same.

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Mark G., @Mike1

    I understand that the same media that celebrates white dispossession tells you that getting vaccinated is a good idea. But it really is.

    Doesn’t this really depend on what age group you are talking about? Certainly for those in high risk groups such as those over 60 getting vaccinated is a good idea.

    For those under 60, though, there is a 99.7% survival rate for Covid. We know there are some side effects in this group such as myocarditis from the vaccines. We don’t know for sure how frequent these side effects are. The VAERS system may be under reporting the number of side effects. It’s a voluntary system that requires doctors to learn how to use it and then spend the time, about a half hour each, to fill out the reports. Some doctors may not want to do this. Some doctors may also fear retaliation if they submit too many reports. Many doctors are now part of group practices connected to hospitals and have lost their previous independence.

    In addition to being uncertain how common the side effects are, we don’t know what the long term effects of the vaccines are. Vaccines are normally tested 4 to 5 years but these were only tested for 8 months. The vaccine companies also demanded legal immunity against any lawsuits involving vaccine injuries. If the vaccines are safe, why would they need to do this? There have been no studies of the effects of repeated booster shots. Since no one has a crystal ball and can see the future, no one can be sure about what the long term effects of these vaccines are.

    Since we are unsure how common current side effects are and what they might be in the future, it is very difficult to do a cost-benefit analysis. Since our big public health agencies are potentially subject to regulatory capture by the companies they are regulating, that needs to be factored in as far as their ability to be objective in doing such a cost-benefit analysis too. It might be best to leave it up to individuals to make their own decisions here instead of pretending we have omniscient leaders who know what is best for us.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Mark G.

    "For those under 60, though, there is a 99.7% survival rate for Covid."

    That's just the death toll itself, I presume. The number of those who survive but still manage to clog up the hospitals along the way with an otherwise easily avoidable illness -- something, as I recall, you have first-hand experience with -- and then suffer months of complications (some of those ventilator survivors will never be 100% again, even if they're technically survivors), should not be ignored.

    If the truthers had the intellectual honesty to stop clogging up hospitals and EMT services -- not to mention restaurants and movie theatres and so forth -- and stay out of public reach, their no one would care that their fragile and puny little lungs wilt like lettuce in a hot dumpster whenever they're forced to wear a mask. No one would care that they wet their panties over the fear of a needle or of how Bill Gates is hiding under their bed.

    The problem remains that once they stop breathing and turn blue (at which their spirit animal is no longer a "lion" but rather more like "roadkill") the people around them become sane enough to momentarily disregard all the Facebook propaganda that led up to this debacle and deposit them at the ER, whereupon the clogging commences. The reason people don't complain about the Amish so much is because the Amish do a better job of consistently living like the Amish. Whereas the truthers want to have it both ways.

    Again, I can understand why you yourself don't appreciate the gravity of the harm that causes the medical system we all ultimately depend on in one way or another, but like I said, those around you might well choose to be more sane.

    Replies: @Mark G., @Greta Handel

  127. @Rob
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco


    The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.
     
    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    2021 was worse than 2020 because social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020. In ‘21, cons got all oppositional defiant disordered. They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed. Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize. Here’s where I did my own research — viruses? They ain’t got no nerves! It is imaginable that ivermectin works against COVID by a totally different mechanism than its effect on ion channels, but there is a ton more evidence that the vaccines work. The vast majority of chemicals researchers try out at various stages of testing do not work. Ivermectin for COVID is at the “large-ish random small molecule with functional groups” stage of testing for treating any virus. The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But cons were all about it. Despite that, as you say, there were more COVID deaths in ‘21 than ‘20. Those libs? They done been owned!

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA. COVID is deadlier than the flu, so maybe the trade-off is worthwhile? Personally, I think a short course of a drug that might cause point mutations is unlikely to cause cancer, but I could be wrong, Omicron seems to be less deadly, likely because it does not activate innate and Th2 immunity as strongly as previous variants, giving the genomes that manage to tamp down the cellular antiviral response an intrahost selective advantage. The benefit to you is that the immune reaction does not kill you. My theory explains why (some) respiratory viruses tend to evolve to be less lethal over short periods of time. A Nobel-worthy theory of someone fleshes it out if I can toot my own horn. This only applies if some non-lethal immune mechanism can keep the virus from turning you into goo, of course.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @D. K., @Known Fact, @HA, @Mr. Anon, @vinteuil, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Rob, @The Alarmist, @Alden

    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate.

    Well, maybe if you ignore that the death count stats include 2020, where there was significant mortality displacement, e.g. culling, of “low hanging fruit,” e.g. the sickest and oldest as a huge part of the unvaxxed count.

    Stats restricted to the period when vaxxes commenced and not counting partially-vaxxed or those within 14 days of second dose as unvaxxed blow that 1/11th number out of the water.

    The benefits of the vaxxes are significantly overstated.

    • Agree: Adam Smith
    • Replies: @HA
    @The Alarmist

    "Well, maybe if you ignore that the death count stats include 2020,"

    No, the Texas factor-of-40 death-differential was restricted to the month of September so as to address the matter of how well the vaccines were doing regarding the delta wave. And the Daily Mail article about the roughly 10-fold predominance of unvaxxed patients even in a more-vaxxed-country like the UK is about 3 days old.

    But all the same, I'm now better able to understand how you came to believe what you evidently believe.

    In order to avoid surpassing the 3-article-per-hour limit, I'll collapse my responses to all the other Algonquin-round-table-level of wit and intellectual rigor I've witnessed in the last few hours ["Hey retard,","foolishness & wickedness ...amazingly stupid...bullsh*t"] by stating that if you're going to accuse others of propaganda, try and dredge up more than name-calling. Otherwise, it's pretty clear who is dispensing propaganda. Put some links or an argument together in the way the truthers used to do before the excess-death-graphs began spiking against them, and back when they still pretended they had something more to offer than name-calling and empty put-downs. Isn't the LewRockwell site still dispensing its usual dose of COVID flim-flam? Did Berenson lose his ability to put a sentence together now that he's no longer able to send out his insights in tweet-sized dribbles? Isn't there yet another libertarian think tank or Russian troll farm out there who is willing to cook up some bogus "lockdown severity index" to try and convince us to be more like Brazil or Belarus (or whatever other freedom-loving bastions of governmental honesty and efficiency the truthers are relying on now that Sweden has gone hog-wild over vaccines)? No?

    Because if desperate name calling is all you've got, you might as well be paid agents sent out by the beagle-torturer's minions to make the truthers look like nothing but a bunch of evidence-bereft monkeys hurling their scats at passers-by. If that's your ultimate goal here, you've done your job well. And yes, that is name-calling, I'll admit, but at least I managed to put together some links to back that up, whereas you can't even bother doing that much. Oh yeah, and so sorry about not misspelling Bret as Brett, for whoever it was that cared about that, though if that's the only mistake you were able to dredge up, well, you do the math.

  128. @Greta Handel
    Subject to whim, did anyone else Notice that there’s no mention of how the “spectacular[,] very high” efficacy of the Pfizer product was calculated?

    Replies: @The Alarmist

    Subject to whim, did anyone else Notice that there’s no mention of how the “spectacular[,] very high” efficacy of the Pfizer product was calculated?

    Nah, I was too busy noticing the Absolute Risk Reduction was only from 0.84% in the control group down to 0.04% in the vaxx group … oh, that and the actual all-cause death count in the control group was actually lower than in the vaxx group before they hurriedly cut the study off.

    • Replies: @Greta Handel
    @The Alarmist

    Thanks.

    For those who still may not have Noticed:


    0.04 / 0.84 = .0476

    1.0 - .0476 = .9524
     

    That’s the “spectacular[,] very high” rate of efficacy — aka “over 95%” — used by Pfizer, captured regulators and politicians, innumerable innumerates of the Establishment media, and their amplifying sheep to stampede us to our sorry state. A country where, if still invited, you’ll be sitting on eggshells at Christmas dinner with your distracted/divided/conquered family.

    The rate of ignorance about this, nearly two years later, must be even higher than 95%. Maintained here by Mr. Sailer, who now does know better but would rather nerdbait readers with the last Most Important Election Ever.

  129. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Arclight

    You started out so well but then fell back into believing in the system.

    We're not voting our way out of this. Sure, whites could score a few rear guard victories as we withdraw, but we're never going to be free in the current system.

    Replies: @Arclight

    So what alternative do you see to the current system and what gets us there?

  130. The Trump Administration’s decision in late summer to require Moderna to delay its clinical trial by a month

    In the case, “the Trump administration” actually means whoever was on the COVID taskforce or coordinating with Moderna–i.e., more Democrat bureaucrats with an interest in delaying the vaccine for political purposes.

    You could point to a lot of factors that could have flipped the election for Trump. Ron Unz’s article on the stolen election was spot on. But the GOP establishment is also responsible for not playing hardball. The BS the Democrats were pulling in some states with changing election laws or procedures should have been answered by any state with a GOP-dominated legislature refusing to certify their state’s election or send electors.

  131. Steve,

    Wisconsin, not Nevada, would give Trump the tie and Wisconsin was closer than Nevada.

    A Republican Congress in 2023 needs to investigate Pfizer for its politically motivated decisions. These people need to be punished and humiliated to send a message. Of course we also need investigations of the George Floyd riots and the big tech companies.

    I have no interest in voting for Republicans who will not focus on punishing our enemies. Our niceness and passivity is the reason we’re losing our rights daily.

  132. @The Alarmist
    @Greta Handel


    Subject to whim, did anyone else Notice that there’s no mention of how the “spectacular[,] very high” efficacy of the Pfizer product was calculated?
     
    Nah, I was too busy noticing the Absolute Risk Reduction was only from 0.84% in the control group down to 0.04% in the vaxx group ... oh, that and the actual all-cause death count in the control group was actually lower than in the vaxx group before they hurriedly cut the study off.

    Replies: @Greta Handel

    Thanks.

    For those who still may not have Noticed:

    0.04 / 0.84 = .0476

    1.0 – .0476 = .9524

    That’s the “spectacular[,] very high” rate of efficacy — aka “over 95%” — used by Pfizer, captured regulators and politicians, innumerable innumerates of the Establishment media, and their amplifying sheep to stampede us to our sorry state. A country where, if still invited, you’ll be sitting on eggshells at Christmas dinner with your distracted/divided/conquered family.

    The rate of ignorance about this, nearly two years later, must be even higher than 95%. Maintained here by Mr. Sailer, who now does know better but would rather nerdbait readers with the last Most Important Election Ever.

  133. @Achmed E. Newman

    Would that have switched enough voters in Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada to cause a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College and cast the decision to the House of Representatives with one vote for each delegation, probably favoring Trump? Or would there have been a violent and/or corrupt intervention to deny Trump a second term?
     
    Or, would the Democratic party volunteers on Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada election vote counting teams have had to spend another half day printing up enough mail-in ballots from people who didn't know they'd even participated? There's your alternate history. Same old same old.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Almost Missouri, @MLK

    You succinctly get to what always takes me many more words. The anyone who is anybody “Trump Must Go!” alignment, domestic and foreign, had four years to learn from their failure of planning and will in 2016.

    As they openly demonstrated over and over in 2020, the Unstoppable Force was not going to give way to the Immoveable Object, no matter the cost and danger to the republic.

    Thus whether the delayed Pfizer news, or the Soviet-style censorship and disinformation regarding the Biden Crime Family, an October Surprise(s) were merely a problem in terms of post-Election Day salesmanship of the steal. The Fake News wouldn’t have missed a beat on Pfizer if it had come out. They would have labeled it good news for Trump that just wasn’t good enough, early voting and all that.

    It’s fun to think about discrete counterfactuals. However, if you haven’t figured out in the instant case that they were prepared to apply whatever level of malicious force to not fail this time then you weren’t paying attention.

    Am I the only one that remembers the Fake News shouting beginning in the summer of the “sieges” planned in all fifty state capitals beginning in September and amping up their violence until Trump was gone? It was quickly memory-holed but on 1/6, CNN and MSNBC were live reporting that “Trump supporters” were attacking at least one state capital.

    By giving way, Trump saved us from a mass casualty false flag that would have been blamed on him and MAGA, and resulted in quick passage of the totalitarian, bye-bye to the Constitution, domestic Patriot Act they had ready to go.

    He then saved the republic again by refusing to concede, allowing the illegitimate regime cards to
    play. Rasmussen reported the other day that even 41% of Democrats question the election result.

    Say what you will about Trump, but he has courageously teed up a win-win by, in effect, making election integrity law changes at the state level under the rubric of “so 2020 can never happen again,” the only way to let air out of the ‘Put him back where he rightfully belongs’ balloon.

    He’s added the additional threat of becoming Speaker in the next (Republican-controlled) Congress, which is designed to get Democrats to sail dictator Pelosi’s ship tout de suite. Then “the nastiest old woman in Washington,” aka Mitch McConnell will quickly follow. Otherwise, unless I miss my mark, they’re going to buy themselves Speaker Trump putting the wood to the Democrats and RINO filth like nobody’s business.

  134. @Mr. Anon
    @HA


    Always such a delight to have the former self-appointed spokesman of the just-a-flu bros who once spoke on their behalf in first-person-plural, but who now wants us to believe he was never a member of that club chiming in to accuse other people of being contemptible liars. Sad to say, your ample experience on that topic hasn’t given you much insight into others.
     
    I've never said it was "'just a flu". And again, you prove yourself to be a contemptible liar.

    It is your like who have proven themselves to be vaporing hysterics. But also more than that - craven apologists for repression. Seriously, in the spirit of the season, allow me to say with all sincerity: F**k you.

    Replies: @HA

    “I’ve never said it was ‘just a flu’”.

    You replied as “we” to a comment specifically addressed to “all the ‘just the flu, bro’ guys”. I’ll let others draw their own obvious conclusions, given that doing so is evidently beyond your mental/moral capacity.

    In the future, if you’re going to lie about things like that, don’t leave a paper trail. And to repeat, if people have come to regard the prattle of a beagle-torturing bureaucrat to be more believable than whatever it is you’re peddling, that says far more about you than it does about the beagle torturer.

  135. @interesting
    I don't care who is in the white house or when the vaccine was rolled out. I had covid and I'm not taking the f'ing clot shot

    Replies: @AndrewR, @JR Ewing, @Corvinus

    I have been warring with my wife for the last half of the year over the wisdom of getting my 14 year old son injected. Neither he nor I are vaccinated and neither of us have any intention to be due to both having antibodies and confirmed cases earlier this year.

    My wife and I recently reached a detente on this issue due to the too-hard-to-hide failure of the vaccines to prevent transmission and the clear evidence that the mRNA is more dangerous to young people than the disease itself. She cannot disagree with my position that neither one of us needs the shot, even if she doesn’t like it, so she has quit harping over it lately.

    I was hoping this uneasy truce would persist indefinitely, but to my chagrin, last night at Christmas Eve dinner, my in-laws announced that they had rescheduled the family vacation Alaskan cruise of 2020 that had been canceled two years ago. We’re going to Alaska in July 2022! GREAT!

    Except that cruise ships all require vax passes and unless the mask nonsense is repealed there is no way I’m getting on a plane for 6+ hours and enduring that humiliation. No f’ing way. I can pray that all of the restrictions are lifted beforehand, but the intractable culture war nature of this makes that very unlikely.

    My father in law is usually pretty reasonable about this kind of stuff and in the past has asked first to confirm dates and interest etc etc, but I’m pretty sure his wife – my mother in law who thinks anything announced by network news is divine truth – probably insisted that it be sprung on us this time so as to put me on the spot.

    So this vax battle is going to heat up again for me in the forthcoming months. My wife and her parents are going to claim that I’m being ungrateful for not wanting to go on vacation with them and I also will be accused of “polluting” my son’s mind with my rightwing politics for not forcing him to go get the shot and risk his health over an illness that is not a threat to him.

    HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ME!

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @JR Ewing

    Merry Christmas, JR. This PanicFest is indeed making family life even tougher. I am lucky my wife is on the same page at this point. That was not at all the case 1 1/2 years back.

    The stupid mask requirement in airport terminals and onboard airliners was extended to March. Who knows if they'll use omicron or the next one to extend it again? What about the cruise ship itself, JR? If they require them in the common areas, that'd be a real P.I.T.A. Something tells me the cruise line won't give up their vax restrictions unless business goes way down.

    How about interfamily dealings? We were at some people's house yesterday eating and hanging out at normal social distances (as in, who cares?) and these people are completely down with the vaccine. Nobody ever asked us, but we're pretty sure they figure we've all gotten jabbed, contrary to the actual case. What do you do? You can't go bothering them about it while we've been in the house among everybody for a couple of hours already. Plus, it might start an argument, and we want to be friends.

    Then, my wife didn't want to stay too long, figuring these recently vaccinated people (at least booster-shot wise) are spreading germs like wildfire, and we're gonna get sick. So when we got home I took another of those Hydrochloroquine pills with a shot of zinc on the side with her.

    I doubt a single person in either family will get sick, but there's all this doubt and worry. As for me, I'm kinda amused by the whole thing.

    That's a nice job sticking to your guns on behalf of yourself and your kid. You're not missing that much. Even the Alaska cruises are just about having a 200 yd long food bar. You'll just gain 10 lb anyway, so maybe you all could rent a car out of Seattle and head up on your own trip to Alaska. Between the Grizzlies and the mosquitoes, COVID germies are the least of your worries. ;-}

    Replies: @JR Ewing

    , @sayless
    @JR Ewing

    Best of luck to you, J. R.

    The family friction is unavoidable, unless they can be convinced by the statements of the creator of the PCR test who won a Nobel for doing so ("'Anthony Fauci is a hack and he doesn't know anything about anything"); or the creator of the mRNA technology, who opposes its use in these "vaccines" and has said so over and over again; or the many other experts who have come out against it and have been deplatformed and censored from social media. Kary Mullis, Robert Malone, Vladimir Zelenko, Luc Montagnier (another Nobel), many others. Follow the links.

    But, it's likely the inlaws won't be convinced by any of this. They probably won't even look.

    However in time your 14-year-old will be grateful that you didn't allow him to be used as an experimental subject in this horrible drug trial. That's the most important thing, his life and his health. Perhaps the others will come round later on, meantime you are taking a hit for him; and yes, it looks like you're not in for a joyride with the relatives.

    Alaska will still be there when this is all resolved. Something to look forward to. So, Happy New Year!

    , @Jack D
    @JR Ewing


    Unless the mask nonsense is repealed there is no way I’m getting on a plane for 6+ hours and enduring that humiliation. No f’ing way.
     
    I really need someone to explain to me the vehemence over masking. (Personally, I agree that the way that it is actually done (little pieces of dirty cloth, half the time they slip below your nose) it is largely worthless. Properly worn N95s would be good but long ago our superiors decided that these should be saved for the really important people. But I digress.)

    But, even assuming that it is another form of "security theater" for getting on a plane that has no real world benefit (we should be accustomed to this by now), why the vehement objections? People are getting themselves arrested over this. When the other forms of security theater were implemented, I don't recall people getting so angry, even though the TSA was taking away their beloved childhood pocket knives and such and making you semi-strip in public and having your crotch groped by strangers. That seemed far mor humiliating to me.

    I can understand not wanted to be forced to take a shot that you believe is detrimental to your health. I don't agree but I can see where people are coming from. But missing a desirable family event because you refuse to wear a little piece of cloth on your face for a few hours? Even if it is stupid, we put up with all sorts of stupidity in the name of civilization. Why draw the line here?

    Replies: @D. K.

  136. @The Alarmist
    @Rob


    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate.
     
    Well, maybe if you ignore that the death count stats include 2020, where there was significant mortality displacement, e.g. culling, of “low hanging fruit,” e.g. the sickest and oldest as a huge part of the unvaxxed count.

    Stats restricted to the period when vaxxes commenced and not counting partially-vaxxed or those within 14 days of second dose as unvaxxed blow that 1/11th number out of the water.

    The benefits of the vaxxes are significantly overstated.

    Replies: @HA

    “Well, maybe if you ignore that the death count stats include 2020,”

    No, the Texas factor-of-40 death-differential was restricted to the month of September so as to address the matter of how well the vaccines were doing regarding the delta wave. And the Daily Mail article about the roughly 10-fold predominance of unvaxxed patients even in a more-vaxxed-country like the UK is about 3 days old.

    But all the same, I’m now better able to understand how you came to believe what you evidently believe.

    In order to avoid surpassing the 3-article-per-hour limit, I’ll collapse my responses to all the other Algonquin-round-table-level of wit and intellectual rigor I’ve witnessed in the last few hours [“Hey retard,”,”foolishness & wickedness …amazingly stupid…bullsh*t”] by stating that if you’re going to accuse others of propaganda, try and dredge up more than name-calling. Otherwise, it’s pretty clear who is dispensing propaganda. Put some links or an argument together in the way the truthers used to do before the excess-death-graphs began spiking against them, and back when they still pretended they had something more to offer than name-calling and empty put-downs. Isn’t the LewRockwell site still dispensing its usual dose of COVID flim-flam? Did Berenson lose his ability to put a sentence together now that he’s no longer able to send out his insights in tweet-sized dribbles? Isn’t there yet another libertarian think tank or Russian troll farm out there who is willing to cook up some bogus “lockdown severity index” to try and convince us to be more like Brazil or Belarus (or whatever other freedom-loving bastions of governmental honesty and efficiency the truthers are relying on now that Sweden has gone hog-wild over vaccines)? No?

    Because if desperate name calling is all you’ve got, you might as well be paid agents sent out by the beagle-torturer’s minions to make the truthers look like nothing but a bunch of evidence-bereft monkeys hurling their scats at passers-by. If that’s your ultimate goal here, you’ve done your job well. And yes, that is name-calling, I’ll admit, but at least I managed to put together some links to back that up, whereas you can’t even bother doing that much. Oh yeah, and so sorry about not misspelling Bret as Brett, for whoever it was that cared about that, though if that’s the only mistake you were able to dredge up, well, you do the math.

  137. @Mark G.
    @Rob


    I understand that the same media that celebrates white dispossession tells you that getting vaccinated is a good idea. But it really is.
     
    Doesn't this really depend on what age group you are talking about? Certainly for those in high risk groups such as those over 60 getting vaccinated is a good idea.

    For those under 60, though, there is a 99.7% survival rate for Covid. We know there are some side effects in this group such as myocarditis from the vaccines. We don't know for sure how frequent these side effects are. The VAERS system may be under reporting the number of side effects. It's a voluntary system that requires doctors to learn how to use it and then spend the time, about a half hour each, to fill out the reports. Some doctors may not want to do this. Some doctors may also fear retaliation if they submit too many reports. Many doctors are now part of group practices connected to hospitals and have lost their previous independence.

    In addition to being uncertain how common the side effects are, we don't know what the long term effects of the vaccines are. Vaccines are normally tested 4 to 5 years but these were only tested for 8 months. The vaccine companies also demanded legal immunity against any lawsuits involving vaccine injuries. If the vaccines are safe, why would they need to do this? There have been no studies of the effects of repeated booster shots. Since no one has a crystal ball and can see the future, no one can be sure about what the long term effects of these vaccines are.

    Since we are unsure how common current side effects are and what they might be in the future, it is very difficult to do a cost-benefit analysis. Since our big public health agencies are potentially subject to regulatory capture by the companies they are regulating, that needs to be factored in as far as their ability to be objective in doing such a cost-benefit analysis too. It might be best to leave it up to individuals to make their own decisions here instead of pretending we have omniscient leaders who know what is best for us.

    Replies: @HA

    “For those under 60, though, there is a 99.7% survival rate for Covid.”

    That’s just the death toll itself, I presume. The number of those who survive but still manage to clog up the hospitals along the way with an otherwise easily avoidable illness — something, as I recall, you have first-hand experience with — and then suffer months of complications (some of those ventilator survivors will never be 100% again, even if they’re technically survivors), should not be ignored.

    If the truthers had the intellectual honesty to stop clogging up hospitals and EMT services — not to mention restaurants and movie theatres and so forth — and stay out of public reach, their no one would care that their fragile and puny little lungs wilt like lettuce in a hot dumpster whenever they’re forced to wear a mask. No one would care that they wet their panties over the fear of a needle or of how Bill Gates is hiding under their bed.

    The problem remains that once they stop breathing and turn blue (at which their spirit animal is no longer a “lion” but rather more like “roadkill”) the people around them become sane enough to momentarily disregard all the Facebook propaganda that led up to this debacle and deposit them at the ER, whereupon the clogging commences. The reason people don’t complain about the Amish so much is because the Amish do a better job of consistently living like the Amish. Whereas the truthers want to have it both ways.

    Again, I can understand why you yourself don’t appreciate the gravity of the harm that causes the medical system we all ultimately depend on in one way or another, but like I said, those around you might well choose to be more sane.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    @HA


    Again, I can understand why you yourself don’t appreciate the gravity of the harm that causes the medical system we all ultimately depend on in one way or another, but like I said, those around you might well choose to be more sane.

     

    You appear to be lumping older and younger people together here. Most younger people don't end up in the hospital when they get Covid. Like I said before, we don't know what the long term harmful effects of the vaccines are and no one should pretend that we do.

    I don't think I'm going to spend time going back and repeating everything I said in my previous comment. I've noticed when you respond to comments, including mine, rather than respond to the actual comment you go off on a tangent. You seem completely oblivious this makes you appear evasive. You also rely heavily on feeble attempts at sarcasm and insults. It's been my experience over 65 years that people substitute name calling when they don't actually have a good argument.

    I'm really interested in the truth on this subject. Between the pro-vaxxers and anti-vaxxers, it seems to be mostly the pro-vaxxers who appear to be calling for censorship of their opponents. Are they afraid they can't win in an open forum? Why is Tony "I am science" Fauci only willing to give interviews to friendly journalists? The only time I've seen him face hostile questions was with Rand Paul and he really looked rattled by it and unable to handle the situation. He was only there because he didn't have a choice. For the pro-vaxxer side, the optics of all this is very bad for them.

    Replies: @HA

    , @Greta Handel
    @HA

    The lyrics keep changing, but the bleat goes on.

    Admit something, at least to yourself:

    1. When you first rolled up your sleeve for one of these therapeutics, you had been fearpharmed that they were “vaccines,” which would prevent viral infection and transmission.

    2. The Establishment has acknowledged that this earlier narrative was false, but you’re stuck.

    3. Rather than thinking about and attending to the potentially adverse long term effects of a marginal, short term therapeutic, you’re masking any doubts, embarrassment, and regrets by scapegoating those who were more skeptical for “clogging up hospitals and EMT services.”

    What’s your position on mandatory injections?

    Replies: @Mark G., @HA

  138. But the main point of vaccines is that they can get us to herd immunity in 2021, so we will then be DONE with the pandemic: no more lockdowns, no more masks, no more this and that.

    But, the anti-vaxers are, in effect, on the side of the lockdowners. By slowing and perhaps preventing us from getting to herd immunity, we might be still doing the same lockdown stuff in 2022 as in 2020.

    —iSteve

    “Can you imagine how bad the anti-vax propaganda in the New York Times would be if Pfizer had announced its vaccine worked on November 2, Trump had spent the final 18 hours before the election boasting nonstop about the vaccine, and that had flipped 1 out of every 300 votes, giving Trump a 269-269 Electoral College tie and likely victory with House delegations voting by state?”

    LOL, simply and patently false, iSteve. You are wildly assuming that this subset voters would have undoubtedly changed their mind due squarely on this issue. The fact of the matter is that most American citizens had decided already who they were supporting, especially those who had cast their ballot via mail days or weeks earlier.

    But I will admit it makes for tremendous drama on your part. No doubt you are inspired by the Hair Negresses and Tiger Moms.

    Let us NOTICE how Trump viewed Coronavirus throughout his presidency, which swayed a good number of Americans to NOT trust him on this dire health matter.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/11/trumps-lies-about-coronavirus/608647/

    And let us also NOTICE a very important decision that Trump made earlier this year, but of course is denying.

    https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/529131-trump-officials-deny-turning-down-additional-doses-of-pfizer-covid-vaccine

    Happy Holidays, iSteve!

    • Replies: @Patrick in SC
    @Corvinus


    LOL, simply and patently false, iSteve
     
    Simply and patently your opinion; an opinion which is, as usual, laughably ridiculous, pathetic, unsupported, and at odds with common sense.

    It's "patently false" to claim the New York Times isn't incredible biased and doesn't slant their coverage and occasionally make stuff up? Officer Sicknick was killed by a fire extinguisher, right?

    Nope, that media of yours calls it right down the middle, is assiduously unbiased, and never, ever makes stuff up, just like you.

    LOLOLOLOL...

    Now, tell us about the all the hard evidence in the Mueller report you claimed was forthcoming to substantiate your claims about "Russian collusion" and other malfeasance?

    Well?

    Bwahahahahaha...
    , @Wokechoke
    @Corvinus

    Approval in October would have meant left wing protests against vaccination. You know it.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  139. @interesting
    I don't care who is in the white house or when the vaccine was rolled out. I had covid and I'm not taking the f'ing clot shot

    Replies: @AndrewR, @JR Ewing, @Corvinus

    “I don’t care who is in the white house or when the vaccine was rolled out. I had covid and I’m not taking the f’ing clot shot“

    They say that selfishness only jeopardizes the health of those around you.

    Happy Holidays!

  140. @HA
    @Mark G.

    "For those under 60, though, there is a 99.7% survival rate for Covid."

    That's just the death toll itself, I presume. The number of those who survive but still manage to clog up the hospitals along the way with an otherwise easily avoidable illness -- something, as I recall, you have first-hand experience with -- and then suffer months of complications (some of those ventilator survivors will never be 100% again, even if they're technically survivors), should not be ignored.

    If the truthers had the intellectual honesty to stop clogging up hospitals and EMT services -- not to mention restaurants and movie theatres and so forth -- and stay out of public reach, their no one would care that their fragile and puny little lungs wilt like lettuce in a hot dumpster whenever they're forced to wear a mask. No one would care that they wet their panties over the fear of a needle or of how Bill Gates is hiding under their bed.

    The problem remains that once they stop breathing and turn blue (at which their spirit animal is no longer a "lion" but rather more like "roadkill") the people around them become sane enough to momentarily disregard all the Facebook propaganda that led up to this debacle and deposit them at the ER, whereupon the clogging commences. The reason people don't complain about the Amish so much is because the Amish do a better job of consistently living like the Amish. Whereas the truthers want to have it both ways.

    Again, I can understand why you yourself don't appreciate the gravity of the harm that causes the medical system we all ultimately depend on in one way or another, but like I said, those around you might well choose to be more sane.

    Replies: @Mark G., @Greta Handel

    Again, I can understand why you yourself don’t appreciate the gravity of the harm that causes the medical system we all ultimately depend on in one way or another, but like I said, those around you might well choose to be more sane.

    You appear to be lumping older and younger people together here. Most younger people don’t end up in the hospital when they get Covid. Like I said before, we don’t know what the long term harmful effects of the vaccines are and no one should pretend that we do.

    I don’t think I’m going to spend time going back and repeating everything I said in my previous comment. I’ve noticed when you respond to comments, including mine, rather than respond to the actual comment you go off on a tangent. You seem completely oblivious this makes you appear evasive. You also rely heavily on feeble attempts at sarcasm and insults. It’s been my experience over 65 years that people substitute name calling when they don’t actually have a good argument.

    I’m really interested in the truth on this subject. Between the pro-vaxxers and anti-vaxxers, it seems to be mostly the pro-vaxxers who appear to be calling for censorship of their opponents. Are they afraid they can’t win in an open forum? Why is Tony “I am science” Fauci only willing to give interviews to friendly journalists? The only time I’ve seen him face hostile questions was with Rand Paul and he really looked rattled by it and unable to handle the situation. He was only there because he didn’t have a choice. For the pro-vaxxer side, the optics of all this is very bad for them.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Mark G.

    "You appear to be lumping older and younger people together here. Most younger people don’t end up in the hospital when they get Covid."

    I rather doubt you are in your 20's, but regardless, you managed, by your own admission, to clog up a hospital bed for quite some time at a time when vaccines were readily available to you. Why are you digressing to some non sequitur? The 20 year olds are certainly less likely to clog up that bed, and I blame them far less than those who older, but by being careless about spreading the disease, they help pass it on to those who will nonetheless clog up a bed, or worse. If you can't understand why people who have done everything that was asked of them -- or at least, like the Amish, not bothered to continue forcing themselves onto public spaces -- are exasperated at those who keep coming up with lame arguments over why they shouldn't have to do anything, and then get upset when people point that out their lame arguments -- it's on you to fix that.

    I can only respond to so many repeated lies and distortions, and I'm sorry if you feel I should waste even more time trying to rebut them, but I do what I can, and I'm limited to three comments a thread. Given the number of conspiracy nuts on a site like this, the handful of people who actually take the time to rebut them do remarkably well. In any case, as a Christmas gesture of goodwill towards all, feel free to come up with ONE SPECIFIC THING that you find most compelling about how wrong everyone except people like you who willingly resisted getting a shot and then wound up in the hospital, thereby depriving the bed of someone who needed it for something less iditiotic. Do that, and I will try to address it despite your being exhibit #1 and ground zero for how stupidly approaches like yours to this virus turned out.

    As for Fauci, I have repeatedly called him a beagle-torturing bureaucrat on this very thread. It's not my job or inclination to defend those who torture small animals. How do you not get that? He can defend himself, assuming some researcher doesn't snip his vocal chords like what happened to those beagles, so as to prevent anyone from having to listen to him. I will however point out that the very fact that the vast majority of people find the arguments of someone as despicable as that more compelling than the arguments of someone like you says more about your arguments than his.

    As for name calling, your ridiculously one-sided take on that clearly overlooks the f-bombs and other assorted expletives hurled my way. Suffice it to say, you deserve a lot more name-calling than I've given you.

  141. @HA
    @Mark G.

    "For those under 60, though, there is a 99.7% survival rate for Covid."

    That's just the death toll itself, I presume. The number of those who survive but still manage to clog up the hospitals along the way with an otherwise easily avoidable illness -- something, as I recall, you have first-hand experience with -- and then suffer months of complications (some of those ventilator survivors will never be 100% again, even if they're technically survivors), should not be ignored.

    If the truthers had the intellectual honesty to stop clogging up hospitals and EMT services -- not to mention restaurants and movie theatres and so forth -- and stay out of public reach, their no one would care that their fragile and puny little lungs wilt like lettuce in a hot dumpster whenever they're forced to wear a mask. No one would care that they wet their panties over the fear of a needle or of how Bill Gates is hiding under their bed.

    The problem remains that once they stop breathing and turn blue (at which their spirit animal is no longer a "lion" but rather more like "roadkill") the people around them become sane enough to momentarily disregard all the Facebook propaganda that led up to this debacle and deposit them at the ER, whereupon the clogging commences. The reason people don't complain about the Amish so much is because the Amish do a better job of consistently living like the Amish. Whereas the truthers want to have it both ways.

    Again, I can understand why you yourself don't appreciate the gravity of the harm that causes the medical system we all ultimately depend on in one way or another, but like I said, those around you might well choose to be more sane.

    Replies: @Mark G., @Greta Handel

    The lyrics keep changing, but the bleat goes on.

    Admit something, at least to yourself:

    1. When you first rolled up your sleeve for one of these therapeutics, you had been fearpharmed that they were “vaccines,” which would prevent viral infection and transmission.

    2. The Establishment has acknowledged that this earlier narrative was false, but you’re stuck.

    3. Rather than thinking about and attending to the potentially adverse long term effects of a marginal, short term therapeutic, you’re masking any doubts, embarrassment, and regrets by scapegoating those who were more skeptical for “clogging up hospitals and EMT services.”

    What’s your position on mandatory injections?

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    @Greta Handel

    Says Greta Handel: Rather than thinking about and attending to the potentially adverse long term effects of a marginal, short term therapeutic, you’re masking any doubts, embarrassment, and regrets by scapegoating those who were more skeptical for “clogging up hospitals and EMT services.”


    My response: I left a comment about the long term effects of the vaccines, whether the benefits exceeded the risks for younger people and whether young people should be able to make their own decision on whether to get it. In his response, HA did not address any of my points and switched the subject over to old people clogging up hospitals. I think you are correct on his reasons why.

    As far as people clogging up the hospitals, I think we could have greatly reduced the numbers of Covid hospitalizations, including my own, if the government had actively helped to develop early treatment protocols. Instead, people just had to sit around until they got sick enough to go into the hospital. The government actually worked to block doctors who tried to develop, implement and publicize early treatment protocols. State medical boards threatened to take away their licenses. Pharmacies, under pressure from the government, refused to fill their prescriptions. Hospitals, who receive lots of government funding, threatened to fire them if they worked for a hospital. Media platforms, under pressure from the government, banned information on early treatments. Big Pharma wants to force everyone to use their expensive patented drugs and vaccines. Pfizer made an additional several billion dollars off its Covid vaccine this year and it should surprise no one that the politician who received the most money from them, Biden, is pushing their product.

    Even in hospital treatments are more ineffective and expensive than they needed to be. When I was hospitalized with Covid I felt like everyone there was desperately trying to convince me I was really sick when I didn't feel like it. After five days a doctor came in, looked at me and said "you don't look sick, you look healthy so I'm sending you home". He was the only honest person there. I felt like they were just trying to squeeze as much money out of me as they could. I felt the Dexamethasone steroid helped my breathing some. The Remdesivir was pretty useless. Studies show it doesn't really reduce death rates. Also, it's an anti-viral and I was past the viral stage and into the inflammation stage where steroids and anti-oxidants work best. If they had just sent me home with some Dexamethasone and Vitamin C pills it would have probably been about as effective and a lot cheaper than a hospital stay and three thousand dollar Remdesivir.

    , @HA
    @Greta Handel

    "When you first rolled up your sleeve for one of these therapeutics, you had been fearpharmed that they were “vaccines,” which would prevent viral infection and transmission."

    The "stopping transmission" was indeed ONE thing that people hoped for -- but repeatedly said "verification is months away". As it turns out -- AS I HAVE REPEATEDLY NOTED:


    “Unvaccinated people are about six times more likely to test positive than vaccinated people, nine times more likely to be hospitalized, and 14 times more likely to die from COVID-related complications,…”
     
    So no, it doesn't STOP transmission, but it does SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE IT. Got that? It really isn't difficult, and the very fact that you're even raising the point is reason enough to dismiss you as a loon. Moreover, it drops the death toll by over 10 fold. So go ahead and keep trying to pretend that "0.04 / 0.84 = .0476" means anything at this point, given that you're apparently so desperate to handwave away something as obvious as that drop in the death toll. It's not persuading anyone who isn't already on your side. You are insane if you think it will. However bogus you think those trials were, no one but the truthers and those who are as clueless as they are believe at this point that the vaccines are some failure.

    If you want to insist that stopping transmission was the sole goal in all this, prove it -- find me a link that says that's the only metric of whether or not a vaccine works. As I've already noted, preventing breakout cases was never something the flu vaccine was able to do, and yet, for years before COVID came along, doctors repeatedly advised people to get it, with absolutely no controversy and no moron trying to tell us this is some "gotcha" for how flu vaccines don't work. On the contrary, there are MULTIPLE goals for any vaccine, and preventing the loss of life -- even of anti-vaxx losers who are begging for their Darwin awards -- continues to be regarded as a primary benefit of this vaccine, and that hope has been satisfied spectacularly, for better of worse. If it were up to me, there would be no hospital beds for the unvaxxed and for people dispensing lame comments like the one you just did. You'd get a pup tent, and access to a rusty vat of ivermectin, HCQ and vitamin C and zinc -- and whatever other quack cure you think will save you -- and you could gargle and bathe with for all I care, but it would be out in the parking lot, or over in the nearby landfill, and that's all you'd get. If we could do that, it would clear up the hospitals for sane people, and allow the rest of us to stop having to care, but doctors and health professionals, being the way they are, they want to save even those who were stupid enough to buy into lies like the one you're peddling. So, alas, that's not an option, and I will defer to the quixotic -- but surely nobler -- aspirations of those who want to save even the likes of you.

    As for mandatory injections, as long as you're the recipient, I'm all for them. Except, in your case, I think they should always be administered with a Black&Decker quarter-inch drill bit, carbide tip, so as to leave more syringes for the rest of us.

    Replies: @Greta Handel

  142. I consider myself a pretty good arbiter of risk when it comes to cost/benefit analysis. 25+ years in General Insurance combined with the highest level of qualification in that field (Fellow of the Chartered Insurance Institute), a CPA designation, and most recently a CFA designation makes me fairly confident that I have a better grasp of risk than most.

    Diamond Princess was perhaps the first clear indication that something didn’t exactly add up with the fear-mongering.

    Went to my 2 favourite ‘bloggers’ -= West Hunter & Steve Sailer

    Cochran had gone nuts – predicting 6 million + deaths

    Steve was……well, disappointing.

    Consequently, I’ve avoided both – until I saw the review of RFK Jr’s book on RU recently.

    Spending Christmas with the family (all unvaxed). For those touting the untested, liability-free shot, here’s my advice – don’t do so unless your age/morbidity factor makes it a dire necessity.

    Read “State of Fear” to find how you’ve been bamboozled.
    Read RFK Jr’s book along with Scott Atlas’s book.

    Or continue taking the shot, quarterly, then monthly, then….?

    Good luck! Oh, and Merry Christmas.

  143. @Patrick in SC

    That has left Mr. Trump running on a record of an out-of-control pandemic …
     

    Trump’s hope that an economic recovery, a Covid vaccine or a Biden scandal could shake up the race faded with the last light of October.
     
    Actually, there were 2 October surprises: The vaccine roll out, which was deliberately delayed, and Hunter Biden's hard drive/laptop, which confirmed a 30 year history of influence peddling which dwarfed in significance even the stuff they fabricated about Trump and "Russia, Russia, Russia."

    But these things didn't happen because the liberal media didn't want them to happen. Full stop.

    Replies: @Pericles, @Sick of Orcs, @JR Ewing

    “I know everyone is worried about this variant that is floating around that we supposedly don’t know anything about and that appears to be at least somewhat resistant to the vaccines, but even if we don’t know anything about it the best thing you can do is get another shot of our excellent vaccine! Ka-ching!”

  144. @Corvinus
    But the main point of vaccines is that they can get us to herd immunity in 2021, so we will then be DONE with the pandemic: no more lockdowns, no more masks, no more this and that.

    But, the anti-vaxers are, in effect, on the side of the lockdowners. By slowing and perhaps preventing us from getting to herd immunity, we might be still doing the same lockdown stuff in 2022 as in 2020.

    —iSteve

    “Can you imagine how bad the anti-vax propaganda in the New York Times would be if Pfizer had announced its vaccine worked on November 2, Trump had spent the final 18 hours before the election boasting nonstop about the vaccine, and that had flipped 1 out of every 300 votes, giving Trump a 269-269 Electoral College tie and likely victory with House delegations voting by state?”

    LOL, simply and patently false, iSteve. You are wildly assuming that this subset voters would have undoubtedly changed their mind due squarely on this issue. The fact of the matter is that most American citizens had decided already who they were supporting, especially those who had cast their ballot via mail days or weeks earlier.

    But I will admit it makes for tremendous drama on your part. No doubt you are inspired by the Hair Negresses and Tiger Moms.

    Let us NOTICE how Trump viewed Coronavirus throughout his presidency, which swayed a good number of Americans to NOT trust him on this dire health matter.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/11/trumps-lies-about-coronavirus/608647/

    And let us also NOTICE a very important decision that Trump made earlier this year, but of course is denying.

    https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/529131-trump-officials-deny-turning-down-additional-doses-of-pfizer-covid-vaccine

    Happy Holidays, iSteve!

    Replies: @Patrick in SC, @Wokechoke

    LOL, simply and patently false, iSteve

    Simply and patently your opinion; an opinion which is, as usual, laughably ridiculous, pathetic, unsupported, and at odds with common sense.

    It’s “patently false” to claim the New York Times isn’t incredible biased and doesn’t slant their coverage and occasionally make stuff up? Officer Sicknick was killed by a fire extinguisher, right?

    Nope, that media of yours calls it right down the middle, is assiduously unbiased, and never, ever makes stuff up, just like you.

    LOLOLOLOL…

    Now, tell us about the all the hard evidence in the Mueller report you claimed was forthcoming to substantiate your claims about “Russian collusion” and other malfeasance?

    Well?

    Bwahahahahaha…

  145. The political question is this…

    How could you have an election on the eve of an announcement by Pfizer claiming that they’d found a credible vaccine and not allow voters to vote with the knowledge being discussed openly? The Democratic Party were doing a kind of insider trading knowing a vaccine was about to rolled (while they decried suggestion that vaccine was ready) out under a mandate while Trump was desperate (self serving perhaps) to let people know it was going to be available in days. Surely the securities exchange commission should look into Pfizer stock trading before the election and see how top Democratic donors and figureheads were investing one way buying Pfizer while they scoffed about a Trump approved vaccine.

    What Finklethink Election. Key knowledge was dramatically withheld from the electorate about vaccine public policy right before a critically important election. The election should have been about vaccine roll out policy. Not about looting coons and arbitrary lockdowns.

  146. @Corvinus
    But the main point of vaccines is that they can get us to herd immunity in 2021, so we will then be DONE with the pandemic: no more lockdowns, no more masks, no more this and that.

    But, the anti-vaxers are, in effect, on the side of the lockdowners. By slowing and perhaps preventing us from getting to herd immunity, we might be still doing the same lockdown stuff in 2022 as in 2020.

    —iSteve

    “Can you imagine how bad the anti-vax propaganda in the New York Times would be if Pfizer had announced its vaccine worked on November 2, Trump had spent the final 18 hours before the election boasting nonstop about the vaccine, and that had flipped 1 out of every 300 votes, giving Trump a 269-269 Electoral College tie and likely victory with House delegations voting by state?”

    LOL, simply and patently false, iSteve. You are wildly assuming that this subset voters would have undoubtedly changed their mind due squarely on this issue. The fact of the matter is that most American citizens had decided already who they were supporting, especially those who had cast their ballot via mail days or weeks earlier.

    But I will admit it makes for tremendous drama on your part. No doubt you are inspired by the Hair Negresses and Tiger Moms.

    Let us NOTICE how Trump viewed Coronavirus throughout his presidency, which swayed a good number of Americans to NOT trust him on this dire health matter.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/11/trumps-lies-about-coronavirus/608647/

    And let us also NOTICE a very important decision that Trump made earlier this year, but of course is denying.

    https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/529131-trump-officials-deny-turning-down-additional-doses-of-pfizer-covid-vaccine

    Happy Holidays, iSteve!

    Replies: @Patrick in SC, @Wokechoke

    Approval in October would have meant left wing protests against vaccination. You know it.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Wokechoke

    "Approval in October would have meant left wing protests against vaccination. You know it."

    You mean right-wing protests agains vaccination. Own it.

  147. @Triteleia Laxa
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco

    You're an idiot. Look at the divergence between Covid deaths rates now, covid case rates and how they used to be pre-vaccine. The vaccine makes it 10× less likely that you will die. The vaccine also has ridiculously infrequent serious side effects. It has saved countless lives and allowed us freedom again. Truly, anti-vaxxers going into 2022, are some of the world's stupidest people.

    It is OK to admit that you were wrong. You are not exactly an expert. You should expect to be wrong a lot.

    Replies: @Wokechoke

    Vulnerable 75+ diabetics obese etc can only be killed once.

  148. @Harry Baldwin
    we’d ever since be reading non-stop tributes in the Washington Post to the Heroes of January 6 Who Saved Democracy by charging into the House past the fascist Capitol Police and physically keeping the GOP from hijacking the election by Republicans

    NPR and the networks constantly mention January 6. They never remind their listeners of Memorial Day weekend 2020, when a mob of violent protestors threatened to storm the White House. They set fires and threw rocks and bottles at the Secret Service agents blocking them, 60 of whom were injured, 12 sufficiently to require hospitalization. At the time, the reaction of the progressive media was to mock Trump for "cowering in the bunker."

    The most important question about January 6 will not be raised at the show-trial hearings: "Why did Pelosi leave the Capitol essentially unguarded, knowing the size of the expected protest?" Trump claims that he advised her to bring in 10,000 National Guard troops to protect it. The progressive media says he did not, but that's what they would say. They have no credibility. No thinking person expects to hear truth from them anymore.

    Pelosi is so sinister I'm convinced that she saw great opportunity in the January 6 protest and had federal agents directing the crowds, but who imagines that we will ever learn the truth about this and so many other events, now that our media is so corrupt?

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Jim Don Bob

    Revolver has a new, long but good, article that confirms my suspicions that the storming of the Capitol 1/6/2021 was instigated by the Feds and its toadies.

    https://www.revolver.news/2021/12/damning-new-details-massive-web-unindicted-operators-january-6/

  149. @Steve Sailer
    @Rob

    Dear Rob:

    Thanks for your comments in 2021.

    Steve

    Replies: @Rob

    Oh, wow. Thank you.

    Any chance i could get one of those gold boxes around a comment that people used to get?

    • Replies: @res
    @Rob

    Now you are getting greedy ; )

    FWIW I would say a personal compliment from Steve on your body of comments for the year is >> a gold box for a single comment. But I guess if you are a completist... ; )

    Merry Christmas and Happy New Year everyone!

  150. @Altai
    https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1471697986577215491

    https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1465083725029466123

    https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1460782847699177477

    https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1457893431070662658

    https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1458157217392340994

    https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1457438336646320133

    Replies: @res

    That Twitter account is great. Thanks!

  151. @D. K.
    @Rob

    You and I both need to get our BMIs down under 25. (A few years ago, when I was walking and swimming, most days, mine was down to about 20.8; now it is 26.0!) I was sick in February 2020, which my oral surgeon, the following month, retrospectively diagnosed as Covid-19; but, a test that I took, that May, said that I was negative for having had it. I finally got the J&J shot, at the beginning of this month, to please my hectoring family members. Before that, I could not find it available locally-- and I would not have gotten an mRNA shot, no matter how much hectoring my family and friends had done. The pandemic will be over when it runs its natural course; the so-called vaccines are not going to end it, as falsely advertised.

    Replies: @res

    You and I both need to get our BMIs down under 25. (A few years ago, when I was walking and swimming, most days, mine was down to about 20.8; now it is 26.0!)

    Under/just around 25 seems like a good goal. Be careful about the idea that lower is better for BMI. Mortality data typically indicates 25 or a bit over is optimal, but there is some debate about whether those results are driven by sickness (especially cancer) in the low BMI people.

    For one example, see the paper and figure at the last two links in this comment.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/predictions-from-1900/#comment-5082454

    Especially note the variation by height. The taller you are the lower the optimal BMI it seems (artifact of the calculation).

    And everyone remember that muscle/fat balance matters as well.

    The pandemic will be over when it runs its natural course; the so-called vaccines are not going to end it, as falsely advertised.

    Looks like that is the case. My major error during the Covidiocy was thinking the vaccines would end both the fear and the pandemic.

    If Omicron really is as mild as it appears it looks like that spreading widely is as good an end as we could see from here.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @res

    If life expectancy were longer at a B.M.I. of 30 than at a B.M.I. of 20, I still would be trying to get back down to a B.M.I. of 20, rather than getting up to a B.M.I. of 30, for the first time ever. At the tail end of my first semi-starvation diet, almost twenty years ago, I got down to a B.M.I. of about 18.2, for a couple of days, and I never felt more energetic and flexible in my adult life-- including when I was walking marathons every day (when I only got down to a B.M.I. of about 18.6)! I would much rather feel well and energetic, and die sooner, than feel immobile and lethargic, and live to senility.

  152. @Rob
    @Steve Sailer

    Oh, wow. Thank you.

    Any chance i could get one of those gold boxes around a comment that people used to get?

    Replies: @res

    Now you are getting greedy ; )

    FWIW I would say a personal compliment from Steve on your body of comments for the year is >> a gold box for a single comment. But I guess if you are a completist… ; )

    Merry Christmas and Happy New Year everyone!

  153. @Greta Handel
    @HA

    The lyrics keep changing, but the bleat goes on.

    Admit something, at least to yourself:

    1. When you first rolled up your sleeve for one of these therapeutics, you had been fearpharmed that they were “vaccines,” which would prevent viral infection and transmission.

    2. The Establishment has acknowledged that this earlier narrative was false, but you’re stuck.

    3. Rather than thinking about and attending to the potentially adverse long term effects of a marginal, short term therapeutic, you’re masking any doubts, embarrassment, and regrets by scapegoating those who were more skeptical for “clogging up hospitals and EMT services.”

    What’s your position on mandatory injections?

    Replies: @Mark G., @HA

    Says Greta Handel: Rather than thinking about and attending to the potentially adverse long term effects of a marginal, short term therapeutic, you’re masking any doubts, embarrassment, and regrets by scapegoating those who were more skeptical for “clogging up hospitals and EMT services.”

    My response: I left a comment about the long term effects of the vaccines, whether the benefits exceeded the risks for younger people and whether young people should be able to make their own decision on whether to get it. In his response, HA did not address any of my points and switched the subject over to old people clogging up hospitals. I think you are correct on his reasons why.

    As far as people clogging up the hospitals, I think we could have greatly reduced the numbers of Covid hospitalizations, including my own, if the government had actively helped to develop early treatment protocols. Instead, people just had to sit around until they got sick enough to go into the hospital. The government actually worked to block doctors who tried to develop, implement and publicize early treatment protocols. State medical boards threatened to take away their licenses. Pharmacies, under pressure from the government, refused to fill their prescriptions. Hospitals, who receive lots of government funding, threatened to fire them if they worked for a hospital. Media platforms, under pressure from the government, banned information on early treatments. Big Pharma wants to force everyone to use their expensive patented drugs and vaccines. Pfizer made an additional several billion dollars off its Covid vaccine this year and it should surprise no one that the politician who received the most money from them, Biden, is pushing their product.

    Even in hospital treatments are more ineffective and expensive than they needed to be. When I was hospitalized with Covid I felt like everyone there was desperately trying to convince me I was really sick when I didn’t feel like it. After five days a doctor came in, looked at me and said “you don’t look sick, you look healthy so I’m sending you home”. He was the only honest person there. I felt like they were just trying to squeeze as much money out of me as they could. I felt the Dexamethasone steroid helped my breathing some. The Remdesivir was pretty useless. Studies show it doesn’t really reduce death rates. Also, it’s an anti-viral and I was past the viral stage and into the inflammation stage where steroids and anti-oxidants work best. If they had just sent me home with some Dexamethasone and Vitamin C pills it would have probably been about as effective and a lot cheaper than a hospital stay and three thousand dollar Remdesivir.

  154. @Mark G.
    @HA


    Again, I can understand why you yourself don’t appreciate the gravity of the harm that causes the medical system we all ultimately depend on in one way or another, but like I said, those around you might well choose to be more sane.

     

    You appear to be lumping older and younger people together here. Most younger people don't end up in the hospital when they get Covid. Like I said before, we don't know what the long term harmful effects of the vaccines are and no one should pretend that we do.

    I don't think I'm going to spend time going back and repeating everything I said in my previous comment. I've noticed when you respond to comments, including mine, rather than respond to the actual comment you go off on a tangent. You seem completely oblivious this makes you appear evasive. You also rely heavily on feeble attempts at sarcasm and insults. It's been my experience over 65 years that people substitute name calling when they don't actually have a good argument.

    I'm really interested in the truth on this subject. Between the pro-vaxxers and anti-vaxxers, it seems to be mostly the pro-vaxxers who appear to be calling for censorship of their opponents. Are they afraid they can't win in an open forum? Why is Tony "I am science" Fauci only willing to give interviews to friendly journalists? The only time I've seen him face hostile questions was with Rand Paul and he really looked rattled by it and unable to handle the situation. He was only there because he didn't have a choice. For the pro-vaxxer side, the optics of all this is very bad for them.

    Replies: @HA

    “You appear to be lumping older and younger people together here. Most younger people don’t end up in the hospital when they get Covid.”

    I rather doubt you are in your 20’s, but regardless, you managed, by your own admission, to clog up a hospital bed for quite some time at a time when vaccines were readily available to you. Why are you digressing to some non sequitur? The 20 year olds are certainly less likely to clog up that bed, and I blame them far less than those who older, but by being careless about spreading the disease, they help pass it on to those who will nonetheless clog up a bed, or worse. If you can’t understand why people who have done everything that was asked of them — or at least, like the Amish, not bothered to continue forcing themselves onto public spaces — are exasperated at those who keep coming up with lame arguments over why they shouldn’t have to do anything, and then get upset when people point that out their lame arguments — it’s on you to fix that.

    I can only respond to so many repeated lies and distortions, and I’m sorry if you feel I should waste even more time trying to rebut them, but I do what I can, and I’m limited to three comments a thread. Given the number of conspiracy nuts on a site like this, the handful of people who actually take the time to rebut them do remarkably well. In any case, as a Christmas gesture of goodwill towards all, feel free to come up with ONE SPECIFIC THING that you find most compelling about how wrong everyone except people like you who willingly resisted getting a shot and then wound up in the hospital, thereby depriving the bed of someone who needed it for something less iditiotic. Do that, and I will try to address it despite your being exhibit #1 and ground zero for how stupidly approaches like yours to this virus turned out.

    As for Fauci, I have repeatedly called him a beagle-torturing bureaucrat on this very thread. It’s not my job or inclination to defend those who torture small animals. How do you not get that? He can defend himself, assuming some researcher doesn’t snip his vocal chords like what happened to those beagles, so as to prevent anyone from having to listen to him. I will however point out that the very fact that the vast majority of people find the arguments of someone as despicable as that more compelling than the arguments of someone like you says more about your arguments than his.

    As for name calling, your ridiculously one-sided take on that clearly overlooks the f-bombs and other assorted expletives hurled my way. Suffice it to say, you deserve a lot more name-calling than I’ve given you.

  155. @JMcG
    @Rob

    Ireland is over 90% vaccinated. High numbers boosted too. Infection rates are skyrocketing at the moment.

    Replies: @HA

    “Ireland is over 90% vaccinated. High numbers boosted too. Infection rates are skyrocketing at the moment.”

    And yet, despite those “skyrocketing” infections, the death toll in Ireland is tiny in comparison with earlier ones. In fact, they’re not even bothering to give a daily update, and now just give a weekly roundup.

    Thanks for demonstrating — yet again — how well the vaccines do at keeping the death toll low, and making the hospitalizations a small fraction of what they would be otherwise.

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/ireland/#graph-deaths-daily

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/ireland/#graph-cases-daily

    • Disagree: Wokechoke
    • Replies: @Wokechoke
    @HA

    My brother in law’s father died of a stroke a month after Pfizer jab 2, in Ireland. Anecdotal but there you go. The death split opinion in the Irish side of the family about the dangers and efficacy of the jab.

    Replies: @HA

  156. @Greta Handel
    @HA

    The lyrics keep changing, but the bleat goes on.

    Admit something, at least to yourself:

    1. When you first rolled up your sleeve for one of these therapeutics, you had been fearpharmed that they were “vaccines,” which would prevent viral infection and transmission.

    2. The Establishment has acknowledged that this earlier narrative was false, but you’re stuck.

    3. Rather than thinking about and attending to the potentially adverse long term effects of a marginal, short term therapeutic, you’re masking any doubts, embarrassment, and regrets by scapegoating those who were more skeptical for “clogging up hospitals and EMT services.”

    What’s your position on mandatory injections?

    Replies: @Mark G., @HA

    “When you first rolled up your sleeve for one of these therapeutics, you had been fearpharmed that they were “vaccines,” which would prevent viral infection and transmission.”

    The “stopping transmission” was indeed ONE thing that people hoped for — but repeatedly said “verification is months away”. As it turns out — AS I HAVE REPEATEDLY NOTED:

    “Unvaccinated people are about six times more likely to test positive than vaccinated people, nine times more likely to be hospitalized, and 14 times more likely to die from COVID-related complications,…”

    So no, it doesn’t STOP transmission, but it does SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE IT. Got that? It really isn’t difficult, and the very fact that you’re even raising the point is reason enough to dismiss you as a loon. Moreover, it drops the death toll by over 10 fold. So go ahead and keep trying to pretend that “0.04 / 0.84 = .0476” means anything at this point, given that you’re apparently so desperate to handwave away something as obvious as that drop in the death toll. It’s not persuading anyone who isn’t already on your side. You are insane if you think it will. However bogus you think those trials were, no one but the truthers and those who are as clueless as they are believe at this point that the vaccines are some failure.

    If you want to insist that stopping transmission was the sole goal in all this, prove it — find me a link that says that’s the only metric of whether or not a vaccine works. As I’ve already noted, preventing breakout cases was never something the flu vaccine was able to do, and yet, for years before COVID came along, doctors repeatedly advised people to get it, with absolutely no controversy and no moron trying to tell us this is some “gotcha” for how flu vaccines don’t work. On the contrary, there are MULTIPLE goals for any vaccine, and preventing the loss of life — even of anti-vaxx losers who are begging for their Darwin awards — continues to be regarded as a primary benefit of this vaccine, and that hope has been satisfied spectacularly, for better of worse. If it were up to me, there would be no hospital beds for the unvaxxed and for people dispensing lame comments like the one you just did. You’d get a pup tent, and access to a rusty vat of ivermectin, HCQ and vitamin C and zinc — and whatever other quack cure you think will save you — and you could gargle and bathe with for all I care, but it would be out in the parking lot, or over in the nearby landfill, and that’s all you’d get. If we could do that, it would clear up the hospitals for sane people, and allow the rest of us to stop having to care, but doctors and health professionals, being the way they are, they want to save even those who were stupid enough to buy into lies like the one you’re peddling. So, alas, that’s not an option, and I will defer to the quixotic — but surely nobler — aspirations of those who want to save even the likes of you.

    As for mandatory injections, as long as you’re the recipient, I’m all for them. Except, in your case, I think they should always be administered with a Black&Decker quarter-inch drill bit, carbide tip, so as to leave more syringes for the rest of us.

    • Replies: @Greta Handel
    @HA

    Contempt must enhance the scapegoating therapeutic.

    But it looks like boosters (#165) eliciting arguments to reject are still required:


    I’m more than willing to buck the establishment and doubt the bureaucrats, and cast shade at Big Pharma, etc. but I’m not about to jump from the frying pan into the fire, and the latter is all you’re offering.
     
    You’ve made The Jump. And there’s no ejection from the Pfrying pan. No one’s offering you anything but fruitless explanations of their choice thus far not to follow.

    Isn’t that what makes you angry?

    Replies: @HA

  157. PREDICTION: The End of the World will happen, and when it does, it. will begin in Vermont:

    https://www.wcax.com/video/2021/12/22/covid-positive-vermonters-with-no-symptoms-clog-up-ers/

  158. @res
    @D. K.


    You and I both need to get our BMIs down under 25. (A few years ago, when I was walking and swimming, most days, mine was down to about 20.8; now it is 26.0!)
     
    Under/just around 25 seems like a good goal. Be careful about the idea that lower is better for BMI. Mortality data typically indicates 25 or a bit over is optimal, but there is some debate about whether those results are driven by sickness (especially cancer) in the low BMI people.

    For one example, see the paper and figure at the last two links in this comment.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/predictions-from-1900/#comment-5082454

    Especially note the variation by height. The taller you are the lower the optimal BMI it seems (artifact of the calculation).

    And everyone remember that muscle/fat balance matters as well.

    The pandemic will be over when it runs its natural course; the so-called vaccines are not going to end it, as falsely advertised.
     
    Looks like that is the case. My major error during the Covidiocy was thinking the vaccines would end both the fear and the pandemic.

    If Omicron really is as mild as it appears it looks like that spreading widely is as good an end as we could see from here.

    Replies: @D. K.

    If life expectancy were longer at a B.M.I. of 30 than at a B.M.I. of 20, I still would be trying to get back down to a B.M.I. of 20, rather than getting up to a B.M.I. of 30, for the first time ever. At the tail end of my first semi-starvation diet, almost twenty years ago, I got down to a B.M.I. of about 18.2, for a couple of days, and I never felt more energetic and flexible in my adult life– including when I was walking marathons every day (when I only got down to a B.M.I. of about 18.6)! I would much rather feel well and energetic, and die sooner, than feel immobile and lethargic, and live to senility.

  159. @HA
    @JMcG

    "Ireland is over 90% vaccinated. High numbers boosted too. Infection rates are skyrocketing at the moment."

    And yet, despite those "skyrocketing" infections, the death toll in Ireland is tiny in comparison with earlier ones. In fact, they're not even bothering to give a daily update, and now just give a weekly roundup.

    Thanks for demonstrating -- yet again -- how well the vaccines do at keeping the death toll low, and making the hospitalizations a small fraction of what they would be otherwise.

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/ireland/#graph-deaths-daily

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/ireland/#graph-cases-daily

    Replies: @Wokechoke

    My brother in law’s father died of a stroke a month after Pfizer jab 2, in Ireland. Anecdotal but there you go. The death split opinion in the Irish side of the family about the dangers and efficacy of the jab.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Wokechoke

    "My brother in law’s father died of a stroke a month after Pfizer jab 2, in Ireland."

    I am sorry for your loss. After 9 billion doses of the vaccine, there will be a lot of stories like yours, and however anecdotal they are, they are a tragedy to all concerned, and especially wounding on the first Christmas day spent after the death of a loved one.

    That being said, the graphs I showed you speak for themselves as to what the COVID death toll was pre- and post- vaccines, to the extent that your "disagree" button dissuades me not in the least, but I hope it at least made you feel a little better.

    If there were some comparable bump showing the death toll increase due to stories like yours, I certainly see no evidence of it in the corresponding MOMO chart for Irish excess deaths. That doesn't prove there was no connection between vaccinations and that death toll graph -- certainly not in the case of your in-law -- but to give you an analogy, I have no problem advising people not to deactivate their air bags, and even though those have been involved in some horrific deaths (including the decapitation of small children) it is my understanding that the overall reduction in car deaths makes up for that grisly track record, and I feel much the same way about these vaccines. So even if a vaccine did kill your in-law, in and of itself it would prove little to nothing.

    Using US data, the vaxxed so far are outdoing the unvaxxed on just about any metric -- they're even less likely to die of causes having nothing to do with COVID not to mention the death reductions that are related to COVID itself and that I've already quoted too many times already. I realize it's not a fair sampling given that the unvaxxed group includes all sorts of daredevils and fools who seem eager to die or care little about living, but that's what we have to work with so far.

    Again, if someone could come up with something more persuasive than anecdotal data, or lame arguments that I have addressed time and time again, I would have more doubts about my course of action. I certainly have no problem with people chasing down what seem to be bad batches or bungled injections, and I'm doubtful that every single drugstore dispensing COVID vaxxes are following protocols 100% so there's always going to be problems with any vaccine administered in unprecedented numbers, but COVID kills a lot of people, too, and I see it as the poison to be avoided. However bad the vaccines are, I'm not surprised, given how weak the anti-vaxxers' arguments have been, that the number of injections has made it to 9bn so far and that Big Pharma is, for better or worse, regarded as the lesser evil than whatever it is the anti-vaxxers are proposing as an alternative. (Feel free to substitute some other word than for "anti-vaxxer" in that last paragraph if you find that insulting or unfair, but it won't change the overall argument in the least.)

    Replies: @Wokechoke

  160. @Wokechoke
    @HA

    My brother in law’s father died of a stroke a month after Pfizer jab 2, in Ireland. Anecdotal but there you go. The death split opinion in the Irish side of the family about the dangers and efficacy of the jab.

    Replies: @HA

    “My brother in law’s father died of a stroke a month after Pfizer jab 2, in Ireland.”

    I am sorry for your loss. After 9 billion doses of the vaccine, there will be a lot of stories like yours, and however anecdotal they are, they are a tragedy to all concerned, and especially wounding on the first Christmas day spent after the death of a loved one.

    That being said, the graphs I showed you speak for themselves as to what the COVID death toll was pre- and post- vaccines, to the extent that your “disagree” button dissuades me not in the least, but I hope it at least made you feel a little better.

    If there were some comparable bump showing the death toll increase due to stories like yours, I certainly see no evidence of it in the corresponding MOMO chart for Irish excess deaths. That doesn’t prove there was no connection between vaccinations and that death toll graph — certainly not in the case of your in-law — but to give you an analogy, I have no problem advising people not to deactivate their air bags, and even though those have been involved in some horrific deaths (including the decapitation of small children) it is my understanding that the overall reduction in car deaths makes up for that grisly track record, and I feel much the same way about these vaccines. So even if a vaccine did kill your in-law, in and of itself it would prove little to nothing.

    Using US data, the vaxxed so far are outdoing the unvaxxed on just about any metric — they’re even less likely to die of causes having nothing to do with COVID not to mention the death reductions that are related to COVID itself and that I’ve already quoted too many times already. I realize it’s not a fair sampling given that the unvaxxed group includes all sorts of daredevils and fools who seem eager to die or care little about living, but that’s what we have to work with so far.

    Again, if someone could come up with something more persuasive than anecdotal data, or lame arguments that I have addressed time and time again, I would have more doubts about my course of action. I certainly have no problem with people chasing down what seem to be bad batches or bungled injections, and I’m doubtful that every single drugstore dispensing COVID vaxxes are following protocols 100% so there’s always going to be problems with any vaccine administered in unprecedented numbers, but COVID kills a lot of people, too, and I see it as the poison to be avoided. However bad the vaccines are, I’m not surprised, given how weak the anti-vaxxers’ arguments have been, that the number of injections has made it to 9bn so far and that Big Pharma is, for better or worse, regarded as the lesser evil than whatever it is the anti-vaxxers are proposing as an alternative. (Feel free to substitute some other word than for “anti-vaxxer” in that last paragraph if you find that insulting or unfair, but it won’t change the overall argument in the least.)

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
    @HA

    From all my extended contacts I’ve got one person who died in the pandemic, an Hispanic inlaw who was obese with diabetes. I know several oldsters who caught covid and lived without hospitalisation. I know one person who was jabbed and died (the Irish inlaw) an Aussie uncle died during the Aussie lockdown of something or other and I think he’d been jabbed but I’m not sure on his status.

    After 2 years of this, knowing many people who caught this including myself before vaccines and several people after with breakthroughs after being jabbed I’m not terribly impressed by the claims of the vaccine. Almost everyone I know has had covid. It’s like Johnny Rotten said, “ever get the feeling you’ve been ripped off?”


    It’s torn through the population and carried off fatties and old diabetics and cancer patients. Not quite enough of them either.

    Replies: @HA, @Mark G.

  161. @JR Ewing
    @interesting

    I have been warring with my wife for the last half of the year over the wisdom of getting my 14 year old son injected. Neither he nor I are vaccinated and neither of us have any intention to be due to both having antibodies and confirmed cases earlier this year.

    My wife and I recently reached a detente on this issue due to the too-hard-to-hide failure of the vaccines to prevent transmission and the clear evidence that the mRNA is more dangerous to young people than the disease itself. She cannot disagree with my position that neither one of us needs the shot, even if she doesn't like it, so she has quit harping over it lately.

    I was hoping this uneasy truce would persist indefinitely, but to my chagrin, last night at Christmas Eve dinner, my in-laws announced that they had rescheduled the family vacation Alaskan cruise of 2020 that had been canceled two years ago. We're going to Alaska in July 2022! GREAT!

    Except that cruise ships all require vax passes and unless the mask nonsense is repealed there is no way I'm getting on a plane for 6+ hours and enduring that humiliation. No f'ing way. I can pray that all of the restrictions are lifted beforehand, but the intractable culture war nature of this makes that very unlikely.

    My father in law is usually pretty reasonable about this kind of stuff and in the past has asked first to confirm dates and interest etc etc, but I'm pretty sure his wife - my mother in law who thinks anything announced by network news is divine truth - probably insisted that it be sprung on us this time so as to put me on the spot.

    So this vax battle is going to heat up again for me in the forthcoming months. My wife and her parents are going to claim that I'm being ungrateful for not wanting to go on vacation with them and I also will be accused of "polluting" my son's mind with my rightwing politics for not forcing him to go get the shot and risk his health over an illness that is not a threat to him.

    HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ME!

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @sayless, @Jack D

    Merry Christmas, JR. This PanicFest is indeed making family life even tougher. I am lucky my wife is on the same page at this point. That was not at all the case 1 1/2 years back.

    The stupid mask requirement in airport terminals and onboard airliners was extended to March. Who knows if they’ll use omicron or the next one to extend it again? What about the cruise ship itself, JR? If they require them in the common areas, that’d be a real P.I.T.A. Something tells me the cruise line won’t give up their vax restrictions unless business goes way down.

    How about interfamily dealings? We were at some people’s house yesterday eating and hanging out at normal social distances (as in, who cares?) and these people are completely down with the vaccine. Nobody ever asked us, but we’re pretty sure they figure we’ve all gotten jabbed, contrary to the actual case. What do you do? You can’t go bothering them about it while we’ve been in the house among everybody for a couple of hours already. Plus, it might start an argument, and we want to be friends.

    Then, my wife didn’t want to stay too long, figuring these recently vaccinated people (at least booster-shot wise) are spreading germs like wildfire, and we’re gonna get sick. So when we got home I took another of those Hydrochloroquine pills with a shot of zinc on the side with her.

    I doubt a single person in either family will get sick, but there’s all this doubt and worry. As for me, I’m kinda amused by the whole thing.

    That’s a nice job sticking to your guns on behalf of yourself and your kid. You’re not missing that much. Even the Alaska cruises are just about having a 200 yd long food bar. You’ll just gain 10 lb anyway, so maybe you all could rent a car out of Seattle and head up on your own trip to Alaska. Between the Grizzlies and the mosquitoes, COVID germies are the least of your worries. ;-}

    • Replies: @JR Ewing
    @Achmed E. Newman

    The vaccine pass thing would make sense in the abstract to me (or they’d have a better “common good” argument) IF it actually worked. But it doesn’t. And they don’t recognize precious infection either, so that doesn’t make sense, either.

    Because of jurisdiction, masks in airplanes is the only place libs can force it on unwashed redstaters. That requirement is more about humiliation of dissenters than anything, which is why Brandon issued that order so quickly and keeps extending it and why the pushback against the airline CEO’s was so extreme without ever addressing the merits of the argument.

    Replies: @Gabe Ruth

  162. @HA
    @Wokechoke

    "My brother in law’s father died of a stroke a month after Pfizer jab 2, in Ireland."

    I am sorry for your loss. After 9 billion doses of the vaccine, there will be a lot of stories like yours, and however anecdotal they are, they are a tragedy to all concerned, and especially wounding on the first Christmas day spent after the death of a loved one.

    That being said, the graphs I showed you speak for themselves as to what the COVID death toll was pre- and post- vaccines, to the extent that your "disagree" button dissuades me not in the least, but I hope it at least made you feel a little better.

    If there were some comparable bump showing the death toll increase due to stories like yours, I certainly see no evidence of it in the corresponding MOMO chart for Irish excess deaths. That doesn't prove there was no connection between vaccinations and that death toll graph -- certainly not in the case of your in-law -- but to give you an analogy, I have no problem advising people not to deactivate their air bags, and even though those have been involved in some horrific deaths (including the decapitation of small children) it is my understanding that the overall reduction in car deaths makes up for that grisly track record, and I feel much the same way about these vaccines. So even if a vaccine did kill your in-law, in and of itself it would prove little to nothing.

    Using US data, the vaxxed so far are outdoing the unvaxxed on just about any metric -- they're even less likely to die of causes having nothing to do with COVID not to mention the death reductions that are related to COVID itself and that I've already quoted too many times already. I realize it's not a fair sampling given that the unvaxxed group includes all sorts of daredevils and fools who seem eager to die or care little about living, but that's what we have to work with so far.

    Again, if someone could come up with something more persuasive than anecdotal data, or lame arguments that I have addressed time and time again, I would have more doubts about my course of action. I certainly have no problem with people chasing down what seem to be bad batches or bungled injections, and I'm doubtful that every single drugstore dispensing COVID vaxxes are following protocols 100% so there's always going to be problems with any vaccine administered in unprecedented numbers, but COVID kills a lot of people, too, and I see it as the poison to be avoided. However bad the vaccines are, I'm not surprised, given how weak the anti-vaxxers' arguments have been, that the number of injections has made it to 9bn so far and that Big Pharma is, for better or worse, regarded as the lesser evil than whatever it is the anti-vaxxers are proposing as an alternative. (Feel free to substitute some other word than for "anti-vaxxer" in that last paragraph if you find that insulting or unfair, but it won't change the overall argument in the least.)

    Replies: @Wokechoke

    From all my extended contacts I’ve got one person who died in the pandemic, an Hispanic inlaw who was obese with diabetes. I know several oldsters who caught covid and lived without hospitalisation. I know one person who was jabbed and died (the Irish inlaw) an Aussie uncle died during the Aussie lockdown of something or other and I think he’d been jabbed but I’m not sure on his status.

    After 2 years of this, knowing many people who caught this including myself before vaccines and several people after with breakthroughs after being jabbed I’m not terribly impressed by the claims of the vaccine. Almost everyone I know has had covid. It’s like Johnny Rotten said, “ever get the feeling you’ve been ripped off?”

    It’s torn through the population and carried off fatties and old diabetics and cancer patients. Not quite enough of them either.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Wokechoke

    Again, all that is still anecdotal, and however meaningful you find it, there's a reason why such evidence is disregarded when it comes to approving a drug, or a vaccine, or determining the death toll from this or that. It's genuinely difficult to retain a sense of objectivity even in a fairly large trial, and people are too good at finding patterns that simply don't exist. Data-mining, p-hacking, confirmation bias, whatever you want to call it -- it's genuinely hard to get past all that.

    No one denies that the vast majority of people will survive COVID, and that the elderly, overweight and diabetic will make up the vast majority of its death toll. (In fact, even before COVID, the elderly, overweight and diabetic were a disproportionate presence in most any mortuary.) The same is also true of stroke victims, I might add. But deaths can be improbable and affect primarily people you don't care so much about, and despite that be something we should go to considerable lenghts to avoid. A round of Russian roulette leaves the vast majority of its players unscathed, but it's still a terrible risk to undertake even if we allow for the fact that those willing to play such games are likely idiots that society could arguably do without.

    If you don't agree with COVID policies, I don't have a problem with that. Pull your kids out of the school that demands vaccinations. Don't get on a plane, and go into a restaurant, and so forth. The Amish do that already and they seem to be doing fine. There will be opponents to every quarantine and health precaution despite the fact that such practices date back to the days of leprosy and smallpox, and they're an ingrained aspect of our civilization. So, like the lady in the Churchill joke, we all know what we are at this point, and the rest is just haggling over prices -- specifically, how much is too much to be ignored and which lives are not really worth saving. But given that there will always be people screaming about how the lines we're drawing are the wrong ones, don't expect to convince me unless you can get beyond the anecdotal, and whatever animus or indifference you may hold for the old, fat, and diabetic, else I will continue to find your position to be thoroughly unpersuasive.

    Objectively speaking, those 9bn shots administered tell me that thus far, you and those on your side have done an awful job of convincing those outside your echo chambers, and you ought to at least be able to admit that. I'm more than willing to buck the establishment and doubt the bureaucrats, and cast shade at Big Pharma, etc. but I'm not about to jump from the frying pan into the fire, and the latter is all you're offering.

    , @Mark G.
    @Wokechoke


    Almost everyone I know has had covid. It’s like Johnny Rotten said, “ever get the feeling you’ve been ripped off?”
     
    The Afghanistan policy of Biden and the Democrats led to a botched withdrawal. Their economic policy led to high inflation rates. Their crime policy led to higher levels of crime. Their energy policy led to higher consumer energy prices. Their immigration policy led to swarms of illegal immigrants crossing the border. Their Covid policy of blocking early treatment options and effective hospital treatments while putting all their eggs in the vaccine basket led to high hospitalization and death rates. We need to tie all these issues together and go to the voters and explain how the failure in all these areas is due to the incompetence and corruption of the parasitic elites that have taken over the country. They are using their positions to rip off the productive portion of the population.

    There is a sense that things are getting worse for the U.S. and the country is on the decline, which is reflected in polling, so it is not too late to change course for this country at the ballot box. We don't have much time left, though. The parasitic elites are busily importing new voters who will vote as they are told in exchange for welfare benefits.
  163. @Wokechoke
    @HA

    From all my extended contacts I’ve got one person who died in the pandemic, an Hispanic inlaw who was obese with diabetes. I know several oldsters who caught covid and lived without hospitalisation. I know one person who was jabbed and died (the Irish inlaw) an Aussie uncle died during the Aussie lockdown of something or other and I think he’d been jabbed but I’m not sure on his status.

    After 2 years of this, knowing many people who caught this including myself before vaccines and several people after with breakthroughs after being jabbed I’m not terribly impressed by the claims of the vaccine. Almost everyone I know has had covid. It’s like Johnny Rotten said, “ever get the feeling you’ve been ripped off?”


    It’s torn through the population and carried off fatties and old diabetics and cancer patients. Not quite enough of them either.

    Replies: @HA, @Mark G.

    Again, all that is still anecdotal, and however meaningful you find it, there’s a reason why such evidence is disregarded when it comes to approving a drug, or a vaccine, or determining the death toll from this or that. It’s genuinely difficult to retain a sense of objectivity even in a fairly large trial, and people are too good at finding patterns that simply don’t exist. Data-mining, p-hacking, confirmation bias, whatever you want to call it — it’s genuinely hard to get past all that.

    No one denies that the vast majority of people will survive COVID, and that the elderly, overweight and diabetic will make up the vast majority of its death toll. (In fact, even before COVID, the elderly, overweight and diabetic were a disproportionate presence in most any mortuary.) The same is also true of stroke victims, I might add. But deaths can be improbable and affect primarily people you don’t care so much about, and despite that be something we should go to considerable lenghts to avoid. A round of Russian roulette leaves the vast majority of its players unscathed, but it’s still a terrible risk to undertake even if we allow for the fact that those willing to play such games are likely idiots that society could arguably do without.

    If you don’t agree with COVID policies, I don’t have a problem with that. Pull your kids out of the school that demands vaccinations. Don’t get on a plane, and go into a restaurant, and so forth. The Amish do that already and they seem to be doing fine. There will be opponents to every quarantine and health precaution despite the fact that such practices date back to the days of leprosy and smallpox, and they’re an ingrained aspect of our civilization. So, like the lady in the Churchill joke, we all know what we are at this point, and the rest is just haggling over prices — specifically, how much is too much to be ignored and which lives are not really worth saving. But given that there will always be people screaming about how the lines we’re drawing are the wrong ones, don’t expect to convince me unless you can get beyond the anecdotal, and whatever animus or indifference you may hold for the old, fat, and diabetic, else I will continue to find your position to be thoroughly unpersuasive.

    Objectively speaking, those 9bn shots administered tell me that thus far, you and those on your side have done an awful job of convincing those outside your echo chambers, and you ought to at least be able to admit that. I’m more than willing to buck the establishment and doubt the bureaucrats, and cast shade at Big Pharma, etc. but I’m not about to jump from the frying pan into the fire, and the latter is all you’re offering.

  164. @HA
    @Greta Handel

    "When you first rolled up your sleeve for one of these therapeutics, you had been fearpharmed that they were “vaccines,” which would prevent viral infection and transmission."

    The "stopping transmission" was indeed ONE thing that people hoped for -- but repeatedly said "verification is months away". As it turns out -- AS I HAVE REPEATEDLY NOTED:


    “Unvaccinated people are about six times more likely to test positive than vaccinated people, nine times more likely to be hospitalized, and 14 times more likely to die from COVID-related complications,…”
     
    So no, it doesn't STOP transmission, but it does SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE IT. Got that? It really isn't difficult, and the very fact that you're even raising the point is reason enough to dismiss you as a loon. Moreover, it drops the death toll by over 10 fold. So go ahead and keep trying to pretend that "0.04 / 0.84 = .0476" means anything at this point, given that you're apparently so desperate to handwave away something as obvious as that drop in the death toll. It's not persuading anyone who isn't already on your side. You are insane if you think it will. However bogus you think those trials were, no one but the truthers and those who are as clueless as they are believe at this point that the vaccines are some failure.

    If you want to insist that stopping transmission was the sole goal in all this, prove it -- find me a link that says that's the only metric of whether or not a vaccine works. As I've already noted, preventing breakout cases was never something the flu vaccine was able to do, and yet, for years before COVID came along, doctors repeatedly advised people to get it, with absolutely no controversy and no moron trying to tell us this is some "gotcha" for how flu vaccines don't work. On the contrary, there are MULTIPLE goals for any vaccine, and preventing the loss of life -- even of anti-vaxx losers who are begging for their Darwin awards -- continues to be regarded as a primary benefit of this vaccine, and that hope has been satisfied spectacularly, for better of worse. If it were up to me, there would be no hospital beds for the unvaxxed and for people dispensing lame comments like the one you just did. You'd get a pup tent, and access to a rusty vat of ivermectin, HCQ and vitamin C and zinc -- and whatever other quack cure you think will save you -- and you could gargle and bathe with for all I care, but it would be out in the parking lot, or over in the nearby landfill, and that's all you'd get. If we could do that, it would clear up the hospitals for sane people, and allow the rest of us to stop having to care, but doctors and health professionals, being the way they are, they want to save even those who were stupid enough to buy into lies like the one you're peddling. So, alas, that's not an option, and I will defer to the quixotic -- but surely nobler -- aspirations of those who want to save even the likes of you.

    As for mandatory injections, as long as you're the recipient, I'm all for them. Except, in your case, I think they should always be administered with a Black&Decker quarter-inch drill bit, carbide tip, so as to leave more syringes for the rest of us.

    Replies: @Greta Handel

    Contempt must enhance the scapegoating therapeutic.

    But it looks like boosters (#165) eliciting arguments to reject are still required:

    I’m more than willing to buck the establishment and doubt the bureaucrats, and cast shade at Big Pharma, etc. but I’m not about to jump from the frying pan into the fire, and the latter is all you’re offering.

    You’ve made The Jump. And there’s no ejection from the Pfrying pan. No one’s offering you anything but fruitless explanations of their choice thus far not to follow.

    Isn’t that what makes you angry?

    • Replies: @HA
    @Greta Handel

    "You’ve made The Jump. And there’s no ejection from the Pfrying pan. No one’s offering you anything but fruitless explanations of their choice thus far not to follow. Isn’t that what makes you angry?"

    No, I'm far more peeved by how much nonsense one can pack into as few sentences as you just did. Whatever my chances of dying from COVID -- and that goes for anyone I might infect, assuming they're not anti-vaxx loons who are as vulnerable to dying from it as you choose to be -- they've gone down by a factor of 10 or so. The same (give or take) goes for their odds of packing the ER's and ICU's at a time when other people need that for something far less preventable. That's good enough for me.

    The fact that you and your fellow truthers can't even seem to wrap your head around that, but keep pretending that getting infected today means the same thing it did a year ago, or even more bizarrely, pretending that after that 10 fold reduction, and those 9bn "test-runs" and full bona fide FDA approval, we still ought to keep discussing is whatever corners they chose to cut or tradeoffs they made in giving the vaccines (or any other) the Emergency Use Authorization that preceded all that. (That 0.84 figure you cited is a year old as of last week.) But given what you have to work with, I guess scraping the bottom of the barrel, Sysiphus-style, is what you're going to keep on doing.

    Yeah, I suppose all that fruitless lunacy might make some people angry, but don't flatter yourself by thinking I care all that much about you one way or another. I've long ago resigned myself to letting you and the likes of you continue to monopolize the COVID death toll from here on out, given the alacrity you've exhibited over the last couple of months for doing just that. As long as you stay out of the gyms and restaurants and public transportation, I'll just have to do without the pleasure of your company. Oh, well. And if COVID continues to spit out weaker and weaker variants and dwindles away to nothing the way SARS-1 did, and MERS, and countless other once-novel viruses we no longer even remember, rest assured I'll have no problem skipping the associated boosters, but I guess we'll see. Any of the colds I've ever had that laid me out for more than a day or two surpass the visible cumulative damage of all the vaccines of any kind I've taken in the last year or two, at least so far, but I guess we'll see about that, too.

    But if you do decide to go full-Amish, do try and hold off starting any more puppy mills. There are already far too many of those.

  165. @Wokechoke
    @Corvinus

    Approval in October would have meant left wing protests against vaccination. You know it.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “Approval in October would have meant left wing protests against vaccination. You know it.”

    You mean right-wing protests agains vaccination. Own it.

  166. @Achmed E. Newman
    @JR Ewing

    Merry Christmas, JR. This PanicFest is indeed making family life even tougher. I am lucky my wife is on the same page at this point. That was not at all the case 1 1/2 years back.

    The stupid mask requirement in airport terminals and onboard airliners was extended to March. Who knows if they'll use omicron or the next one to extend it again? What about the cruise ship itself, JR? If they require them in the common areas, that'd be a real P.I.T.A. Something tells me the cruise line won't give up their vax restrictions unless business goes way down.

    How about interfamily dealings? We were at some people's house yesterday eating and hanging out at normal social distances (as in, who cares?) and these people are completely down with the vaccine. Nobody ever asked us, but we're pretty sure they figure we've all gotten jabbed, contrary to the actual case. What do you do? You can't go bothering them about it while we've been in the house among everybody for a couple of hours already. Plus, it might start an argument, and we want to be friends.

    Then, my wife didn't want to stay too long, figuring these recently vaccinated people (at least booster-shot wise) are spreading germs like wildfire, and we're gonna get sick. So when we got home I took another of those Hydrochloroquine pills with a shot of zinc on the side with her.

    I doubt a single person in either family will get sick, but there's all this doubt and worry. As for me, I'm kinda amused by the whole thing.

    That's a nice job sticking to your guns on behalf of yourself and your kid. You're not missing that much. Even the Alaska cruises are just about having a 200 yd long food bar. You'll just gain 10 lb anyway, so maybe you all could rent a car out of Seattle and head up on your own trip to Alaska. Between the Grizzlies and the mosquitoes, COVID germies are the least of your worries. ;-}

    Replies: @JR Ewing

    The vaccine pass thing would make sense in the abstract to me (or they’d have a better “common good” argument) IF it actually worked. But it doesn’t. And they don’t recognize precious infection either, so that doesn’t make sense, either.

    Because of jurisdiction, masks in airplanes is the only place libs can force it on unwashed redstaters. That requirement is more about humiliation of dissenters than anything, which is why Brandon issued that order so quickly and keeps extending it and why the pushback against the airline CEO’s was so extreme without ever addressing the merits of the argument.

    • Replies: @Gabe Ruth
    @JR Ewing

    I’m surprised they’ll still let you on the plane without proof of vaccination. Would think that a high enough percentage of fliers are NPCs that the airlines wouldn’t sweat it, but maybe there are more of us than I suspect.

    Wife has made strides in her COVID skepticism, but she’s vacillating on meeting up with my family (admittedly a large crew with a very relaxed attitude to such things). Didn’t think I could hate the MSM more, this hysteria has made me take the words off Sam Hyde on journalists more and more seriously.

  167. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @James Braxton

    Steve desperately wants to believe that we can still reform the system so he sees what he wants to see.

    It's the same with how he continues to believe that some people in Hollywood are secret conservatives, putting dissident messages in their movies. It's insane, but it allows Steve to avoid the hard choice of supporting or rejecting white identity politics.

    White identity politics is the question of our time, yet Steve assiduously avoids it. Why?

    Replies: @EuroNat, @silviosilver, @Corvinus

    The answer is easy:

    1. Steve is, with all due respect, a bit of an intellectual featherweight, does not matter how hard he tries to publish pretendedly high brow cultural articles. He simply is not articulate enough to lash out at EuroAms’ ethnic adversaries without sounding racist or “antisemitic”. And honestly I dont even know if there is a way to do it, because the words “racist” and “antisemite” have come to mean “bad for blacks” and “bad for the Jews” respectively.

    2. Steve is like Trump, in the sense that he was never up to the task that some conservative Americans believe he should be up to. If Steve was Jewish instead of “legacy”, he probably would do more of this particular ethnic activism you want him to do, most possibly in Jews behalf. Alas he is not, and neither are legacy Americans calling the shots in DC anymore. BS walks and money talks. And guess who’s got the shekels and the network to buy the necessary DC and state politicos to get stuff done?

    3. Steve is completely dependant on donations, and he intuits many of his big donors are either Jewish or have a big Crimestop reaction when fingers are pointed at Jews. Therefore he understands that in order to keep this flow of donations as wide and abundant as possible he must make some concessions, including being very careful with Jews. Now how could anyone do some serious pro-EuroAm activism without mentioning the greatests and best organised of EuroAms’ adversaries ie wihout touching the JQ?

    4. He is a bit of a coward, and I think he has admitted as much himself if memory serves me, and also he has not the brains to make money with his content without having to regularly panhandle.

    In an alternative timeline, would a Steve with FU money be a more explicitly pro-EuroAm activist? Honestly I am not so sure, but I bet he would be a bit snarkier towards the mostly not “wholesome” Jewish influence to the American political and cultural status quo. Including of course foreign policy.

    • Disagree: New Dealer
    • Thanks: Corvinus
    • Replies: @Athenian Gentleman
    @EuroNat


    he has not the brains to make money with his content without having to regularly panhandle.
     
    Who is able to make money from expressing the kind of crimethink that you are talking about, "without having to regularly panhandle"? How many such individuals can you name?
    , @Jack D
    @EuroNat

    tl:dr Steve is not anti-Semitic enough for my taste.

    Write your own anti-Semitic blog then.

  168. @Wokechoke
    @HA

    From all my extended contacts I’ve got one person who died in the pandemic, an Hispanic inlaw who was obese with diabetes. I know several oldsters who caught covid and lived without hospitalisation. I know one person who was jabbed and died (the Irish inlaw) an Aussie uncle died during the Aussie lockdown of something or other and I think he’d been jabbed but I’m not sure on his status.

    After 2 years of this, knowing many people who caught this including myself before vaccines and several people after with breakthroughs after being jabbed I’m not terribly impressed by the claims of the vaccine. Almost everyone I know has had covid. It’s like Johnny Rotten said, “ever get the feeling you’ve been ripped off?”


    It’s torn through the population and carried off fatties and old diabetics and cancer patients. Not quite enough of them either.

    Replies: @HA, @Mark G.

    Almost everyone I know has had covid. It’s like Johnny Rotten said, “ever get the feeling you’ve been ripped off?”

    The Afghanistan policy of Biden and the Democrats led to a botched withdrawal. Their economic policy led to high inflation rates. Their crime policy led to higher levels of crime. Their energy policy led to higher consumer energy prices. Their immigration policy led to swarms of illegal immigrants crossing the border. Their Covid policy of blocking early treatment options and effective hospital treatments while putting all their eggs in the vaccine basket led to high hospitalization and death rates. We need to tie all these issues together and go to the voters and explain how the failure in all these areas is due to the incompetence and corruption of the parasitic elites that have taken over the country. They are using their positions to rip off the productive portion of the population.

    There is a sense that things are getting worse for the U.S. and the country is on the decline, which is reflected in polling, so it is not too late to change course for this country at the ballot box. We don’t have much time left, though. The parasitic elites are busily importing new voters who will vote as they are told in exchange for welfare benefits.

  169. @Mr. Anon
    It's all such a mystery:

    https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/pfizer-inc/summary?id=D000000138

    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pfizer-unions-others-donated-618-mln-bidens-inaugural-2021-04-21/

    By the way, Pfizer donated money to 275 Congressional candidates in 2020, 164 Democrats (including Bernie Sanders - who's he kidding with that (I) crap), and 111 Republicans. So it's pretty clear they're just bribing Congress - there's really no other way to wash it. And such a bargain too.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @silviosilver

    So it’s pretty clear they’re just bribing Congress – there’s really no other way to wash it. And such a bargain too.

    That’s one of the more remarkable aspects of American decline – how cheap it actually is to subvert American democracy. If I were China, I’d pull back on military production, and invest those funds into buying off Congress. They’ve clearly signaled they’re for sale, so the Chinese could achieve their geopolitical goals, avert war, and save trillions. What’s not to like?

  170. @AnotherDad
    It was the most openly fraudulent presidential election in American history. The list is almost endless--Russia hoax, FBI, CIA, the Republican establishment, Ukraine and Hunter Biden, Covid nonsense, "public health authorities", Fauci, gain-of-function and the lab leak, Cuomo the savior, George Floyd lies, other assorted BLM lies, the Democrat's mostly-peaceful-protests, Kenosha, Joe Biden's dementia, Kamala Harris's history and career path, Twitter, Google, Facebook, "covid emergency" election law suspensions, Pfizer vax antics, ballot harvesting and midnight ballot dumps.

    But end of the day ... the person who lost it: Donald J. Trump.

    Trump had the money and independence and attitude ... but "Art of the Deal" boy, gets his program rolled by Paul Ryan, doesn't fire Fauci, hires his son-in-law--a mediocre, Democrat, globalist--as his political advisor, can't make the obvious "Democrat riots" rule-of-law case, does nothing to stop-the-steal beforehand and debates like a 3rd grader hyped on adderall.

    Better nationalists please.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Achmed E. Newman, @silviosilver

    Better nationalists please.

    What can I say? You go into election battles with the billionaires you have, not the billionaires you dream of. So for the future, it’s not better nationalists you need, but better billionaires.

  171. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @James Braxton

    Steve desperately wants to believe that we can still reform the system so he sees what he wants to see.

    It's the same with how he continues to believe that some people in Hollywood are secret conservatives, putting dissident messages in their movies. It's insane, but it allows Steve to avoid the hard choice of supporting or rejecting white identity politics.

    White identity politics is the question of our time, yet Steve assiduously avoids it. Why?

    Replies: @EuroNat, @silviosilver, @Corvinus

    White identity politics is the question of our time, yet Steve assiduously avoids it. Why?

    What do you want from him? If tomorrow Sailer sounds that clarion, you know what will happen? Sweet fuck all. It’s not as if millions of hitherto apprehensive whites would suddenly spring into action.

    I’m not going to tell Sailer what to think or do, but I can say that I’m happier having him doing what he is doing – which is bridging the divide between white identitarians and white cuckservatives – than yet further reducing his influence and relevance by going full white right.

    At least this way, some of those cucks, and even the odd libtard here and there, will actually think, hmm, I might not agree with everything I’m hearing, but boy, those pro-white types are correct that there sure is whole lot of anti-white bullshit out there; why should anyone have to live like this?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @silviosilver

    "I might not agree with everything I’m hearing, but boy, those pro-white types are correct that there sure is whole lot of anti-white bullshit out there; why should anyone have to live like this?"

    Except there is no clear definition as to what is pro-white or what is anti-white. Perhaps you can clarify?

  172. @The Alarmist
    @Athenian Gentleman

    Lighten up, Frances.

    When police are telling people they’re essentially on their own vis à vis the thugs, it’s nice to know there are women and girls who can defend themselves when average menfolk on the streets are waiting for 911 to pick up the phone.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7Zmi0s6x-4

    Replies: @Athenian Gentleman

    Where did I express any objection to anyone being trained in the proper use of firearms? My objection was specifically to the way that, in the image representing the video-in-question, firearms were being treated as toys. Isn’t that completely contrary to what is a basic principle of proper firearm training and usage: the proper solemnity and respect that such objects, as instruments capable of severe and ultimate harm, demand?

    :

    1.) I agree that too much of an echo-chamber-like environment typically prevails in the comment threads here. The number of people who seem ready to actually consider and engage thoughtfully and substantively with a position or viewpoint that fundamentally and profoundly contradicts or challenges one they are commited-to would appear few. In fairness, this is pretty endemic to the human condition; hardly unique to this forum, or even particularly egregious here.

    2.) Did you not find Anon[136]‘s characterization of me rather absurd? I suppose that for his sake, I can only hope that he did not actually conclude from my comment that I was “a genuine Michael Moore-style socialist”.

  173. @Rob
    @D. K.

    I’m 42. I have high cholesterol, low iron, I had serious back surgery, and am disabled. I’m schizoaffective, which might explain some of what I post. Overweight but not quite obese. Blood sugar fine. I take 1g iron/day, 4 or 5000 iu vitamin D. Not much sun, though i walk 20 minutes outside every day.

    My friend had covid. He said it was like a horrible cold. To quote, it “knocked him on his ass. He lost his sense of smell completely, could not taste anything. Sounded unpleasant.

    Omicron seems to be less deadly,though who knows. Milder virus plus fully vaccinated and antivirals coming, it’s getting close to just the flu territory. Though one of the antivirals reduced hospitalization but not death.

    If two vaccine shots 6 months ago do not give your immune stystem enough head start with omicron it is possible that having had omicron will not protect you from delta. There are ~160 serotypes of rhinovirus...

    I’m ready for the pandemic to be over.

    Replies: @D. K., @Peter Lund

    I’m schizoaffective, which might explain some of what I post.

    Some of what you post is a bit weird, sure, but most of it is well-thought out and is clearly written by an intelligent and educated person. I’d like to take this opportunity to say thanks 🙂

    • Replies: @Rob
    @Peter Lund

    Thank you!

  174. @EuroNat
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    The answer is easy:

    1. Steve is, with all due respect, a bit of an intellectual featherweight, does not matter how hard he tries to publish pretendedly high brow cultural articles. He simply is not articulate enough to lash out at EuroAms' ethnic adversaries without sounding racist or "antisemitic". And honestly I dont even know if there is a way to do it, because the words "racist" and "antisemite" have come to mean "bad for blacks" and "bad for the Jews" respectively.

    2. Steve is like Trump, in the sense that he was never up to the task that some conservative Americans believe he should be up to. If Steve was Jewish instead of "legacy", he probably would do more of this particular ethnic activism you want him to do, most possibly in Jews behalf. Alas he is not, and neither are legacy Americans calling the shots in DC anymore. BS walks and money talks. And guess who's got the shekels and the network to buy the necessary DC and state politicos to get stuff done?

    3. Steve is completely dependant on donations, and he intuits many of his big donors are either Jewish or have a big Crimestop reaction when fingers are pointed at Jews. Therefore he understands that in order to keep this flow of donations as wide and abundant as possible he must make some concessions, including being very careful with Jews. Now how could anyone do some serious pro-EuroAm activism without mentioning the greatests and best organised of EuroAms' adversaries ie wihout touching the JQ?

    4. He is a bit of a coward, and I think he has admitted as much himself if memory serves me, and also he has not the brains to make money with his content without having to regularly panhandle.

    In an alternative timeline, would a Steve with FU money be a more explicitly pro-EuroAm activist? Honestly I am not so sure, but I bet he would be a bit snarkier towards the mostly not "wholesome" Jewish influence to the American political and cultural status quo. Including of course foreign policy.

    Replies: @Athenian Gentleman, @Jack D

    he has not the brains to make money with his content without having to regularly panhandle.

    Who is able to make money from expressing the kind of crimethink that you are talking about, “without having to regularly panhandle”? How many such individuals can you name?

  175. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Harry Baldwin

    Wallace is loyal to his tribe. Once that's understood, everything makes sense.

    Our tribe should learn the lessons of his tribe.

    Replies: @Athenian Gentleman, @Athenian Gentleman

    Wallace is loyal to his tribe.

    If Wallace has a “tribe”, it would be his socio-economic and political class. And that includes plenty who are not Jews, while excluding plenty who are.

    Viewing the world through a cartoon-level simplistic “Jews vs. Goyim” lens is silly. Silly citizens make for a silly country.

    • Thanks: Corvinus
    • Replies: @silviosilver
    @Athenian Gentleman

    If you're not willing to concede the marked tendency of Jews to view issues and situations through "is it good for the Jews?" lens, then you're just not in the game. "Silliness" doesn't even begin to capture such deliberate blindness.

    Note: Americans and Europeans have been deliberately blinding themselves to Jewish influence for well over fifty years now. It's worked out wonderfully, clearly.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Hangnail Hans
    @Athenian Gentleman

    Oh great, yet another Fellow White Person whispering in our ear the eternal verities of MSM propaganda.

    , @silviosilver
    @Athenian Gentleman


    If Wallace has a “tribe”, it would be his socio-economic and political class. And that includes plenty who are not Jews, while excluding plenty who are.

    Viewing the world through a cartoon-level simplistic “Jews vs. Goyim” lens is silly. Silly citizens make for a silly country.
     
    How does Athenian Gent know that if Wallace has a tribe it's his economic class - that and no other? He just does. He just knows it. He's sure of it.

    Luckily for him, this is not a cartoon-level simplistic "Rich vs. Poor" lens, and viewing the world solely through this lens does not lead to silliness.

    Lol.
  176. @Rob
    @Mike1

    Vaccinated are dying from omicron at higher rates everywhere? I wanna see a citation for that.

    Vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED) or vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD) at work? Know the mechanisms?

    Fact is, omicron has boomed in places where people are young and thin. Who knows what it’s going to do to Americans. A “milder” covid that overflows the hospitals because it’s so contagious would still be bad.

    Where do y’all get the idea that covid is worse for vaccinated people? Vox day seems to think the vaccines make you more vulnerable to covid snd sterilize you. Haven’t looked recently, has he added any new effects? Do you know how vaccines work? If omicron is worse for vaccinated people, then it is likely worse for people who caught another strain of covid. Is it?

    As far as a vaccine for a “mild” disease goes, if there were a polyvalent rhinovirus vaccine, I would take it in a second.

    I understand that the same media that celebrates white dispossession tells you that getting vaccinated is a good idea. But it really is

    Not to mention, omicron’s phenotype is not set in stone. Death is a side effect from the virus “point of view” dead host or recovered host is the same.

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Mark G., @Mike1

    If you actually are interested Alex Berenson on Substack presents information in a way that non technical readers like yourself will be able to understand. You could also look at the raw data from the UK and Israel yourself if you do happen to have that skillset.

    However, I’m well aware the “I wanna see a citation for that” crowd are never interested in reality. If they were, they would have read the papers themselves already: you know, deadly pandemic and all.

    • Replies: @Rob
    @Mike1

    Well, I do have to admit that I am less interested in this one pandemic than I am in vaccines generally.

    On the vaccine causing ADE, VAED, or VAERD I am skeptical because the FDA is extremely biased toward ruling new medications unsafe.

    To start with, antibody-dependent enhancement to a pathological extent is relatively rare in vivo. Some vaccines caused it, though. There was an inactivated measles vaccine and a respiratory syncytial virus vaccine for infants that was caught in phase III testing. Dengue can cause it. There’s a cat disease as well.

    The thing about the dengue vaccine causing ADE is that wild dengue causes it too. This is not super surprising. Live vaccines cause immunity (or not) by the same mechanisms that “natural immunity” post-infection does.

    The inactivated vaccines that caused ADE to a pathological extent did so because they did not cause cell-mediated immunity (CD8+ cytotoxic “killer” T cells) or possibly CD4+ of both helper and cytotoxic varieties. The antibodies were likely not the result of “affinity maturation,” which makes more strongly-binding antibodies that, ceteris paribus are more neutralizing and more numerous.

    Vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease happened with SARS I vaccine attempts. It’s a Th2-mediated hypersensitivity that causes eosinophils to infiltrate the lungs in high numbers. The covid vaccines avoided it by creating more balanced Th1 and Th2 responses and by using spike protein-analogs that were “stuck” in the pre-fusion metastable state so that antibodies raised to them are both more neutralizing and possibly do not bind post-fusion spikes, which would lead to greater inflammation. Also, SARS I snd II are different diseases, so maybe covid vaccines would have caused VAERD.

    Again on ADE, typically the solution to low titer non-neutralizing antibodies causing infection of macrophages and monocytes is to cause higher-titer neutralizing antibodies. To the cure to the vaccine-induced enhanced disease is more vaccine.

    All this ADE stuff is of course predicated upon the coronavirus replicating in macrophages, which I don’t know that it can.

    I am really, strongly on the side of free speech. I don’t think Berenson should be censored by the government or the “town square” of social media. I do wish people had better judgment of sources. I would love to “trust the experts,” but the experts have done a terrible job the whole pandemic. Nevertheless, they have shown that they can eventually learn from reality, which is more than I can say for the covid truthers.

    I was asking for a source because “vaccinated people are getting covid at a higher rate” is an extraordinary claim.

    Replies: @gda, @Mike1, @Mark G.

  177. I have the capacity to read medical papers and do statistical math. That puts me in a very small group worldwide (also why I got conned in the early months of Covid. They did a great job on the back end).

    Quoting PolitiFact is just comical. If you don’t know who funds that you should not have an opinion on what the weather is.

  178. @Greta Handel
    @HA

    Contempt must enhance the scapegoating therapeutic.

    But it looks like boosters (#165) eliciting arguments to reject are still required:


    I’m more than willing to buck the establishment and doubt the bureaucrats, and cast shade at Big Pharma, etc. but I’m not about to jump from the frying pan into the fire, and the latter is all you’re offering.
     
    You’ve made The Jump. And there’s no ejection from the Pfrying pan. No one’s offering you anything but fruitless explanations of their choice thus far not to follow.

    Isn’t that what makes you angry?

    Replies: @HA

    “You’ve made The Jump. And there’s no ejection from the Pfrying pan. No one’s offering you anything but fruitless explanations of their choice thus far not to follow. Isn’t that what makes you angry?”

    No, I’m far more peeved by how much nonsense one can pack into as few sentences as you just did. Whatever my chances of dying from COVID — and that goes for anyone I might infect, assuming they’re not anti-vaxx loons who are as vulnerable to dying from it as you choose to be — they’ve gone down by a factor of 10 or so. The same (give or take) goes for their odds of packing the ER’s and ICU’s at a time when other people need that for something far less preventable. That’s good enough for me.

    The fact that you and your fellow truthers can’t even seem to wrap your head around that, but keep pretending that getting infected today means the same thing it did a year ago, or even more bizarrely, pretending that after that 10 fold reduction, and those 9bn “test-runs” and full bona fide FDA approval, we still ought to keep discussing is whatever corners they chose to cut or tradeoffs they made in giving the vaccines (or any other) the Emergency Use Authorization that preceded all that. (That 0.84 figure you cited is a year old as of last week.) But given what you have to work with, I guess scraping the bottom of the barrel, Sysiphus-style, is what you’re going to keep on doing.

    Yeah, I suppose all that fruitless lunacy might make some people angry, but don’t flatter yourself by thinking I care all that much about you one way or another. I’ve long ago resigned myself to letting you and the likes of you continue to monopolize the COVID death toll from here on out, given the alacrity you’ve exhibited over the last couple of months for doing just that. As long as you stay out of the gyms and restaurants and public transportation, I’ll just have to do without the pleasure of your company. Oh, well. And if COVID continues to spit out weaker and weaker variants and dwindles away to nothing the way SARS-1 did, and MERS, and countless other once-novel viruses we no longer even remember, rest assured I’ll have no problem skipping the associated boosters, but I guess we’ll see. Any of the colds I’ve ever had that laid me out for more than a day or two surpass the visible cumulative damage of all the vaccines of any kind I’ve taken in the last year or two, at least so far, but I guess we’ll see about that, too.

    But if you do decide to go full-Amish, do try and hold off starting any more puppy mills. There are already far too many of those.

  179. The mRNA vaccines are a joke, and a very bad one. Getting worse by the month!

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Guest29048

    Go Utahville!

  180. @Athenian Gentleman
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    Wallace is loyal to his tribe.
     
    If Wallace has a "tribe", it would be his socio-economic and political class. And that includes plenty who are not Jews, while excluding plenty who are.

    Viewing the world through a cartoon-level simplistic "Jews vs. Goyim" lens is silly. Silly citizens make for a silly country.

    Replies: @silviosilver, @Hangnail Hans, @silviosilver

    If you’re not willing to concede the marked tendency of Jews to view issues and situations through “is it good for the Jews?” lens, then you’re just not in the game. “Silliness” doesn’t even begin to capture such deliberate blindness.

    Note: Americans and Europeans have been deliberately blinding themselves to Jewish influence for well over fifty years now. It’s worked out wonderfully, clearly.

    • Thanks: Hangnail Hans
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @silviosilver

    “If you’re not willing to concede the marked tendency of Jews to view issues and situations through “is it good for the Jews?” lens”

    Except Athenian Gentlemen started that Jews are not monolithic in their thinking, that there are competing subgroups, so what may be good for them in their particular subgroup, may not be good for the other subgroups.

    “Note: Americans and Europeans have been deliberately blinding themselves to Jewish influence for well over fifty years now. It’s worked out wonderfully, clearly.”

    So I’ve been told that white Americans and Europeans have high IQs and high time preferences on average. Yet, somehow, they collectively have been bamboozled and hoodwinked repeatedly by Jews, who engage in a masterclass of deception, for half a century. And that when these two groups do realize they’ve been taken for a ride, they refuse to believe it. Basically, they are too trusting.**. Is that your take, or is it something different?

    Because I would counter that we whites do know exactly what has been going on, and that we have been making our own decisions about race and culture, decision that you personally disagree with. So, some people make this excuse** to provide psychological comfort. Is that what you are doing here? Explain, please.

  181. @JR Ewing
    @Achmed E. Newman

    The vaccine pass thing would make sense in the abstract to me (or they’d have a better “common good” argument) IF it actually worked. But it doesn’t. And they don’t recognize precious infection either, so that doesn’t make sense, either.

    Because of jurisdiction, masks in airplanes is the only place libs can force it on unwashed redstaters. That requirement is more about humiliation of dissenters than anything, which is why Brandon issued that order so quickly and keeps extending it and why the pushback against the airline CEO’s was so extreme without ever addressing the merits of the argument.

    Replies: @Gabe Ruth

    I’m surprised they’ll still let you on the plane without proof of vaccination. Would think that a high enough percentage of fliers are NPCs that the airlines wouldn’t sweat it, but maybe there are more of us than I suspect.

    Wife has made strides in her COVID skepticism, but she’s vacillating on meeting up with my family (admittedly a large crew with a very relaxed attitude to such things). Didn’t think I could hate the MSM more, this hysteria has made me take the words off Sam Hyde on journalists more and more seriously.

  182. @Arclight
    The most important lesson of delaying the Pfizer vaccine is that our betters are perfectly content to let the masses suffer if it serves their political goals. Even if the ultimate number of people who may have gotten very ill or died due to this isn't enough to fill a high school gym, it doesn't change the fact that in 2020 the ruling class watched billions of property and economic damage unfold, dozens of direct homicides from rioting, and likely thousands of incremental deaths occur so that they got the political outcome they wanted.

    Obviously there are many people who do not see these events this way, but on the other hand based on the shift in Latino voting patterns and the millions of people of all stripes who were suddenly interested in owning a firearms, many do understand this in one way or another. If the GOP was smart, they would realize that unabashedly focusing on masculine virtues they would grow their voter base. Latinos like strength in their politicians and even chipping the traditional black voter performance for Dems down to 85% rather than 90% (which is entirely possible) would cause enormous problems for the left in statewide elections.

    Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Johann Ricke, @Johann Ricke, @Johann Ricke

    And when I say Hispanics want murderers killed, I am referring to a number of surveys I have read of in the past:

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/01/24/mexico-death-penalty-texas-execution/4817247/

    Surveys by polling firms and media outlets in Mexico over the past seven years show that support for the death penalty has increased to a point where a majority would like to see it reinstated. Recent polls found 70%-80% would like to see the death penalty imposed for crimes such as murder and kidnapping, a rate above the majority support for the death penalty in the USA.

    I expect these polls are less cherry-picked than similar polls commissioned by abolitionist groups stateside.

  183. @HA
    @Mike Tre

    "It’s a bit difficult to reconcile that with people having a fear of needles."

    I didn't accuse all people, or people in general, of having a fear of needles. I accused panty-wetting little crybabies like you, convinced as you are that being told to wear a mask to Walmart is the "greatest seizure of civil liberties ever visited upon the American populace" -- even more so than the IRS, and forced conscription.

    Are we clear on that? You are the tantrum-throwing little sissy-pants I accused of being afraid of needles, and with good reason. Maybe it's just the drama of it, and the need for attention, that drives both that and whatever tattoos you've collected over the years, but trying to convince me of your overall mental soundness by appealing to your tats is not a particularly impressive comeback. Same goes for your muscle car, combover, pit bull, sock-in-the-underwear or whatever else you try to paper over your inadequacy issues.

    If it triggers you so much to have your crybaby hysteria exposed to the world, maybe do something to fix that instead of lashing out at those who point it out to you.

    Replies: @Anon

    You can hear the lisp as he typed this.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Anon

    And just to be clear, I was not being hyperbolic about the insistence among at least some people here that COVID mask restrictions are indeed the "greatest seizure of civil liberties ever visited on the American people" -- even after being reminded about the IRS, forced military conscription, MK Ultra, Typhoid Mary, etc.

    The no-one-ever-suffered-worse-than-we-did narcissism required for someone older than 14 to believe anything that crazy is not something that can be negated simply by appealing to the number of tats (which also scream "me, me me" in another kind of way) which people like that may be sporting.

  184. @Guest29048
    The mRNA vaccines are a joke, and a very bad one. Getting worse by the month!

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    Go Utahville!

  185. @Arclight
    The most important lesson of delaying the Pfizer vaccine is that our betters are perfectly content to let the masses suffer if it serves their political goals. Even if the ultimate number of people who may have gotten very ill or died due to this isn't enough to fill a high school gym, it doesn't change the fact that in 2020 the ruling class watched billions of property and economic damage unfold, dozens of direct homicides from rioting, and likely thousands of incremental deaths occur so that they got the political outcome they wanted.

    Obviously there are many people who do not see these events this way, but on the other hand based on the shift in Latino voting patterns and the millions of people of all stripes who were suddenly interested in owning a firearms, many do understand this in one way or another. If the GOP was smart, they would realize that unabashedly focusing on masculine virtues they would grow their voter base. Latinos like strength in their politicians and even chipping the traditional black voter performance for Dems down to 85% rather than 90% (which is entirely possible) would cause enormous problems for the left in statewide elections.

    Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Johann Ricke, @Johann Ricke, @Johann Ricke

    Latinos like strength in their politicians

    The real bottom line is that Hispanics, like other voters, like obedience in their politicians. Since Democrats have become obedient primarily to black voters, who want free rein to engage in mayhem at will, from shoplifting on up to and including murder, Hispanics are balking, just like deplorables. This is especially critical to Hispanics, since so many of them tend to be lower-income and working class and have to live in areas blessed with large percentages of black residents. Giving blacks free passes for mayhem doesn’t play well with people who have to deal with it on a daily basis, and a lot of those people are workaday Hispanics.

  186. @Rob
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco


    The vaccines are no -sterilizing and did not stop the spread, they were a complete failure.
     
    They reduced deaths to 1/11 (that’s not a date) the unvaccinated rate. They did not cause sterilizing immunity and did not stop the spread. Do you mean you could not freeload on other people getting vaccinated? Boohoo.

    2021 was worse than 2020 because social distancing and (finally) masking slowed the spread in 2020. In ‘21, cons got all oppositional defiant disordered. They stopped masking and stopped social distancing, but refused to get vaccinated, as they were suddenly expert immunologists, having scrolled through a Twitter feed. Oh, yeah. They also started taking ivermectin, a neurotoxin for parasitic worms. It is a wonder drug, and its discoverers earned their Nobel prize. Here’s where I did my own research — viruses? They ain’t got no nerves! It is imaginable that ivermectin works against COVID by a totally different mechanism than its effect on ion channels, but there is a ton more evidence that the vaccines work. The vast majority of chemicals researchers try out at various stages of testing do not work. Ivermectin for COVID is at the “large-ish random small molecule with functional groups” stage of testing for treating any virus. The logic of, “parasitic worms are bad. Ivermectin treats parasitic worm infections. COVID is bad, too. Therefore, ivermectin treats COVID” is lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. But cons were all about it. Despite that, as you say, there were more COVID deaths in ‘21 than ‘20. Those libs? They done been owned!

    In fairness, this year’s deaths cannot be entirely attributed to conservatives getting COVID and dying to make Biden’s numbers worse than Trump’s and thereby own the libs. Blacks, Mexicans, and Mexicans from the rest of Latin America were also too dumb and lazy to get vaccinated. August company.

    However, there are now two oral COVID medications. Both are mutagenic for rdrp replication of RNA. One was tested for flu, but withdrawn over concerns that it is mutagenic for DNA polymerase replication of DNA. COVID is deadlier than the flu, so maybe the trade-off is worthwhile? Personally, I think a short course of a drug that might cause point mutations is unlikely to cause cancer, but I could be wrong, Omicron seems to be less deadly, likely because it does not activate innate and Th2 immunity as strongly as previous variants, giving the genomes that manage to tamp down the cellular antiviral response an intrahost selective advantage. The benefit to you is that the immune reaction does not kill you. My theory explains why (some) respiratory viruses tend to evolve to be less lethal over short periods of time. A Nobel-worthy theory of someone fleshes it out if I can toot my own horn. This only applies if some non-lethal immune mechanism can keep the virus from turning you into goo, of course.

    Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic, @D. K., @Known Fact, @HA, @Mr. Anon, @vinteuil, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Rob, @The Alarmist, @Alden

    Ivermectin cures more than worms. Many medications cure more than one disease. For instance Prozac. It was originally developed as a diet pill . By increasing supplies of serotonin in the brain. Turns out serotonin is a natural happiness supply to the brain. Thus the serotonin also causes decreased appetite. Similar to how cigarettes cause increased serotonin and a cheerful little lift to get one through the day and decreased appetite.

    So now Prozac is a widely prescribed and effective anti depressant.

    There’s plenty more examples of dual or much more than dual purpose medications. Prozac is the first one I thought of. Benadryl prevents hives bug bites skin allergies from getting really dangerous. For someone severely allergic to bee stings, a four ounce slug of Benadryl will keep them alive till they get to the ER. It also slows the system down enough to alleviate coughing and induce sleep.

    Muscle relaxers aren’t prescribed as sleeping pills or pain pills. But they are very effective pain and sleeping pills.

    There are plenty more meds that cure or alleviate many diseases. Ivermectin is one.

    Ask Mr google or looking for an online pharmacology site. Or look in any pharmacology book. You’ll find lots of multi use medications.

    • Replies: @Rob
    @Alden

    Yes, lots of drugs treat more than one condition. Many of these treat conditions by acting on one thing (system, receptor, receptor family, cell type...) that is important to the conditions treated. SSRIs treat lots of things that seem to relate to low serotonin. Even here, things are a bit uncertain. Prozac starts inhibiting serotonin reuptake immediately. Probably with 45 minutes of taking the pill. So why do they take a month to start treating depression? Perhaps because low serotonin-as-neurotransmitter is not what needs to change to alleviate depression. It may be serotonin-as-neurohormone increasing causes new growth, either of connections or neurogenesis that alleviates depression. Paradoxical effects of SSRIs, when taking one causes serious suicidal ideation, happen much more quickly.

    Interestingly, you bring up an anti-depressant. There is an antidepressant, fluvoxamine, that may help with covid. Scott Alexander (astral codex X, formerly slate star codex) discusses it in several places. He has a very interesting post, On taking “drugs” that have a small cost but an unlikely large positive effect. I recommend the article. He has another post on the surprising number of antiparasitics that turned out to be antidepressants. This is not it, but goes towards why that might be true.

    Anyway, Prozac for depression and Prozac for weight loss are both mediated by serotonin reuptake inhibition. For ivermectin to help with coronavirus by the recognized mechanism (the equivalent of serotonin reuptake inhibition for Prozac) would be to bind and activate a cys loop containing pentameric (5 subunits) glutamate-gated ion channel.

    Ivermectin activates glutamate-mediated chloride channels, invertebrate ones at nanomolar (like a few 1 - 10’s * 10^-9 * 60.022*10^23 molecules/liter big number, low concentration) it inhibits ours at micromolar concentrations, on the order 1000 times more concentrated. That’s a very nice therapeutic window.

    Ok, so I was a bit dishonest. Viruses do not have nerves, but frequently (usually?) encode ion channels. SARS-CoV-2 encodes three. 3a, 8a, and E proteins. 3a is a tetrameric (4 subunit) cation (positive ions, unlike chloride) channel, and ivermectin binds pentameric channels, so (probably) does not affect 3a.

    E appears to be pentameric, but with complex conductivities depending on in vitro conditions. Maybe it is non-selective? No one seems to think ivm binds it, though.

    8a honestly, I'm feeling too lazy. A quick googling suggests that ivermectin boosters do not think ivm activates any of the coronavirus ion channels.

    Given that SARS-CoV-2 does not have the sort of ion channel that ivermectin turns on, it would have to act through another mechanism on a different kind of protein. This is possible. Simply binding to a protein, even far from an active site can inhibit its associations with other proteins including itself that are necessary for that protein to work, but puts it from a well-characterized drug with a known mechanism to a large small molecule (yes, it’s an oxymoron) with functional groups.

  187. @Anon
    @HA

    You can hear the lisp as he typed this.

    Replies: @HA

    And just to be clear, I was not being hyperbolic about the insistence among at least some people here that COVID mask restrictions are indeed the “greatest seizure of civil liberties ever visited on the American people” — even after being reminded about the IRS, forced military conscription, MK Ultra, Typhoid Mary, etc.

    The no-one-ever-suffered-worse-than-we-did narcissism required for someone older than 14 to believe anything that crazy is not something that can be negated simply by appealing to the number of tats (which also scream “me, me me” in another kind of way) which people like that may be sporting.

    • Agree: Athenian Gentleman
  188. @JR Ewing
    @interesting

    I have been warring with my wife for the last half of the year over the wisdom of getting my 14 year old son injected. Neither he nor I are vaccinated and neither of us have any intention to be due to both having antibodies and confirmed cases earlier this year.

    My wife and I recently reached a detente on this issue due to the too-hard-to-hide failure of the vaccines to prevent transmission and the clear evidence that the mRNA is more dangerous to young people than the disease itself. She cannot disagree with my position that neither one of us needs the shot, even if she doesn't like it, so she has quit harping over it lately.

    I was hoping this uneasy truce would persist indefinitely, but to my chagrin, last night at Christmas Eve dinner, my in-laws announced that they had rescheduled the family vacation Alaskan cruise of 2020 that had been canceled two years ago. We're going to Alaska in July 2022! GREAT!

    Except that cruise ships all require vax passes and unless the mask nonsense is repealed there is no way I'm getting on a plane for 6+ hours and enduring that humiliation. No f'ing way. I can pray that all of the restrictions are lifted beforehand, but the intractable culture war nature of this makes that very unlikely.

    My father in law is usually pretty reasonable about this kind of stuff and in the past has asked first to confirm dates and interest etc etc, but I'm pretty sure his wife - my mother in law who thinks anything announced by network news is divine truth - probably insisted that it be sprung on us this time so as to put me on the spot.

    So this vax battle is going to heat up again for me in the forthcoming months. My wife and her parents are going to claim that I'm being ungrateful for not wanting to go on vacation with them and I also will be accused of "polluting" my son's mind with my rightwing politics for not forcing him to go get the shot and risk his health over an illness that is not a threat to him.

    HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ME!

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @sayless, @Jack D

    Best of luck to you, J. R.

    The family friction is unavoidable, unless they can be convinced by the statements of the creator of the PCR test who won a Nobel for doing so (“‘Anthony Fauci is a hack and he doesn’t know anything about anything”); or the creator of the mRNA technology, who opposes its use in these “vaccines” and has said so over and over again; or the many other experts who have come out against it and have been deplatformed and censored from social media. Kary Mullis, Robert Malone, Vladimir Zelenko, Luc Montagnier (another Nobel), many others. Follow the links.

    But, it’s likely the inlaws won’t be convinced by any of this. They probably won’t even look.

    However in time your 14-year-old will be grateful that you didn’t allow him to be used as an experimental subject in this horrible drug trial. That’s the most important thing, his life and his health. Perhaps the others will come round later on, meantime you are taking a hit for him; and yes, it looks like you’re not in for a joyride with the relatives.

    Alaska will still be there when this is all resolved. Something to look forward to. So, Happy New Year!

  189. @Peter Lund
    @Rob


    I’m schizoaffective, which might explain some of what I post.
     
    Some of what you post is a bit weird, sure, but most of it is well-thought out and is clearly written by an intelligent and educated person. I'd like to take this opportunity to say thanks :)

    Replies: @Rob

    Thank you!

  190. @Alden
    @Rob

    Ivermectin cures more than worms. Many medications cure more than one disease. For instance Prozac. It was originally developed as a diet pill . By increasing supplies of serotonin in the brain. Turns out serotonin is a natural happiness supply to the brain. Thus the serotonin also causes decreased appetite. Similar to how cigarettes cause increased serotonin and a cheerful little lift to get one through the day and decreased appetite.

    So now Prozac is a widely prescribed and effective anti depressant.

    There’s plenty more examples of dual or much more than dual purpose medications. Prozac is the first one I thought of. Benadryl prevents hives bug bites skin allergies from getting really dangerous. For someone severely allergic to bee stings, a four ounce slug of Benadryl will keep them alive till they get to the ER. It also slows the system down enough to alleviate coughing and induce sleep.

    Muscle relaxers aren’t prescribed as sleeping pills or pain pills. But they are very effective pain and sleeping pills.

    There are plenty more meds that cure or alleviate many diseases. Ivermectin is one.

    Ask Mr google or looking for an online pharmacology site. Or look in any pharmacology book. You’ll find lots of multi use medications.

    Replies: @Rob

    Yes, lots of drugs treat more than one condition. Many of these treat conditions by acting on one thing (system, receptor, receptor family, cell type…) that is important to the conditions treated. SSRIs treat lots of things that seem to relate to low serotonin. Even here, things are a bit uncertain. Prozac starts inhibiting serotonin reuptake immediately. Probably with 45 minutes of taking the pill. So why do they take a month to start treating depression? Perhaps because low serotonin-as-neurotransmitter is not what needs to change to alleviate depression. It may be serotonin-as-neurohormone increasing causes new growth, either of connections or neurogenesis that alleviates depression. Paradoxical effects of SSRIs, when taking one causes serious suicidal ideation, happen much more quickly.

    Interestingly, you bring up an anti-depressant. There is an antidepressant, fluvoxamine, that may help with covid. Scott Alexander (astral codex X, formerly slate star codex) discusses it in several places. He has a very interesting post, On taking “drugs” that have a small cost but an unlikely large positive effect. I recommend the article. He has another post on the surprising number of antiparasitics that turned out to be antidepressants. This is not it, but goes towards why that might be true.

    Anyway, Prozac for depression and Prozac for weight loss are both mediated by serotonin reuptake inhibition. For ivermectin to help with coronavirus by the recognized mechanism (the equivalent of serotonin reuptake inhibition for Prozac) would be to bind and activate a cys loop containing pentameric (5 subunits) glutamate-gated ion channel.

    [MORE]

    Ivermectin activates glutamate-mediated chloride channels, invertebrate ones at nanomolar (like a few 1 – 10’s * 10^-9 * 60.022*10^23 molecules/liter big number, low concentration) it inhibits ours at micromolar concentrations, on the order 1000 times more concentrated. That’s a very nice therapeutic window.

    Ok, so I was a bit dishonest. Viruses do not have nerves, but frequently (usually?) encode ion channels. SARS-CoV-2 encodes three. 3a, 8a, and E proteins. 3a is a tetrameric (4 subunit) cation (positive ions, unlike chloride) channel, and ivermectin binds pentameric channels, so (probably) does not affect 3a.

    E appears to be pentameric, but with complex conductivities depending on in vitro conditions. Maybe it is non-selective? No one seems to think ivm binds it, though.

    8a honestly, I’m feeling too lazy. A quick googling suggests that ivermectin boosters do not think ivm activates any of the coronavirus ion channels.

    Given that SARS-CoV-2 does not have the sort of ion channel that ivermectin turns on, it would have to act through another mechanism on a different kind of protein. This is possible. Simply binding to a protein, even far from an active site can inhibit its associations with other proteins including itself that are necessary for that protein to work, but puts it from a well-characterized drug with a known mechanism to a large small molecule (yes, it’s an oxymoron) with functional groups.

  191. @Mike1
    @Rob

    If you actually are interested Alex Berenson on Substack presents information in a way that non technical readers like yourself will be able to understand. You could also look at the raw data from the UK and Israel yourself if you do happen to have that skillset.

    However, I'm well aware the "I wanna see a citation for that" crowd are never interested in reality. If they were, they would have read the papers themselves already: you know, deadly pandemic and all.

    Replies: @Rob

    Well, I do have to admit that I am less interested in this one pandemic than I am in vaccines generally.

    On the vaccine causing ADE, VAED, or VAERD I am skeptical because the FDA is extremely biased toward ruling new medications unsafe.

    To start with, antibody-dependent enhancement to a pathological extent is relatively rare in vivo. Some vaccines caused it, though. There was an inactivated measles vaccine and a respiratory syncytial virus vaccine for infants that was caught in phase III testing. Dengue can cause it. There’s a cat disease as well.

    The thing about the dengue vaccine causing ADE is that wild dengue causes it too. This is not super surprising. Live vaccines cause immunity (or not) by the same mechanisms that “natural immunity” post-infection does.

    The inactivated vaccines that caused ADE to a pathological extent did so because they did not cause cell-mediated immunity (CD8+ cytotoxic “killer” T cells) or possibly CD4+ of both helper and cytotoxic varieties. The antibodies were likely not the result of “affinity maturation,” which makes more strongly-binding antibodies that, ceteris paribus are more neutralizing and more numerous.

    [MORE]

    Vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease happened with SARS I vaccine attempts. It’s a Th2-mediated hypersensitivity that causes eosinophils to infiltrate the lungs in high numbers. The covid vaccines avoided it by creating more balanced Th1 and Th2 responses and by using spike protein-analogs that were “stuck” in the pre-fusion metastable state so that antibodies raised to them are both more neutralizing and possibly do not bind post-fusion spikes, which would lead to greater inflammation. Also, SARS I snd II are different diseases, so maybe covid vaccines would have caused VAERD.

    Again on ADE, typically the solution to low titer non-neutralizing antibodies causing infection of macrophages and monocytes is to cause higher-titer neutralizing antibodies. To the cure to the vaccine-induced enhanced disease is more vaccine.

    All this ADE stuff is of course predicated upon the coronavirus replicating in macrophages, which I don’t know that it can.

    I am really, strongly on the side of free speech. I don’t think Berenson should be censored by the government or the “town square” of social media. I do wish people had better judgment of sources. I would love to “trust the experts,” but the experts have done a terrible job the whole pandemic. Nevertheless, they have shown that they can eventually learn from reality, which is more than I can say for the covid truthers.

    I was asking for a source because “vaccinated people are getting covid at a higher rate” is an extraordinary claim.

    • Replies: @gda
    @Rob

    Ask and ye shall receive:

    ·      " Vaccination status: Those who have received three doses of a vaccine and test positive for COVID-19 are more likely to be infected with infections compatible with the Omicron variant compared with those who are unvaccinated, though individuals who had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine continued to be less likely to test positive for COVID-19, regardless of variant. It is too early to draw conclusions from our data on the effectiveness of vaccines against the Omicron variant."
    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/adhocs/14107coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveyukcharacteristicsrelatedtohavinganomicroncompatibleresultinthosewhotestpositiveforcovid19

    "Official" enough for you?

    According to that (early it's true) data published by the ONS, the triple-vaccinated are 4.5 times as likely to test positive for a probable Omicron infection than the unvaccinated. The double-vaccinated, meanwhile, are 2.3 times as likely to have a probable Omicron infection.

    Of course there was also the Danish study showing a similar result.
    https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.50.2101146

    And if you were paying attention, that's been reported as well from South Africa. And in Ontario, it's now very much a "pandemic of the vaccinated".

    Of course, it's just a cold, basically.

    So maybe just lazy? Or is is that you just don't want to see?

    Replies: @Rob

    , @Mike1
    @Rob

    "Nevertheless, they have shown that they can eventually learn from reality, which is more than I can say for the covid truthers." This is an extraordinary claim. I started very firmly on the side of covid panic for what it is worth. The initial research was terrifying (and as time has proven, utterly fake).

    ADE is likely a problem but not high on my list of concerns.

    "Also, SARS I snd II are different diseases". For pedantic clarification, do you think SARS I or II is a disease?

    "I was asking for a source because “vaccinated people are getting covid at a higher rate” is an extraordinary claim." My source is math. Every jurisdiction where comparable numbers eventually emerge from is showing this. I have yet to convince anyone in my entire life of a statistical reality they don't want to hear. I got called "racist" in 2007 when I freaked out about a housing collapse: most memorably by a Stanford math PHD. I have seen epidemiologists get sneered at by people that struggled to finish high school recently for holding the "wrong" opinions on how epidemics progress.

    Reality is:

    - People are getting hauled off to camps for passing someone in an open space who is later determined to have covid. They are being taken by armed police or military. This is occurring in first world countries. Testing positive results in losing your children in highly admired nations.
    - People are getting fined amounts that will result in the loss of all assets for minor defiance of public health orders. The amounts are unlike any civil fines in any recorded history.

    If you want a source for this I suggest google. I'm also directly related to political leadership where the above is happening right now.

    The number one thing I'd suggest is just looking around you. Visit a red area if you live in a blue one. Talk to nurses in a red state and ask them if their hospitals are overwhelmed. Ask a red state nurse if they are vaccinated. The noise on this is incredible. Looking for outside answers isn't going to work at the moment. You seem inquisitive so use that skill to your advantage.

    Replies: @Rob

    , @Mark G.
    @Rob


    I was asking for a source because “vaccinated people are getting covid at a higher rate” is an extraordinary claim.
     
    Alex Berenson refers to a new Danish study which, if I'm reading what he says correctly, shows that vaccinated people are more likely to get the Omicron variant after three months.

    https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/pandemic-of-the-vaccinated-1b5/comments

    Younger people are unlikely to be hospitalized if they catch Covid so the main reason given for why they should be vaccinated is to prevent them from catching it and passing it on to old people. With studies like this, we really don't know how effective that would be. We also don't have a very good understanding of the negative current and future side effects of the vaccines for younger people. If they are forcibly vaccinated, the costs to them may exceed the benefits to older people. The vaccines do appear to lower death rates among the elderly so it might be better to encourage more of them to get vaccinated.

    I'm glad to see you support freedom of speech. If we want to get at the truth on this, then freedom of speech is very important. I also think some people on both sides should lower the level of verbal abuse of their opponents. I try to avoid that myself but I don't always succeed.
  192. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Harry Baldwin

    Wallace is loyal to his tribe. Once that's understood, everything makes sense.

    Our tribe should learn the lessons of his tribe.

    Replies: @Athenian Gentleman, @Athenian Gentleman

    Let’s analyze Citizen of a Silly Country‘s (CoaSC) comment in some greater detail for a moment, shall we?

    A review of CoaSC‘s comment in the context it was made[1] would reveal that he clearly was implicitly asserting that moderator Chris Wallace, in disadvantaging Donald Trump during the Presidential debate, was acting in the interest of “The Jews” [TM] (i.e., the entity that Mr. CoaSC was obviously alluding-to in his reference to what he termed Wallace’s “tribe”).

    How does such an assertion fit with the relevant facts? Let us review them and consider.

    Throughout his Presidency as well as both of his campaigns for said office, Donald J. Trump had considerable support from many Jews. As President, many of his appointees, administration members, advisors and confidants were Jews. Among Orthodox Jews, Mr. Trump received a majority of the vote,

    [MORE]
    in some communities as high as upwards of 80% or more. (It would perhaps be relevant to point-out here that it is the Orthodox who are the single subset of Jews who most strongly and consistently identify as such.)

    Moreover, Mr. Trump has had extensive ties-to and close, friendly relationships with many Jews from long before there was any talk of him running for the Presidency. We’re talking about a man who, by all available evidence that I am aware of, was never less-than fully accepting, even embracing, of his daughter not only choosing to marry a Jew but but even to convert to Judaism (at least ostensibly) herself. Mr. Trump had also served as Grand Marshall of the annual Salute to Israel Parade in his native New York City.[2]

    All that I have cited above should be more than sufficient to demonstrate the absurdity of characterizing either opposition to or support for Donald Trump (or, for that matter, just about any given established or viable political figure or entity in the present-day US) as categorically either for or against the interest of “The Jews”. Jews are not monolithic and there is no consensus even on what constitutes “Jewish interests”, much less what advances them.

    NOTES and ADDENDA

    [1] A review of the full, chronological context follows.
    Sick of Orcs had written,

    During the debates, Trump brought up the hunter laptop, but had no more to add and was shut down.

    “High-energy” means nothing when you don’t prepare.

    Harry Baldwin had replied,

    Chris Wallace wouldn’t let him talk about the laptop. He cut him off. He thought it was more important to ask him, “Will you denounce white supremacy?” a question he had also asked him during the 2016 debate he moderated. It’s one of those, “Have you stopped beating your wife?” questions. Apparently, you can’t ask it often enough.

    To the above, Citizen of a Silly Country replied,

    Wallace is loyal to his tribe. Once that’s understood, everything makes sense.

    Our tribe should learn the lessons of his tribe.

    [2] Granted, Judaism should not be conflated with Zionism*, nor Jews with Zionists**. Nonetheless, there is obviously extensive overlap between all of the aforementioned entities, and there would appear to be a fairly high positive correlation between favorable views toward any one of them to favorable views toward the others.

    *In fact, many Jews, not least of whom many prominent rabbis, maintain that Zionism is actually antithetical to Judaism.

    **Zionists include many who are not Jews, and exclude many who are (including some of the most devout Orthodox Jews).

    • Thanks: Corvinus
  193. @Athenian Gentleman
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    Wallace is loyal to his tribe.
     
    If Wallace has a "tribe", it would be his socio-economic and political class. And that includes plenty who are not Jews, while excluding plenty who are.

    Viewing the world through a cartoon-level simplistic "Jews vs. Goyim" lens is silly. Silly citizens make for a silly country.

    Replies: @silviosilver, @Hangnail Hans, @silviosilver

    Oh great, yet another Fellow White Person whispering in our ear the eternal verities of MSM propaganda.

  194. @Athenian Gentleman
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    Wallace is loyal to his tribe.
     
    If Wallace has a "tribe", it would be his socio-economic and political class. And that includes plenty who are not Jews, while excluding plenty who are.

    Viewing the world through a cartoon-level simplistic "Jews vs. Goyim" lens is silly. Silly citizens make for a silly country.

    Replies: @silviosilver, @Hangnail Hans, @silviosilver

    If Wallace has a “tribe”, it would be his socio-economic and political class. And that includes plenty who are not Jews, while excluding plenty who are.

    Viewing the world through a cartoon-level simplistic “Jews vs. Goyim” lens is silly. Silly citizens make for a silly country.

    How does Athenian Gent know that if Wallace has a tribe it’s his economic class – that and no other? He just does. He just knows it. He’s sure of it.

    Luckily for him, this is not a cartoon-level simplistic “Rich vs. Poor” lens, and viewing the world solely through this lens does not lead to silliness.

    Lol.

  195. @Rob
    @Mike1

    Well, I do have to admit that I am less interested in this one pandemic than I am in vaccines generally.

    On the vaccine causing ADE, VAED, or VAERD I am skeptical because the FDA is extremely biased toward ruling new medications unsafe.

    To start with, antibody-dependent enhancement to a pathological extent is relatively rare in vivo. Some vaccines caused it, though. There was an inactivated measles vaccine and a respiratory syncytial virus vaccine for infants that was caught in phase III testing. Dengue can cause it. There’s a cat disease as well.

    The thing about the dengue vaccine causing ADE is that wild dengue causes it too. This is not super surprising. Live vaccines cause immunity (or not) by the same mechanisms that “natural immunity” post-infection does.

    The inactivated vaccines that caused ADE to a pathological extent did so because they did not cause cell-mediated immunity (CD8+ cytotoxic “killer” T cells) or possibly CD4+ of both helper and cytotoxic varieties. The antibodies were likely not the result of “affinity maturation,” which makes more strongly-binding antibodies that, ceteris paribus are more neutralizing and more numerous.

    Vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease happened with SARS I vaccine attempts. It’s a Th2-mediated hypersensitivity that causes eosinophils to infiltrate the lungs in high numbers. The covid vaccines avoided it by creating more balanced Th1 and Th2 responses and by using spike protein-analogs that were “stuck” in the pre-fusion metastable state so that antibodies raised to them are both more neutralizing and possibly do not bind post-fusion spikes, which would lead to greater inflammation. Also, SARS I snd II are different diseases, so maybe covid vaccines would have caused VAERD.

    Again on ADE, typically the solution to low titer non-neutralizing antibodies causing infection of macrophages and monocytes is to cause higher-titer neutralizing antibodies. To the cure to the vaccine-induced enhanced disease is more vaccine.

    All this ADE stuff is of course predicated upon the coronavirus replicating in macrophages, which I don’t know that it can.

    I am really, strongly on the side of free speech. I don’t think Berenson should be censored by the government or the “town square” of social media. I do wish people had better judgment of sources. I would love to “trust the experts,” but the experts have done a terrible job the whole pandemic. Nevertheless, they have shown that they can eventually learn from reality, which is more than I can say for the covid truthers.

    I was asking for a source because “vaccinated people are getting covid at a higher rate” is an extraordinary claim.

    Replies: @gda, @Mike1, @Mark G.

    Ask and ye shall receive:

    ·      ” Vaccination status: Those who have received three doses of a vaccine and test positive for COVID-19 are more likely to be infected with infections compatible with the Omicron variant compared with those who are unvaccinated, though individuals who had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine continued to be less likely to test positive for COVID-19, regardless of variant. It is too early to draw conclusions from our data on the effectiveness of vaccines against the Omicron variant.”
    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/adhocs/14107coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveyukcharacteristicsrelatedtohavinganomicroncompatibleresultinthosewhotestpositiveforcovid19

    “Official” enough for you?

    According to that (early it’s true) data published by the ONS, the triple-vaccinated are 4.5 times as likely to test positive for a probable Omicron infection than the unvaccinated. The double-vaccinated, meanwhile, are 2.3 times as likely to have a probable Omicron infection.

    Of course there was also the Danish study showing a similar result.
    https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.50.2101146

    And if you were paying attention, that’s been reported as well from South Africa. And in Ontario, it’s now very much a “pandemic of the vaccinated”.

    Of course, it’s just a cold, basically.

    So maybe just lazy? Or is is that you just don’t want to see?

    • Replies: @Rob
    @gda

    On the first link, The 4.45 more likely to be infected with omicron is in the population of people who have coronavirus. It says what we knew, the vaccines are less effective against omicron. Also interestingly, previous infection with covid is less protective against omicron relative to “classic coke” covid or the non-omicron variants. The first fact is not particularly surprising in light of the second. We have a hard time vaccinating against things where having had the disease before is not protective, whether this is due to multiple serotypes (versions of the bug that infection with one does not protect against the other) or the bug's ability to change the antigens displayed, like many protozoa. That the odds ratio is much higher for vaxed than for previously infected is likely due to antibodies to other viral surface proteins (M and E, maybe another) and T cell response to both surface proteins and other viral proteins.

    The first reference does not include anything that goes towards answering, “out of the total population (in each demographic category) were unvaccinated people less likely to get omicron than the vax^3 were?”

    The last item of the Results tab of the spreadsheet says


    Vaccination status: Those who have received three doses of a vaccine and test positive for COVID-19 are more likely to be infected with infections compatible with the Omicron variant compared with those who are unvaccinated, though individuals who had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine continued to be less likely to test positive for COVID-19, regardless of variant. It is too early to draw conclusions from our data on the effectiveness of vaccines against the Omicron variant.
     
    Bolded in the original.

    The second link also gives numbers for “out of people who have covid, what percent were...” Without knowing what percent of the population (in each age category) is vaccinated, it is not possible to get from the data presented to determine whether omicron is more likely to infect vaxed people than unvaxed people.

    So, yeah, the vaccine is much more protective against delta and earlier variants than it is against omicron. It is more protective against omicron than not being vaccinated is protective against omicron.

    As always, I'm not wishing coronavirus on anyone, regardless of vaccination status. Even in the counterfactual case in which vaccination made people more susceptible to omicron, the (factual) case that it is protective against the currently much more common (in Denmark, at least) delta means one’s odds of not getting very sick and possibly dying from covid are improved by vaccination, because delta is much more prevalent and seems to be much deadlier than omicron, though I don’t know how much more so.

    Replies: @HA, @gda

  196. Oh, you had to go there with that bulls–t with the last paragraph again.

    OK, if we’re doing alternate scenarios, let’s flip it precisely from what you’ve imagined, and let’s imagine Democrats having a ridiculous electoral college advantage, while having lost the popular vote in the 7 out of last 8 presidential elections. In 2020, Democrats receive 269 electoral votes, and the election goes to the house. The house is controlled by Republicans, with a majority, of course, BUT, constitutional rules actually give every state one vote, and Democrats control 26 states.

    So, Democrats, having lost the popular vote by 6 million, and received 269 electoral votes, vote in Joe Biden as president through the House of Representatives, which they also do not actually control.

    What would January 6, 2021 have looked like then? Any cracks at Donald Trump’s speech that day?
    Somehow we never hear about THAT alternate world here from Republican partisan (above ALL else that he is) Steve, even though that’s the flipside world Democrats have to live in.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Beene13

    Gold box for your comment.

    , @D. K.
    @Beene13

    Under the Constitution of the United States, the sovereign states, plus (unfortunately) the non-sovereign federal district known as the District of Columbia, elect their political union's presidents, through the constitutional mechanism of the Electoral College. The sovereign states comprising the Union are not required, under the Constitution, to allow their respective citizens to vote for presidential tickets, at all.

  197. @silviosilver
    @Athenian Gentleman

    If you're not willing to concede the marked tendency of Jews to view issues and situations through "is it good for the Jews?" lens, then you're just not in the game. "Silliness" doesn't even begin to capture such deliberate blindness.

    Note: Americans and Europeans have been deliberately blinding themselves to Jewish influence for well over fifty years now. It's worked out wonderfully, clearly.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “If you’re not willing to concede the marked tendency of Jews to view issues and situations through “is it good for the Jews?” lens”

    Except Athenian Gentlemen started that Jews are not monolithic in their thinking, that there are competing subgroups, so what may be good for them in their particular subgroup, may not be good for the other subgroups.

    “Note: Americans and Europeans have been deliberately blinding themselves to Jewish influence for well over fifty years now. It’s worked out wonderfully, clearly.”

    So I’ve been told that white Americans and Europeans have high IQs and high time preferences on average. Yet, somehow, they collectively have been bamboozled and hoodwinked repeatedly by Jews, who engage in a masterclass of deception, for half a century. And that when these two groups do realize they’ve been taken for a ride, they refuse to believe it. Basically, they are too trusting.**. Is that your take, or is it something different?

    Because I would counter that we whites do know exactly what has been going on, and that we have been making our own decisions about race and culture, decision that you personally disagree with. So, some people make this excuse** to provide psychological comfort. Is that what you are doing here? Explain, please.

    • Agree: Athenian Gentleman
  198. @JR Ewing
    @interesting

    I have been warring with my wife for the last half of the year over the wisdom of getting my 14 year old son injected. Neither he nor I are vaccinated and neither of us have any intention to be due to both having antibodies and confirmed cases earlier this year.

    My wife and I recently reached a detente on this issue due to the too-hard-to-hide failure of the vaccines to prevent transmission and the clear evidence that the mRNA is more dangerous to young people than the disease itself. She cannot disagree with my position that neither one of us needs the shot, even if she doesn't like it, so she has quit harping over it lately.

    I was hoping this uneasy truce would persist indefinitely, but to my chagrin, last night at Christmas Eve dinner, my in-laws announced that they had rescheduled the family vacation Alaskan cruise of 2020 that had been canceled two years ago. We're going to Alaska in July 2022! GREAT!

    Except that cruise ships all require vax passes and unless the mask nonsense is repealed there is no way I'm getting on a plane for 6+ hours and enduring that humiliation. No f'ing way. I can pray that all of the restrictions are lifted beforehand, but the intractable culture war nature of this makes that very unlikely.

    My father in law is usually pretty reasonable about this kind of stuff and in the past has asked first to confirm dates and interest etc etc, but I'm pretty sure his wife - my mother in law who thinks anything announced by network news is divine truth - probably insisted that it be sprung on us this time so as to put me on the spot.

    So this vax battle is going to heat up again for me in the forthcoming months. My wife and her parents are going to claim that I'm being ungrateful for not wanting to go on vacation with them and I also will be accused of "polluting" my son's mind with my rightwing politics for not forcing him to go get the shot and risk his health over an illness that is not a threat to him.

    HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ME!

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @sayless, @Jack D

    Unless the mask nonsense is repealed there is no way I’m getting on a plane for 6+ hours and enduring that humiliation. No f’ing way.

    I really need someone to explain to me the vehemence over masking. (Personally, I agree that the way that it is actually done (little pieces of dirty cloth, half the time they slip below your nose) it is largely worthless. Properly worn N95s would be good but long ago our superiors decided that these should be saved for the really important people. But I digress.)

    But, even assuming that it is another form of “security theater” for getting on a plane that has no real world benefit (we should be accustomed to this by now), why the vehement objections? People are getting themselves arrested over this. When the other forms of security theater were implemented, I don’t recall people getting so angry, even though the TSA was taking away their beloved childhood pocket knives and such and making you semi-strip in public and having your crotch groped by strangers. That seemed far mor humiliating to me.

    I can understand not wanted to be forced to take a shot that you believe is detrimental to your health. I don’t agree but I can see where people are coming from. But missing a desirable family event because you refuse to wear a little piece of cloth on your face for a few hours? Even if it is stupid, we put up with all sorts of stupidity in the name of civilization. Why draw the line here?

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Jack D

    It is mind-boggling that someone with a genius-level IQ and an Ivy League law degree actually thinks that inhaling your own exhaled carbon-dioxide waste, for hours on end, is healthy.

    https://twitter.com/ianmSC/status/1475542677135380482

    Replies: @Jack D, @Jack D

  199. @Rob
    @Mike1

    Well, I do have to admit that I am less interested in this one pandemic than I am in vaccines generally.

    On the vaccine causing ADE, VAED, or VAERD I am skeptical because the FDA is extremely biased toward ruling new medications unsafe.

    To start with, antibody-dependent enhancement to a pathological extent is relatively rare in vivo. Some vaccines caused it, though. There was an inactivated measles vaccine and a respiratory syncytial virus vaccine for infants that was caught in phase III testing. Dengue can cause it. There’s a cat disease as well.

    The thing about the dengue vaccine causing ADE is that wild dengue causes it too. This is not super surprising. Live vaccines cause immunity (or not) by the same mechanisms that “natural immunity” post-infection does.

    The inactivated vaccines that caused ADE to a pathological extent did so because they did not cause cell-mediated immunity (CD8+ cytotoxic “killer” T cells) or possibly CD4+ of both helper and cytotoxic varieties. The antibodies were likely not the result of “affinity maturation,” which makes more strongly-binding antibodies that, ceteris paribus are more neutralizing and more numerous.

    Vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease happened with SARS I vaccine attempts. It’s a Th2-mediated hypersensitivity that causes eosinophils to infiltrate the lungs in high numbers. The covid vaccines avoided it by creating more balanced Th1 and Th2 responses and by using spike protein-analogs that were “stuck” in the pre-fusion metastable state so that antibodies raised to them are both more neutralizing and possibly do not bind post-fusion spikes, which would lead to greater inflammation. Also, SARS I snd II are different diseases, so maybe covid vaccines would have caused VAERD.

    Again on ADE, typically the solution to low titer non-neutralizing antibodies causing infection of macrophages and monocytes is to cause higher-titer neutralizing antibodies. To the cure to the vaccine-induced enhanced disease is more vaccine.

    All this ADE stuff is of course predicated upon the coronavirus replicating in macrophages, which I don’t know that it can.

    I am really, strongly on the side of free speech. I don’t think Berenson should be censored by the government or the “town square” of social media. I do wish people had better judgment of sources. I would love to “trust the experts,” but the experts have done a terrible job the whole pandemic. Nevertheless, they have shown that they can eventually learn from reality, which is more than I can say for the covid truthers.

    I was asking for a source because “vaccinated people are getting covid at a higher rate” is an extraordinary claim.

    Replies: @gda, @Mike1, @Mark G.

    “Nevertheless, they have shown that they can eventually learn from reality, which is more than I can say for the covid truthers.” This is an extraordinary claim. I started very firmly on the side of covid panic for what it is worth. The initial research was terrifying (and as time has proven, utterly fake).

    ADE is likely a problem but not high on my list of concerns.

    “Also, SARS I snd II are different diseases”. For pedantic clarification, do you think SARS I or II is a disease?

    “I was asking for a source because “vaccinated people are getting covid at a higher rate” is an extraordinary claim.” My source is math. Every jurisdiction where comparable numbers eventually emerge from is showing this. I have yet to convince anyone in my entire life of a statistical reality they don’t want to hear. I got called “racist” in 2007 when I freaked out about a housing collapse: most memorably by a Stanford math PHD. I have seen epidemiologists get sneered at by people that struggled to finish high school recently for holding the “wrong” opinions on how epidemics progress.

    Reality is:

    – People are getting hauled off to camps for passing someone in an open space who is later determined to have covid. They are being taken by armed police or military. This is occurring in first world countries. Testing positive results in losing your children in highly admired nations.
    – People are getting fined amounts that will result in the loss of all assets for minor defiance of public health orders. The amounts are unlike any civil fines in any recorded history.

    If you want a source for this I suggest google. I’m also directly related to political leadership where the above is happening right now.

    The number one thing I’d suggest is just looking around you. Visit a red area if you live in a blue one. Talk to nurses in a red state and ask them if their hospitals are overwhelmed. Ask a red state nurse if they are vaccinated. The noise on this is incredible. Looking for outside answers isn’t going to work at the moment. You seem inquisitive so use that skill to your advantage.

    • Replies: @Rob
    @Mike1


    My source is math. Every jurisdiction where comparable numbers eventually emerge from is showing this.
     
    I would like to have data, even for a single city, where the vaccinated (and how many shots) and unvaccinated pop within fairly narrow age (and race) bands with sick, hospitalized, and died from covid numbers for each band. If you have a link to data showing that vaxed people have greater risk of infection, I’d love to see it. Just curious, do you think the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine efficacy studies were fraudulent? Those (they say) were unequivocal that vaccines were more effective than nothing.

    But let’s take a look at the last epidemic where there were lots of skeptical people. HIV→ AIDS skeptics. There were HIV+, educated, intelligent people who doubted that HIV caused AIDS. Some of them wrote books about it. Lived healthily for years without HIV meds. They all died of AIDS. Looking in from the outside, it is pretty easy to see why. Most of them were gay, did not like condoms, and wanted to keep being promiscuous. They had too strong consciences to have sex knowing they were spreading a horrible illness, so they decided that they weren’t.

    While covid is a far milder disease than AIDS, it seems to me that many of the deniers, minimizers and skeptics are also engaged in motivated reasoning and making statements for group affiliation affirmation rather than truth value.

    As too dumb people sneering at epidemiologists for disagreeing about the course of epidemics, I think it is fair to say that that has happened from dim people on both sides of the disagreement to epidemiologists on the other. Many epidemiologists do not seem to have a clear understanding of how infectious diseases work. “Quarantines do not work” has been a mainstay of epidemiologists at least since the AIDS epidemic. Contact tracing “not working” has been unpopular, also since AIDS. Shutting down locations at which “superspreading” occurs - same. These were clearly matters of politics. Most public health people are liberals. They did not want gays “stigmatized.” Gays did not want contact tracing because it would have been obvious, at least to the tracers both who was gay and that many gays did not know who they were having sex with. Viruses evolving to becoming milder, that one was and is widespread, even though it contradicts evolutionary theory, history, snd makes one wonder why living things have so many adaptations to infectious diseases. In fairness, I might have solved this for respiratory viruses.

    I’m sure you’ve seen the NYC health department Tweet encouraging people to go to the 2020 Chinese New Year celebration to show the coronavirus they weren’t racists. Whichever side you are on concerning covid and masking, the “experts” got it wrong, either at the beginning (when it mattered) or for the bulk of the pandemic. Airborne spread, also wrong. I remember the voice of the pro-man zeitgeist, Steven Colbert, talking up alcoholizing one’s hands at every opportunity for weeks. I’m sure you remember the howling about racism when Trump implemented his halfassed, leaky, too-late travel ban on China (but not Italy) The same with the discussion of mandatory, enforced, quarantine of “Americans” in from Wuhan - racist! Won’t work!

    The FDA putting coronavirus cDNA in their test kits, and then not allowing any other testing was either a terrible mistake or a crime against humanity someone did to make Orangeman Bad look bad. Surely competent infectious disease specialists would have realized that even imperfect free-range testing was better than none at all. If anyone is even investigating this crime against humanity, I have not heard of it.

    Remember the universal condemnation of “lab leak” as “Trump’s conspiracy theory”? Expert epidemiologists yet again!

    On the other side, the certainty that vaccines could not work but a monoclonal antibody would? Ok, don’t know if these were epidemiologists, but it is nonsensical. Some of the earliest “masks work! China took ours!” voices are in the “masks don’t work” camp today. I think maybe they were driven more by contrarian urgings rather than reasonableness.

    I heard one “expert” an immunologist according to the video, but I did not look it up, said Covid struck because immunity to SARS had waned! Not an epidemiologist, but a supposed “expert” on the denialist side.

    Anyway, what did the epidemiologists you were talking about say? I did well enough in high school, but it’s possible I would have thought they said something dumb, too. Certainly “infections evolve to become milder” needed a lot more work, though it is a truism in epidemiology.

    Replies: @Mike1

  200. @EuroNat
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    The answer is easy:

    1. Steve is, with all due respect, a bit of an intellectual featherweight, does not matter how hard he tries to publish pretendedly high brow cultural articles. He simply is not articulate enough to lash out at EuroAms' ethnic adversaries without sounding racist or "antisemitic". And honestly I dont even know if there is a way to do it, because the words "racist" and "antisemite" have come to mean "bad for blacks" and "bad for the Jews" respectively.

    2. Steve is like Trump, in the sense that he was never up to the task that some conservative Americans believe he should be up to. If Steve was Jewish instead of "legacy", he probably would do more of this particular ethnic activism you want him to do, most possibly in Jews behalf. Alas he is not, and neither are legacy Americans calling the shots in DC anymore. BS walks and money talks. And guess who's got the shekels and the network to buy the necessary DC and state politicos to get stuff done?

    3. Steve is completely dependant on donations, and he intuits many of his big donors are either Jewish or have a big Crimestop reaction when fingers are pointed at Jews. Therefore he understands that in order to keep this flow of donations as wide and abundant as possible he must make some concessions, including being very careful with Jews. Now how could anyone do some serious pro-EuroAm activism without mentioning the greatests and best organised of EuroAms' adversaries ie wihout touching the JQ?

    4. He is a bit of a coward, and I think he has admitted as much himself if memory serves me, and also he has not the brains to make money with his content without having to regularly panhandle.

    In an alternative timeline, would a Steve with FU money be a more explicitly pro-EuroAm activist? Honestly I am not so sure, but I bet he would be a bit snarkier towards the mostly not "wholesome" Jewish influence to the American political and cultural status quo. Including of course foreign policy.

    Replies: @Athenian Gentleman, @Jack D

    tl:dr Steve is not anti-Semitic enough for my taste.

    Write your own anti-Semitic blog then.

  201. @Rob
    @Mike1

    Well, I do have to admit that I am less interested in this one pandemic than I am in vaccines generally.

    On the vaccine causing ADE, VAED, or VAERD I am skeptical because the FDA is extremely biased toward ruling new medications unsafe.

    To start with, antibody-dependent enhancement to a pathological extent is relatively rare in vivo. Some vaccines caused it, though. There was an inactivated measles vaccine and a respiratory syncytial virus vaccine for infants that was caught in phase III testing. Dengue can cause it. There’s a cat disease as well.

    The thing about the dengue vaccine causing ADE is that wild dengue causes it too. This is not super surprising. Live vaccines cause immunity (or not) by the same mechanisms that “natural immunity” post-infection does.

    The inactivated vaccines that caused ADE to a pathological extent did so because they did not cause cell-mediated immunity (CD8+ cytotoxic “killer” T cells) or possibly CD4+ of both helper and cytotoxic varieties. The antibodies were likely not the result of “affinity maturation,” which makes more strongly-binding antibodies that, ceteris paribus are more neutralizing and more numerous.

    Vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease happened with SARS I vaccine attempts. It’s a Th2-mediated hypersensitivity that causes eosinophils to infiltrate the lungs in high numbers. The covid vaccines avoided it by creating more balanced Th1 and Th2 responses and by using spike protein-analogs that were “stuck” in the pre-fusion metastable state so that antibodies raised to them are both more neutralizing and possibly do not bind post-fusion spikes, which would lead to greater inflammation. Also, SARS I snd II are different diseases, so maybe covid vaccines would have caused VAERD.

    Again on ADE, typically the solution to low titer non-neutralizing antibodies causing infection of macrophages and monocytes is to cause higher-titer neutralizing antibodies. To the cure to the vaccine-induced enhanced disease is more vaccine.

    All this ADE stuff is of course predicated upon the coronavirus replicating in macrophages, which I don’t know that it can.

    I am really, strongly on the side of free speech. I don’t think Berenson should be censored by the government or the “town square” of social media. I do wish people had better judgment of sources. I would love to “trust the experts,” but the experts have done a terrible job the whole pandemic. Nevertheless, they have shown that they can eventually learn from reality, which is more than I can say for the covid truthers.

    I was asking for a source because “vaccinated people are getting covid at a higher rate” is an extraordinary claim.

    Replies: @gda, @Mike1, @Mark G.

    I was asking for a source because “vaccinated people are getting covid at a higher rate” is an extraordinary claim.

    Alex Berenson refers to a new Danish study which, if I’m reading what he says correctly, shows that vaccinated people are more likely to get the Omicron variant after three months.

    https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/pandemic-of-the-vaccinated-1b5/comments

    Younger people are unlikely to be hospitalized if they catch Covid so the main reason given for why they should be vaccinated is to prevent them from catching it and passing it on to old people. With studies like this, we really don’t know how effective that would be. We also don’t have a very good understanding of the negative current and future side effects of the vaccines for younger people. If they are forcibly vaccinated, the costs to them may exceed the benefits to older people. The vaccines do appear to lower death rates among the elderly so it might be better to encourage more of them to get vaccinated.

    I’m glad to see you support freedom of speech. If we want to get at the truth on this, then freedom of speech is very important. I also think some people on both sides should lower the level of verbal abuse of their opponents. I try to avoid that myself but I don’t always succeed.

  202. @Jack D
    @JR Ewing


    Unless the mask nonsense is repealed there is no way I’m getting on a plane for 6+ hours and enduring that humiliation. No f’ing way.
     
    I really need someone to explain to me the vehemence over masking. (Personally, I agree that the way that it is actually done (little pieces of dirty cloth, half the time they slip below your nose) it is largely worthless. Properly worn N95s would be good but long ago our superiors decided that these should be saved for the really important people. But I digress.)

    But, even assuming that it is another form of "security theater" for getting on a plane that has no real world benefit (we should be accustomed to this by now), why the vehement objections? People are getting themselves arrested over this. When the other forms of security theater were implemented, I don't recall people getting so angry, even though the TSA was taking away their beloved childhood pocket knives and such and making you semi-strip in public and having your crotch groped by strangers. That seemed far mor humiliating to me.

    I can understand not wanted to be forced to take a shot that you believe is detrimental to your health. I don't agree but I can see where people are coming from. But missing a desirable family event because you refuse to wear a little piece of cloth on your face for a few hours? Even if it is stupid, we put up with all sorts of stupidity in the name of civilization. Why draw the line here?

    Replies: @D. K.

    It is mind-boggling that someone with a genius-level IQ and an Ivy League law degree actually thinks that inhaling your own exhaled carbon-dioxide waste, for hours on end, is healthy.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @D. K.

    So you're saying wearing a mask is bad for your health? Do you have any data? How does a little piece of cloth on your face cause you to re-inhale CO2?

    Your chart means nothing. For all I know, without the mask and vaccine mandates it would have been 10x worse than it was. Without a control group, you can't make any scientific conclusion.

    No, I'm sorry but I don't think that mask rage is related to any real (or even imaginary) health concern. That's not the true reason.

    Replies: @D. K.

    , @Jack D
    @D. K.

    BTW, the graph of hospitalizations (and deaths, which are even lower) tell a different story:

    https://media.nbcnewyork.com/2021/12/Screenshot-324.png?w=1024

    What is apparently happening is that most of these new cases are Omicron. Omicron is apparently both more infectious (including to the masked and vaccinated) and less lethal than the earlier variants. Despite 20K new cases/day or more, the average daily dealth toll in NYC is around 12. Covid is not even just the flu anymore. It's just a cold.

    Replies: @D. K.

  203. @Beene13
    Oh, you had to go there with that bulls--t with the last paragraph again.

    OK, if we're doing alternate scenarios, let's flip it precisely from what you've imagined, and let's imagine Democrats having a ridiculous electoral college advantage, while having lost the popular vote in the 7 out of last 8 presidential elections. In 2020, Democrats receive 269 electoral votes, and the election goes to the house. The house is controlled by Republicans, with a majority, of course, BUT, constitutional rules actually give every state one vote, and Democrats control 26 states.

    So, Democrats, having lost the popular vote by 6 million, and received 269 electoral votes, vote in Joe Biden as president through the House of Representatives, which they also do not actually control.

    What would January 6, 2021 have looked like then? Any cracks at Donald Trump's speech that day?
    Somehow we never hear about THAT alternate world here from Republican partisan (above ALL else that he is) Steve, even though that's the flipside world Democrats have to live in.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @D. K.

    Gold box for your comment.

  204. @Beene13
    Oh, you had to go there with that bulls--t with the last paragraph again.

    OK, if we're doing alternate scenarios, let's flip it precisely from what you've imagined, and let's imagine Democrats having a ridiculous electoral college advantage, while having lost the popular vote in the 7 out of last 8 presidential elections. In 2020, Democrats receive 269 electoral votes, and the election goes to the house. The house is controlled by Republicans, with a majority, of course, BUT, constitutional rules actually give every state one vote, and Democrats control 26 states.

    So, Democrats, having lost the popular vote by 6 million, and received 269 electoral votes, vote in Joe Biden as president through the House of Representatives, which they also do not actually control.

    What would January 6, 2021 have looked like then? Any cracks at Donald Trump's speech that day?
    Somehow we never hear about THAT alternate world here from Republican partisan (above ALL else that he is) Steve, even though that's the flipside world Democrats have to live in.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @D. K.

    Under the Constitution of the United States, the sovereign states, plus (unfortunately) the non-sovereign federal district known as the District of Columbia, elect their political union’s presidents, through the constitutional mechanism of the Electoral College. The sovereign states comprising the Union are not required, under the Constitution, to allow their respective citizens to vote for presidential tickets, at all.

  205. @D. K.
    @Jack D

    It is mind-boggling that someone with a genius-level IQ and an Ivy League law degree actually thinks that inhaling your own exhaled carbon-dioxide waste, for hours on end, is healthy.

    https://twitter.com/ianmSC/status/1475542677135380482

    Replies: @Jack D, @Jack D

    So you’re saying wearing a mask is bad for your health? Do you have any data? How does a little piece of cloth on your face cause you to re-inhale CO2?

    Your chart means nothing. For all I know, without the mask and vaccine mandates it would have been 10x worse than it was. Without a control group, you can’t make any scientific conclusion.

    No, I’m sorry but I don’t think that mask rage is related to any real (or even imaginary) health concern. That’s not the true reason.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Jack D

    "So you’re saying wearing a mask is bad for your health?"

    Yes, I am.

    "Do you have any data?"

    Yes, I do . . .



    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150422121724.htm

    https://www.fsis.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media_file/2020-08/Carbon-Dioxide.pdf

    https://www.aier.org/article/the-dangers-of-masks/

    "How does a little piece of cloth on your face cause you to re-inhale CO2?"

    As should be obvious, especially to a genius like you, Jack, when you exhale, while wearing a mask, some of what you exhale is caught between your face and the mask's interior, causing you to inhale excess carbon dioxide, compared to breathing normally, without a mask. If a mask works to limit what air penetrates it, it obviously works in the opposite direction, when you exhale carbon dioxide into the mask. If you have not experienced this, since the spring of 2020, perhaps you have been wearing your mask like a Congressional Chairwoman might:

    https://i.redd.it/bmkd7ifmnlr41.jpg

    "Your chart means nothing. For all I know, without the mask and vaccine mandates it would have been 10x worse than it was. Without a control group, you can’t make any scientific conclusion."

    https://twitter.com/ianmSC/status/1474132300673679361

    https://twitter.com/ianmSC/status/1473794717095579648

    https://twitter.com/ianmSC/status/1473365067148136449

    https://twitter.com/ianmSC/status/1474449628187684864

    https://twitter.com/ianmSC/status/1473355627623636993

    "No, I’m sorry but I don’t think that mask rage is related to any real (or even imaginary) health concern. That’s not the true reason."

    https://twitter.com/ianmSC/status/1474145777878384644

    https://twitter.com/davidzweig/status/1471585312178638863

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySxKC6Wd2z0

  206. @silviosilver
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    White identity politics is the question of our time, yet Steve assiduously avoids it. Why?
     
    What do you want from him? If tomorrow Sailer sounds that clarion, you know what will happen? Sweet fuck all. It's not as if millions of hitherto apprehensive whites would suddenly spring into action.

    I'm not going to tell Sailer what to think or do, but I can say that I'm happier having him doing what he is doing - which is bridging the divide between white identitarians and white cuckservatives - than yet further reducing his influence and relevance by going full white right.

    At least this way, some of those cucks, and even the odd libtard here and there, will actually think, hmm, I might not agree with everything I'm hearing, but boy, those pro-white types are correct that there sure is whole lot of anti-white bullshit out there; why should anyone have to live like this?

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “I might not agree with everything I’m hearing, but boy, those pro-white types are correct that there sure is whole lot of anti-white bullshit out there; why should anyone have to live like this?”

    Except there is no clear definition as to what is pro-white or what is anti-white. Perhaps you can clarify?

  207. @D. K.
    @Jack D

    It is mind-boggling that someone with a genius-level IQ and an Ivy League law degree actually thinks that inhaling your own exhaled carbon-dioxide waste, for hours on end, is healthy.

    https://twitter.com/ianmSC/status/1475542677135380482

    Replies: @Jack D, @Jack D

    BTW, the graph of hospitalizations (and deaths, which are even lower) tell a different story:

    What is apparently happening is that most of these new cases are Omicron. Omicron is apparently both more infectious (including to the masked and vaccinated) and less lethal than the earlier variants. Despite 20K new cases/day or more, the average daily dealth toll in NYC is around 12. Covid is not even just the flu anymore. It’s just a cold.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Jack D

    "BTW, the graph of hospitalizations (and deaths, which are even lower) tell a different story...."

    A different story from what, Jack?

    Mask recommendations and mandates are based on the fallacious claim that such mask usage prevents transmission of respiratory viruses; those recommendations and mandates have nothing to do with the consequent seriousness of such a disease, once transmission has occurred.

  208. @gda
    @Rob

    Ask and ye shall receive:

    ·      " Vaccination status: Those who have received three doses of a vaccine and test positive for COVID-19 are more likely to be infected with infections compatible with the Omicron variant compared with those who are unvaccinated, though individuals who had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine continued to be less likely to test positive for COVID-19, regardless of variant. It is too early to draw conclusions from our data on the effectiveness of vaccines against the Omicron variant."
    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/adhocs/14107coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveyukcharacteristicsrelatedtohavinganomicroncompatibleresultinthosewhotestpositiveforcovid19

    "Official" enough for you?

    According to that (early it's true) data published by the ONS, the triple-vaccinated are 4.5 times as likely to test positive for a probable Omicron infection than the unvaccinated. The double-vaccinated, meanwhile, are 2.3 times as likely to have a probable Omicron infection.

    Of course there was also the Danish study showing a similar result.
    https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.50.2101146

    And if you were paying attention, that's been reported as well from South Africa. And in Ontario, it's now very much a "pandemic of the vaccinated".

    Of course, it's just a cold, basically.

    So maybe just lazy? Or is is that you just don't want to see?

    Replies: @Rob

    On the first link, The 4.45 more likely to be infected with omicron is in the population of people who have coronavirus. It says what we knew, the vaccines are less effective against omicron. Also interestingly, previous infection with covid is less protective against omicron relative to “classic coke” covid or the non-omicron variants. The first fact is not particularly surprising in light of the second. We have a hard time vaccinating against things where having had the disease before is not protective, whether this is due to multiple serotypes (versions of the bug that infection with one does not protect against the other) or the bug’s ability to change the antigens displayed, like many protozoa. That the odds ratio is much higher for vaxed than for previously infected is likely due to antibodies to other viral surface proteins (M and E, maybe another) and T cell response to both surface proteins and other viral proteins.

    The first reference does not include anything that goes towards answering, “out of the total population (in each demographic category) were unvaccinated people less likely to get omicron than the vax^3 were?”

    The last item of the Results tab of the spreadsheet says

    Vaccination status: Those who have received three doses of a vaccine and test positive for COVID-19 are more likely to be infected with infections compatible with the Omicron variant compared with those who are unvaccinated, though individuals who had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine continued to be less likely to test positive for COVID-19, regardless of variant. It is too early to draw conclusions from our data on the effectiveness of vaccines against the Omicron variant.

    Bolded in the original.

    The second link also gives numbers for “out of people who have covid, what percent were…” Without knowing what percent of the population (in each age category) is vaccinated, it is not possible to get from the data presented to determine whether omicron is more likely to infect vaxed people than unvaxed people.

    So, yeah, the vaccine is much more protective against delta and earlier variants than it is against omicron. It is more protective against omicron than not being vaccinated is protective against omicron.

    As always, I’m not wishing coronavirus on anyone, regardless of vaccination status. Even in the counterfactual case in which vaccination made people more susceptible to omicron, the (factual) case that it is protective against the currently much more common (in Denmark, at least) delta means one’s odds of not getting very sick and possibly dying from covid are improved by vaccination, because delta is much more prevalent and seems to be much deadlier than omicron, though I don’t know how much more so.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Rob

    "Without knowing what percent of the population (in each age category) is vaccinated, it is not possible to get from the data presented to determine whether omicron is more likely to infect vaxed people than unvaxed people."

    Exactly. The "vaxxed people get omicron more" assertion is like saying "people who ski in Austrian resorts", or else, "Asians" or "Jews who enjoy spending their Christmas in Asian restaurants" are more likely to get COVID. That was likely true about a year ago. Ultimately, it didn't mean squat.

    I expect that people who take lots of plane trips (and are, in NY, more likely to be vaxxed as a group -- or so I'd guess) may well be over-represented in omicron's initial surge. Let's see how well that observation holds up once omicron comes calling in Mississippi -- or even how it holds up in NY in a couple of weeks. If this is the kind of stuff the truthers are reduced to arguing about, they have indeed fallen on hard times.

    Also, be ready for a repeat of the same tactic Berenson tried regarding how "most people who died from COVID-19 in the United Kingdom in September were fully vaccinated." As it turns out, denominators matter.

    Replies: @Mark G.

    , @gda
    @Rob

    Latest from Ontario:
    h ttps://twitter.com/KnowledgeAcqui1/status/1476224675042643968

    Latest from Denmark:
    h ttps://twitter.com/Covid19Crusher/status/1475798077428711425

    Latest from Wales:
    h ttps://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1476169844773031940

    (Don't want to clutter up the thread, so do your own adjustment to get the results).

    I could go on, but what's the point.

    Trying to convince a Pfizer employee/cult member is a never-ending proposition.

  209. @Rob
    @gda

    On the first link, The 4.45 more likely to be infected with omicron is in the population of people who have coronavirus. It says what we knew, the vaccines are less effective against omicron. Also interestingly, previous infection with covid is less protective against omicron relative to “classic coke” covid or the non-omicron variants. The first fact is not particularly surprising in light of the second. We have a hard time vaccinating against things where having had the disease before is not protective, whether this is due to multiple serotypes (versions of the bug that infection with one does not protect against the other) or the bug's ability to change the antigens displayed, like many protozoa. That the odds ratio is much higher for vaxed than for previously infected is likely due to antibodies to other viral surface proteins (M and E, maybe another) and T cell response to both surface proteins and other viral proteins.

    The first reference does not include anything that goes towards answering, “out of the total population (in each demographic category) were unvaccinated people less likely to get omicron than the vax^3 were?”

    The last item of the Results tab of the spreadsheet says


    Vaccination status: Those who have received three doses of a vaccine and test positive for COVID-19 are more likely to be infected with infections compatible with the Omicron variant compared with those who are unvaccinated, though individuals who had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine continued to be less likely to test positive for COVID-19, regardless of variant. It is too early to draw conclusions from our data on the effectiveness of vaccines against the Omicron variant.
     
    Bolded in the original.

    The second link also gives numbers for “out of people who have covid, what percent were...” Without knowing what percent of the population (in each age category) is vaccinated, it is not possible to get from the data presented to determine whether omicron is more likely to infect vaxed people than unvaxed people.

    So, yeah, the vaccine is much more protective against delta and earlier variants than it is against omicron. It is more protective against omicron than not being vaccinated is protective against omicron.

    As always, I'm not wishing coronavirus on anyone, regardless of vaccination status. Even in the counterfactual case in which vaccination made people more susceptible to omicron, the (factual) case that it is protective against the currently much more common (in Denmark, at least) delta means one’s odds of not getting very sick and possibly dying from covid are improved by vaccination, because delta is much more prevalent and seems to be much deadlier than omicron, though I don’t know how much more so.

    Replies: @HA, @gda

    “Without knowing what percent of the population (in each age category) is vaccinated, it is not possible to get from the data presented to determine whether omicron is more likely to infect vaxed people than unvaxed people.”

    Exactly. The “vaxxed people get omicron more” assertion is like saying “people who ski in Austrian resorts”, or else, “Asians” or “Jews who enjoy spending their Christmas in Asian restaurants” are more likely to get COVID. That was likely true about a year ago. Ultimately, it didn’t mean squat.

    I expect that people who take lots of plane trips (and are, in NY, more likely to be vaxxed as a group — or so I’d guess) may well be over-represented in omicron’s initial surge. Let’s see how well that observation holds up once omicron comes calling in Mississippi — or even how it holds up in NY in a couple of weeks. If this is the kind of stuff the truthers are reduced to arguing about, they have indeed fallen on hard times.

    Also, be ready for a repeat of the same tactic Berenson tried regarding how “most people who died from COVID-19 in the United Kingdom in September were fully vaccinated.” As it turns out, denominators matter.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    @HA

    I'm curious. Do you think Pfizer gave a larger campaign contribution to Biden than any other candidate in the 2020 election for purely altruistic reasons? After Biden was elected, he started pushing for vaccine mandates. Pfizer has a vaccine and would financially benefit from mandatory vaccines. Do you think Biden might want to pay Pfizer back or do you think it is just a coincidence that he is pushing the product of one of his big campaign contributors?

    The FDA approved the anti-viral drug Remdesivir, which is still under patent and can be sold for three thousand dollars but not Ivermectin or HCQ, which Big Pharma can't make any money off of since the patents on them expired. Do you think there is a possibility of regulatory capture here or is it just a coincidence that the drug that is still under patent is the one that got approved?

    I can think of four problems with Remdesivir. First, it's ineffective. Studies show it slightly reduces the duration of the disease but doesn't really reduce the death rate. Second, it's an anti-viral drug but is given to hospital patients who have already passed from the viral to the inflammation stage. At that point they need a steroid like Dexamethasone. Third, it can have nasty side effects. Fourth, since it can have nasty side effects anyone receiving it has to stay in the hospital so they can be monitored for the appearance of those side effects.

    Many of the Covid patients who have been forced to take this drug, myself included, might have recovered just as well if they had just been given some Dexamethasone to take orally and then sent home. Of course, if there had been fewer hospitalizations there might not have been as much pressure to quickly approve inadequately tested vaccines. Also, the hospitals would have had less money coming in to pay the inflated salaries of the doctors and administrators there. Do you think it is just a coincidence that we adopted the course that would most enrich the hospitals, drug and vaccine companies?

    Replies: @HA

  210. @Jack D
    @D. K.

    So you're saying wearing a mask is bad for your health? Do you have any data? How does a little piece of cloth on your face cause you to re-inhale CO2?

    Your chart means nothing. For all I know, without the mask and vaccine mandates it would have been 10x worse than it was. Without a control group, you can't make any scientific conclusion.

    No, I'm sorry but I don't think that mask rage is related to any real (or even imaginary) health concern. That's not the true reason.

    Replies: @D. K.

    “So you’re saying wearing a mask is bad for your health?”

    Yes, I am.

    “Do you have any data?”

    Yes, I do . . .

    [MORE]

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150422121724.htm

    https://www.fsis.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media_file/2020-08/Carbon-Dioxide.pdf

    https://www.aier.org/article/the-dangers-of-masks/

    “How does a little piece of cloth on your face cause you to re-inhale CO2?”

    As should be obvious, especially to a genius like you, Jack, when you exhale, while wearing a mask, some of what you exhale is caught between your face and the mask’s interior, causing you to inhale excess carbon dioxide, compared to breathing normally, without a mask. If a mask works to limit what air penetrates it, it obviously works in the opposite direction, when you exhale carbon dioxide into the mask. If you have not experienced this, since the spring of 2020, perhaps you have been wearing your mask like a Congressional Chairwoman might:

    “Your chart means nothing. For all I know, without the mask and vaccine mandates it would have been 10x worse than it was. Without a control group, you can’t make any scientific conclusion.”

    “No, I’m sorry but I don’t think that mask rage is related to any real (or even imaginary) health concern. That’s not the true reason.”

  211. @Jack D
    @D. K.

    BTW, the graph of hospitalizations (and deaths, which are even lower) tell a different story:

    https://media.nbcnewyork.com/2021/12/Screenshot-324.png?w=1024

    What is apparently happening is that most of these new cases are Omicron. Omicron is apparently both more infectious (including to the masked and vaccinated) and less lethal than the earlier variants. Despite 20K new cases/day or more, the average daily dealth toll in NYC is around 12. Covid is not even just the flu anymore. It's just a cold.

    Replies: @D. K.

    “BTW, the graph of hospitalizations (and deaths, which are even lower) tell a different story….”

    A different story from what, Jack?

    Mask recommendations and mandates are based on the fallacious claim that such mask usage prevents transmission of respiratory viruses; those recommendations and mandates have nothing to do with the consequent seriousness of such a disease, once transmission has occurred.

  212. @Mike1
    @Rob

    "Nevertheless, they have shown that they can eventually learn from reality, which is more than I can say for the covid truthers." This is an extraordinary claim. I started very firmly on the side of covid panic for what it is worth. The initial research was terrifying (and as time has proven, utterly fake).

    ADE is likely a problem but not high on my list of concerns.

    "Also, SARS I snd II are different diseases". For pedantic clarification, do you think SARS I or II is a disease?

    "I was asking for a source because “vaccinated people are getting covid at a higher rate” is an extraordinary claim." My source is math. Every jurisdiction where comparable numbers eventually emerge from is showing this. I have yet to convince anyone in my entire life of a statistical reality they don't want to hear. I got called "racist" in 2007 when I freaked out about a housing collapse: most memorably by a Stanford math PHD. I have seen epidemiologists get sneered at by people that struggled to finish high school recently for holding the "wrong" opinions on how epidemics progress.

    Reality is:

    - People are getting hauled off to camps for passing someone in an open space who is later determined to have covid. They are being taken by armed police or military. This is occurring in first world countries. Testing positive results in losing your children in highly admired nations.
    - People are getting fined amounts that will result in the loss of all assets for minor defiance of public health orders. The amounts are unlike any civil fines in any recorded history.

    If you want a source for this I suggest google. I'm also directly related to political leadership where the above is happening right now.

    The number one thing I'd suggest is just looking around you. Visit a red area if you live in a blue one. Talk to nurses in a red state and ask them if their hospitals are overwhelmed. Ask a red state nurse if they are vaccinated. The noise on this is incredible. Looking for outside answers isn't going to work at the moment. You seem inquisitive so use that skill to your advantage.

    Replies: @Rob

    My source is math. Every jurisdiction where comparable numbers eventually emerge from is showing this.

    I would like to have data, even for a single city, where the vaccinated (and how many shots) and unvaccinated pop within fairly narrow age (and race) bands with sick, hospitalized, and died from covid numbers for each band. If you have a link to data showing that vaxed people have greater risk of infection, I’d love to see it. Just curious, do you think the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine efficacy studies were fraudulent? Those (they say) were unequivocal that vaccines were more effective than nothing.

    But let’s take a look at the last epidemic where there were lots of skeptical people. HIV→ AIDS skeptics. There were HIV+, educated, intelligent people who doubted that HIV caused AIDS. Some of them wrote books about it. Lived healthily for years without HIV meds. They all died of AIDS. Looking in from the outside, it is pretty easy to see why. Most of them were gay, did not like condoms, and wanted to keep being promiscuous. They had too strong consciences to have sex knowing they were spreading a horrible illness, so they decided that they weren’t.

    [MORE]

    While covid is a far milder disease than AIDS, it seems to me that many of the deniers, minimizers and skeptics are also engaged in motivated reasoning and making statements for group affiliation affirmation rather than truth value.

    As too dumb people sneering at epidemiologists for disagreeing about the course of epidemics, I think it is fair to say that that has happened from dim people on both sides of the disagreement to epidemiologists on the other. Many epidemiologists do not seem to have a clear understanding of how infectious diseases work. “Quarantines do not work” has been a mainstay of epidemiologists at least since the AIDS epidemic. Contact tracing “not working” has been unpopular, also since AIDS. Shutting down locations at which “superspreading” occurs – same. These were clearly matters of politics. Most public health people are liberals. They did not want gays “stigmatized.” Gays did not want contact tracing because it would have been obvious, at least to the tracers both who was gay and that many gays did not know who they were having sex with. Viruses evolving to becoming milder, that one was and is widespread, even though it contradicts evolutionary theory, history, snd makes one wonder why living things have so many adaptations to infectious diseases. In fairness, I might have solved this for respiratory viruses.

    I’m sure you’ve seen the NYC health department Tweet encouraging people to go to the 2020 Chinese New Year celebration to show the coronavirus they weren’t racists. Whichever side you are on concerning covid and masking, the “experts” got it wrong, either at the beginning (when it mattered) or for the bulk of the pandemic. Airborne spread, also wrong. I remember the voice of the pro-man zeitgeist, Steven Colbert, talking up alcoholizing one’s hands at every opportunity for weeks. I’m sure you remember the howling about racism when Trump implemented his halfassed, leaky, too-late travel ban on China (but not Italy) The same with the discussion of mandatory, enforced, quarantine of “Americans” in from Wuhan – racist! Won’t work!

    The FDA putting coronavirus cDNA in their test kits, and then not allowing any other testing was either a terrible mistake or a crime against humanity someone did to make Orangeman Bad look bad. Surely competent infectious disease specialists would have realized that even imperfect free-range testing was better than none at all. If anyone is even investigating this crime against humanity, I have not heard of it.

    Remember the universal condemnation of “lab leak” as “Trump’s conspiracy theory”? Expert epidemiologists yet again!

    On the other side, the certainty that vaccines could not work but a monoclonal antibody would? Ok, don’t know if these were epidemiologists, but it is nonsensical. Some of the earliest “masks work! China took ours!” voices are in the “masks don’t work” camp today. I think maybe they were driven more by contrarian urgings rather than reasonableness.

    I heard one “expert” an immunologist according to the video, but I did not look it up, said Covid struck because immunity to SARS had waned! Not an epidemiologist, but a supposed “expert” on the denialist side.

    Anyway, what did the epidemiologists you were talking about say? I did well enough in high school, but it’s possible I would have thought they said something dumb, too. Certainly “infections evolve to become milder” needed a lot more work, though it is a truism in epidemiology.

    • Replies: @Mike1
    @Rob

    The data is mostly population level. I get the instinct to want tight age bands as that is better science but it is not available in most countries/jurisdictions. People love their "correlation/causation" argument as they think it makes them sound smart but when the correlations are all one way and are very distributed then that is close to a certainty that what appears to be happening is actually happening. I can send you interesting things as I find them if you like.

    AIDS is a minefield of entrenched opinions and super charged emotions. I don't think there is any sane argument that AIDS is anything more than drug addicts having weak immune systems. To this day, people write science articles talking about "catching AIDS" which is a medical impossibility.

    I do think that AIDS (the Western defined version) is a gay community specific disease. The behavioral traits of AIDS victims is almost completely absent in the straight community. Staying awake for days at a time on a cocktail of drugs and having unprotected sex with dozens of strangers is incredibly unusual in the straight world. I very much doubt that straight people know that AIDS is not feared in the gay community. I've met many young gay men that state actual ambitions to "catch AIDS".

    You are right that group affiliation drives close to 100% of covid belief. I live between heavily red and heavily blue areas at different points in the year. One interesting point: the red populations are capable of discussing covid and the blue populations have no ability to do so (despite the quasi religious "we believe in science" signs). The red groups sources are often baffling but they do know an argument is happening. I have been harassed for wearing a mask (mid January 2020) and not wearing a mask by the same people.

    Epidemiologists have been harassed for any deviation of orthodoxy. I read the news of the country of my birth which is where I see most of this.

    "Just curious, do you think the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine efficacy studies were fraudulent?". I think all medical studies paid for by a drug company are fraudulent: nothing special about this one. Injecting the control group to ruin the study is obvious fraud. It's also totally normal.

  213. @HA
    @Rob

    "Without knowing what percent of the population (in each age category) is vaccinated, it is not possible to get from the data presented to determine whether omicron is more likely to infect vaxed people than unvaxed people."

    Exactly. The "vaxxed people get omicron more" assertion is like saying "people who ski in Austrian resorts", or else, "Asians" or "Jews who enjoy spending their Christmas in Asian restaurants" are more likely to get COVID. That was likely true about a year ago. Ultimately, it didn't mean squat.

    I expect that people who take lots of plane trips (and are, in NY, more likely to be vaxxed as a group -- or so I'd guess) may well be over-represented in omicron's initial surge. Let's see how well that observation holds up once omicron comes calling in Mississippi -- or even how it holds up in NY in a couple of weeks. If this is the kind of stuff the truthers are reduced to arguing about, they have indeed fallen on hard times.

    Also, be ready for a repeat of the same tactic Berenson tried regarding how "most people who died from COVID-19 in the United Kingdom in September were fully vaccinated." As it turns out, denominators matter.

    Replies: @Mark G.

    I’m curious. Do you think Pfizer gave a larger campaign contribution to Biden than any other candidate in the 2020 election for purely altruistic reasons? After Biden was elected, he started pushing for vaccine mandates. Pfizer has a vaccine and would financially benefit from mandatory vaccines. Do you think Biden might want to pay Pfizer back or do you think it is just a coincidence that he is pushing the product of one of his big campaign contributors?

    The FDA approved the anti-viral drug Remdesivir, which is still under patent and can be sold for three thousand dollars but not Ivermectin or HCQ, which Big Pharma can’t make any money off of since the patents on them expired. Do you think there is a possibility of regulatory capture here or is it just a coincidence that the drug that is still under patent is the one that got approved?

    I can think of four problems with Remdesivir. First, it’s ineffective. Studies show it slightly reduces the duration of the disease but doesn’t really reduce the death rate. Second, it’s an anti-viral drug but is given to hospital patients who have already passed from the viral to the inflammation stage. At that point they need a steroid like Dexamethasone. Third, it can have nasty side effects. Fourth, since it can have nasty side effects anyone receiving it has to stay in the hospital so they can be monitored for the appearance of those side effects.

    Many of the Covid patients who have been forced to take this drug, myself included, might have recovered just as well if they had just been given some Dexamethasone to take orally and then sent home. Of course, if there had been fewer hospitalizations there might not have been as much pressure to quickly approve inadequately tested vaccines. Also, the hospitals would have had less money coming in to pay the inflated salaries of the doctors and administrators there. Do you think it is just a coincidence that we adopted the course that would most enrich the hospitals, drug and vaccine companies?

    • Replies: @HA
    @Mark G.

    "I’m curious. Do you think Pfizer gave a larger campaign contribution to Biden than any other candidate in the 2020 election for purely altruistic reasons?"

    I'm not sure, given that Pfizer is just one of the horses in a pretty big race -- with Moderna beating it in terms of longer lasting immunity (at the risk of worse side effects) and with J&J and now, as already noted, Novavax, not to mention the Chinese and Russian contenders -- why their contribution to Biden (some $300K more than they gave to Trump) would matter in the grand scheme of things. If that's all it takes to swing the government in your favor, why don't you and your buddies -- assuming your hospital bill was not too onerous (and if that's the case, it means the suckers who are in the same insurance plan you are wound up footing the bill for your "freedoms") -- pitch in and put together $301K and thereby magically make COVID go away?

    In other words, no, I don't think it would have made much of a difference. COVID is a global phenomenon, and the travails we're having are replicated in countries where Pfizer hasn't really penetrated. As for the Chinese and Indian firms that are responsible for manufacturing ivermectin (yes, I know it's not patented -- milk and gasoline don't have patents either, but that doesn't mean the dairy and and petroleum lobbies are hurting for change, so I suspect the same is true for the companies crunching out ivermectin), they seem to have plenty of pull, given that they are capable of bribing the WHO to grant approval to their loony "traditional" medicines. Same goes for the other companies that make up the substantial "alternative medicine" market (not as big as Big Pharma, but still plenty big, and in some cases, connected at the hip, if you carefully go through the supply chain). Why didn't they just shell out a few more bribes to have ivermectin be featured along with Ayurvedic cow urine and chi-balancing tiger penis and rhino horn and whatever other quack cures we're now supposed to regard as acceptable? In other words, no, given the unimpressive results ivermectin has racked up so far (i.e. possibly better than placebo, but not up to the 95% confidence interval that is typically used), while I have no problem with people taking it (since it's not as harmful as HCQ, which you also mentioned) I can see it's not nearly as good as any of the vaccines. I wouldn't be surprised if ivermectin kills more than just parasitic worms in your gut, and thereby affects your immune response (and that's a big deal as far as whether or not COVID will wind up killing you), but even if that's the case, it doesn't appear to happen all that often, else the results would have been more impressive.

    And if you don't like Remdesivir, or ventilators, or any of the other experimental and possibly harmful things that doctors do to you in their desperate attempts to keep you alive once you go to the hospital, don't go to the hospital. You passed up an easy opportunity to drastically minimize your likelihood of winding up there. That being the case, your anecdotal and childish protests about why the treatments you got weren't tailor-made just for you (and if they had been, I suspect the result would have killed significantly more people than it would have helped) do not impress me. If you read the Facebook sagas of the COVID patients who eventually died of the disease, plenty of them felt good enough to get out of the hospital and go back home after five days, only to wind up back in the hospital in worse shape than ever. So it's a judgment call as to when or if to release a patient, and good for you that releasing you turned out to be the right call, but it's not just about you, and there's no magic 8-ball that doctors can use to differentiate you from all those other hard luck cases.

    As for other "preventatives", good luck trying to sell those to people who can't be bothered to strap on a thin strip of blue fabric, or take a shot. Good luck trying to tax sugary drinks like Bloomberg did, or supporting any other governmental effort to change the terrible health choices you and others make. I have no problem with that. But for now, we have to work with the tub-of-lard, soda-guzzling buffoons we've been given, who are so dumb, they pass up an easy opportunity to get a vaccination, and then complain about the rough time they had at the hospital. It's not going to be easy to get people like that to get in shape, given that they can't be bothered with far simpler and far easier preventatives.

    Replies: @Mark G., @Greta Handel

  214. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @James Braxton

    Steve desperately wants to believe that we can still reform the system so he sees what he wants to see.

    It's the same with how he continues to believe that some people in Hollywood are secret conservatives, putting dissident messages in their movies. It's insane, but it allows Steve to avoid the hard choice of supporting or rejecting white identity politics.

    White identity politics is the question of our time, yet Steve assiduously avoids it. Why?

    Replies: @EuroNat, @silviosilver, @Corvinus

    “White identity politics is the question of our time, yet Steve assiduously avoids it. Why?“

    It’s the question for YOU. Ever thought that most whites view it differently on their behalf and volition, that there hasn’t been this Jewish propaganda conspiracy to hijack “our proper place in society”.

  215. @Mark G.
    @HA

    I'm curious. Do you think Pfizer gave a larger campaign contribution to Biden than any other candidate in the 2020 election for purely altruistic reasons? After Biden was elected, he started pushing for vaccine mandates. Pfizer has a vaccine and would financially benefit from mandatory vaccines. Do you think Biden might want to pay Pfizer back or do you think it is just a coincidence that he is pushing the product of one of his big campaign contributors?

    The FDA approved the anti-viral drug Remdesivir, which is still under patent and can be sold for three thousand dollars but not Ivermectin or HCQ, which Big Pharma can't make any money off of since the patents on them expired. Do you think there is a possibility of regulatory capture here or is it just a coincidence that the drug that is still under patent is the one that got approved?

    I can think of four problems with Remdesivir. First, it's ineffective. Studies show it slightly reduces the duration of the disease but doesn't really reduce the death rate. Second, it's an anti-viral drug but is given to hospital patients who have already passed from the viral to the inflammation stage. At that point they need a steroid like Dexamethasone. Third, it can have nasty side effects. Fourth, since it can have nasty side effects anyone receiving it has to stay in the hospital so they can be monitored for the appearance of those side effects.

    Many of the Covid patients who have been forced to take this drug, myself included, might have recovered just as well if they had just been given some Dexamethasone to take orally and then sent home. Of course, if there had been fewer hospitalizations there might not have been as much pressure to quickly approve inadequately tested vaccines. Also, the hospitals would have had less money coming in to pay the inflated salaries of the doctors and administrators there. Do you think it is just a coincidence that we adopted the course that would most enrich the hospitals, drug and vaccine companies?

    Replies: @HA

    “I’m curious. Do you think Pfizer gave a larger campaign contribution to Biden than any other candidate in the 2020 election for purely altruistic reasons?”

    I’m not sure, given that Pfizer is just one of the horses in a pretty big race — with Moderna beating it in terms of longer lasting immunity (at the risk of worse side effects) and with J&J and now, as already noted, Novavax, not to mention the Chinese and Russian contenders — why their contribution to Biden (some $300K more than they gave to Trump) would matter in the grand scheme of things. If that’s all it takes to swing the government in your favor, why don’t you and your buddies — assuming your hospital bill was not too onerous (and if that’s the case, it means the suckers who are in the same insurance plan you are wound up footing the bill for your “freedoms”) — pitch in and put together $301K and thereby magically make COVID go away?

    In other words, no, I don’t think it would have made much of a difference. COVID is a global phenomenon, and the travails we’re having are replicated in countries where Pfizer hasn’t really penetrated. As for the Chinese and Indian firms that are responsible for manufacturing ivermectin (yes, I know it’s not patented — milk and gasoline don’t have patents either, but that doesn’t mean the dairy and and petroleum lobbies are hurting for change, so I suspect the same is true for the companies crunching out ivermectin), they seem to have plenty of pull, given that they are capable of bribing the WHO to grant approval to their loony “traditional” medicines. Same goes for the other companies that make up the substantial “alternative medicine” market (not as big as Big Pharma, but still plenty big, and in some cases, connected at the hip, if you carefully go through the supply chain). Why didn’t they just shell out a few more bribes to have ivermectin be featured along with Ayurvedic cow urine and chi-balancing tiger penis and rhino horn and whatever other quack cures we’re now supposed to regard as acceptable? In other words, no, given the unimpressive results ivermectin has racked up so far (i.e. possibly better than placebo, but not up to the 95% confidence interval that is typically used), while I have no problem with people taking it (since it’s not as harmful as HCQ, which you also mentioned) I can see it’s not nearly as good as any of the vaccines. I wouldn’t be surprised if ivermectin kills more than just parasitic worms in your gut, and thereby affects your immune response (and that’s a big deal as far as whether or not COVID will wind up killing you), but even if that’s the case, it doesn’t appear to happen all that often, else the results would have been more impressive.

    And if you don’t like Remdesivir, or ventilators, or any of the other experimental and possibly harmful things that doctors do to you in their desperate attempts to keep you alive once you go to the hospital, don’t go to the hospital. You passed up an easy opportunity to drastically minimize your likelihood of winding up there. That being the case, your anecdotal and childish protests about why the treatments you got weren’t tailor-made just for you (and if they had been, I suspect the result would have killed significantly more people than it would have helped) do not impress me. If you read the Facebook sagas of the COVID patients who eventually died of the disease, plenty of them felt good enough to get out of the hospital and go back home after five days, only to wind up back in the hospital in worse shape than ever. So it’s a judgment call as to when or if to release a patient, and good for you that releasing you turned out to be the right call, but it’s not just about you, and there’s no magic 8-ball that doctors can use to differentiate you from all those other hard luck cases.

    As for other “preventatives”, good luck trying to sell those to people who can’t be bothered to strap on a thin strip of blue fabric, or take a shot. Good luck trying to tax sugary drinks like Bloomberg did, or supporting any other governmental effort to change the terrible health choices you and others make. I have no problem with that. But for now, we have to work with the tub-of-lard, soda-guzzling buffoons we’ve been given, who are so dumb, they pass up an easy opportunity to get a vaccination, and then complain about the rough time they had at the hospital. It’s not going to be easy to get people like that to get in shape, given that they can’t be bothered with far simpler and far easier preventatives.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    @HA


    And if you don’t like Remdesivir, or ventilators, or any of the other experimental and possibly harmful things that doctors do to you in their desperate attempts to keep you alive once you go to the hospital, don’t go to the hospital.
     
    I had read the studies on various treatments and wanted access to Dexamethasone, since it showed good results with reducing inflammation. Unfortunately, that is not available over the counter. That meant the only way I could get it was to sign on to their entire treatment program.

    You suspect the treatments I wanted to take wouldn't work but I suspect you are wrong. Why are you and the medical establishment against medical choice and want to use the force of the government to prevent me and others from taking them? If, as you say, they don't work wouldn't a good way to demonstrate that would be to allow them to be used and let everyone see they don't work? Isn't the reality here that the vaccine proponents are afraid they would work and reduce the need for their vaccines and are blocking access to them for that reason?

    Let's be honest here. The medical establishment is engaging in thuglike behavior in using the government to enforce a monopoly to eliminate competition and enrich itself. In 1960 medical spending was 6% of GDP and the U.S. was twelfth in the world in life expectancy. Now it is 17% of GDP and the U.S. is no longer even in the top twenty five in life expectancy. This is because they have replaced concern for the health of their patients with trying to squeeze as much money out of them as they can.

    Replies: @HA

    , @Greta Handel
    @HA

    Did you write the histrionic HA comments to me upthread?

    This one - calm, casual yet eloquent, appealing to status insecurity, conflating the objections to masks and vaccines - sounds like That Would Be Telling.

    Or maybe you’re just in a better mood today.

    Replies: @HA

  216. @Rob
    @Mike1


    My source is math. Every jurisdiction where comparable numbers eventually emerge from is showing this.
     
    I would like to have data, even for a single city, where the vaccinated (and how many shots) and unvaccinated pop within fairly narrow age (and race) bands with sick, hospitalized, and died from covid numbers for each band. If you have a link to data showing that vaxed people have greater risk of infection, I’d love to see it. Just curious, do you think the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine efficacy studies were fraudulent? Those (they say) were unequivocal that vaccines were more effective than nothing.

    But let’s take a look at the last epidemic where there were lots of skeptical people. HIV→ AIDS skeptics. There were HIV+, educated, intelligent people who doubted that HIV caused AIDS. Some of them wrote books about it. Lived healthily for years without HIV meds. They all died of AIDS. Looking in from the outside, it is pretty easy to see why. Most of them were gay, did not like condoms, and wanted to keep being promiscuous. They had too strong consciences to have sex knowing they were spreading a horrible illness, so they decided that they weren’t.

    While covid is a far milder disease than AIDS, it seems to me that many of the deniers, minimizers and skeptics are also engaged in motivated reasoning and making statements for group affiliation affirmation rather than truth value.

    As too dumb people sneering at epidemiologists for disagreeing about the course of epidemics, I think it is fair to say that that has happened from dim people on both sides of the disagreement to epidemiologists on the other. Many epidemiologists do not seem to have a clear understanding of how infectious diseases work. “Quarantines do not work” has been a mainstay of epidemiologists at least since the AIDS epidemic. Contact tracing “not working” has been unpopular, also since AIDS. Shutting down locations at which “superspreading” occurs - same. These were clearly matters of politics. Most public health people are liberals. They did not want gays “stigmatized.” Gays did not want contact tracing because it would have been obvious, at least to the tracers both who was gay and that many gays did not know who they were having sex with. Viruses evolving to becoming milder, that one was and is widespread, even though it contradicts evolutionary theory, history, snd makes one wonder why living things have so many adaptations to infectious diseases. In fairness, I might have solved this for respiratory viruses.

    I’m sure you’ve seen the NYC health department Tweet encouraging people to go to the 2020 Chinese New Year celebration to show the coronavirus they weren’t racists. Whichever side you are on concerning covid and masking, the “experts” got it wrong, either at the beginning (when it mattered) or for the bulk of the pandemic. Airborne spread, also wrong. I remember the voice of the pro-man zeitgeist, Steven Colbert, talking up alcoholizing one’s hands at every opportunity for weeks. I’m sure you remember the howling about racism when Trump implemented his halfassed, leaky, too-late travel ban on China (but not Italy) The same with the discussion of mandatory, enforced, quarantine of “Americans” in from Wuhan - racist! Won’t work!

    The FDA putting coronavirus cDNA in their test kits, and then not allowing any other testing was either a terrible mistake or a crime against humanity someone did to make Orangeman Bad look bad. Surely competent infectious disease specialists would have realized that even imperfect free-range testing was better than none at all. If anyone is even investigating this crime against humanity, I have not heard of it.

    Remember the universal condemnation of “lab leak” as “Trump’s conspiracy theory”? Expert epidemiologists yet again!

    On the other side, the certainty that vaccines could not work but a monoclonal antibody would? Ok, don’t know if these were epidemiologists, but it is nonsensical. Some of the earliest “masks work! China took ours!” voices are in the “masks don’t work” camp today. I think maybe they were driven more by contrarian urgings rather than reasonableness.

    I heard one “expert” an immunologist according to the video, but I did not look it up, said Covid struck because immunity to SARS had waned! Not an epidemiologist, but a supposed “expert” on the denialist side.

    Anyway, what did the epidemiologists you were talking about say? I did well enough in high school, but it’s possible I would have thought they said something dumb, too. Certainly “infections evolve to become milder” needed a lot more work, though it is a truism in epidemiology.

    Replies: @Mike1

    The data is mostly population level. I get the instinct to want tight age bands as that is better science but it is not available in most countries/jurisdictions. People love their “correlation/causation” argument as they think it makes them sound smart but when the correlations are all one way and are very distributed then that is close to a certainty that what appears to be happening is actually happening. I can send you interesting things as I find them if you like.

    AIDS is a minefield of entrenched opinions and super charged emotions. I don’t think there is any sane argument that AIDS is anything more than drug addicts having weak immune systems. To this day, people write science articles talking about “catching AIDS” which is a medical impossibility.

    I do think that AIDS (the Western defined version) is a gay community specific disease. The behavioral traits of AIDS victims is almost completely absent in the straight community. Staying awake for days at a time on a cocktail of drugs and having unprotected sex with dozens of strangers is incredibly unusual in the straight world. I very much doubt that straight people know that AIDS is not feared in the gay community. I’ve met many young gay men that state actual ambitions to “catch AIDS”.

    You are right that group affiliation drives close to 100% of covid belief. I live between heavily red and heavily blue areas at different points in the year. One interesting point: the red populations are capable of discussing covid and the blue populations have no ability to do so (despite the quasi religious “we believe in science” signs). The red groups sources are often baffling but they do know an argument is happening. I have been harassed for wearing a mask (mid January 2020) and not wearing a mask by the same people.

    Epidemiologists have been harassed for any deviation of orthodoxy. I read the news of the country of my birth which is where I see most of this.

    “Just curious, do you think the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine efficacy studies were fraudulent?”. I think all medical studies paid for by a drug company are fraudulent: nothing special about this one. Injecting the control group to ruin the study is obvious fraud. It’s also totally normal.

  217. @HA
    @Mark G.

    "I’m curious. Do you think Pfizer gave a larger campaign contribution to Biden than any other candidate in the 2020 election for purely altruistic reasons?"

    I'm not sure, given that Pfizer is just one of the horses in a pretty big race -- with Moderna beating it in terms of longer lasting immunity (at the risk of worse side effects) and with J&J and now, as already noted, Novavax, not to mention the Chinese and Russian contenders -- why their contribution to Biden (some $300K more than they gave to Trump) would matter in the grand scheme of things. If that's all it takes to swing the government in your favor, why don't you and your buddies -- assuming your hospital bill was not too onerous (and if that's the case, it means the suckers who are in the same insurance plan you are wound up footing the bill for your "freedoms") -- pitch in and put together $301K and thereby magically make COVID go away?

    In other words, no, I don't think it would have made much of a difference. COVID is a global phenomenon, and the travails we're having are replicated in countries where Pfizer hasn't really penetrated. As for the Chinese and Indian firms that are responsible for manufacturing ivermectin (yes, I know it's not patented -- milk and gasoline don't have patents either, but that doesn't mean the dairy and and petroleum lobbies are hurting for change, so I suspect the same is true for the companies crunching out ivermectin), they seem to have plenty of pull, given that they are capable of bribing the WHO to grant approval to their loony "traditional" medicines. Same goes for the other companies that make up the substantial "alternative medicine" market (not as big as Big Pharma, but still plenty big, and in some cases, connected at the hip, if you carefully go through the supply chain). Why didn't they just shell out a few more bribes to have ivermectin be featured along with Ayurvedic cow urine and chi-balancing tiger penis and rhino horn and whatever other quack cures we're now supposed to regard as acceptable? In other words, no, given the unimpressive results ivermectin has racked up so far (i.e. possibly better than placebo, but not up to the 95% confidence interval that is typically used), while I have no problem with people taking it (since it's not as harmful as HCQ, which you also mentioned) I can see it's not nearly as good as any of the vaccines. I wouldn't be surprised if ivermectin kills more than just parasitic worms in your gut, and thereby affects your immune response (and that's a big deal as far as whether or not COVID will wind up killing you), but even if that's the case, it doesn't appear to happen all that often, else the results would have been more impressive.

    And if you don't like Remdesivir, or ventilators, or any of the other experimental and possibly harmful things that doctors do to you in their desperate attempts to keep you alive once you go to the hospital, don't go to the hospital. You passed up an easy opportunity to drastically minimize your likelihood of winding up there. That being the case, your anecdotal and childish protests about why the treatments you got weren't tailor-made just for you (and if they had been, I suspect the result would have killed significantly more people than it would have helped) do not impress me. If you read the Facebook sagas of the COVID patients who eventually died of the disease, plenty of them felt good enough to get out of the hospital and go back home after five days, only to wind up back in the hospital in worse shape than ever. So it's a judgment call as to when or if to release a patient, and good for you that releasing you turned out to be the right call, but it's not just about you, and there's no magic 8-ball that doctors can use to differentiate you from all those other hard luck cases.

    As for other "preventatives", good luck trying to sell those to people who can't be bothered to strap on a thin strip of blue fabric, or take a shot. Good luck trying to tax sugary drinks like Bloomberg did, or supporting any other governmental effort to change the terrible health choices you and others make. I have no problem with that. But for now, we have to work with the tub-of-lard, soda-guzzling buffoons we've been given, who are so dumb, they pass up an easy opportunity to get a vaccination, and then complain about the rough time they had at the hospital. It's not going to be easy to get people like that to get in shape, given that they can't be bothered with far simpler and far easier preventatives.

    Replies: @Mark G., @Greta Handel

    And if you don’t like Remdesivir, or ventilators, or any of the other experimental and possibly harmful things that doctors do to you in their desperate attempts to keep you alive once you go to the hospital, don’t go to the hospital.

    I had read the studies on various treatments and wanted access to Dexamethasone, since it showed good results with reducing inflammation. Unfortunately, that is not available over the counter. That meant the only way I could get it was to sign on to their entire treatment program.

    You suspect the treatments I wanted to take wouldn’t work but I suspect you are wrong. Why are you and the medical establishment against medical choice and want to use the force of the government to prevent me and others from taking them? If, as you say, they don’t work wouldn’t a good way to demonstrate that would be to allow them to be used and let everyone see they don’t work? Isn’t the reality here that the vaccine proponents are afraid they would work and reduce the need for their vaccines and are blocking access to them for that reason?

    Let’s be honest here. The medical establishment is engaging in thuglike behavior in using the government to enforce a monopoly to eliminate competition and enrich itself. In 1960 medical spending was 6% of GDP and the U.S. was twelfth in the world in life expectancy. Now it is 17% of GDP and the U.S. is no longer even in the top twenty five in life expectancy. This is because they have replaced concern for the health of their patients with trying to squeeze as much money out of them as they can.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Mark G.

    "You suspect the treatments I wanted to take wouldn’t work but I suspect you are wrong. Why are you and the medical establishment against medical choice and want to use the force of the government to prevent me and others from taking them?"

    I have no problem with you finding a doctor or a hospital that will prescribe you whatever you want. Or put your cash into a hedge fund that funds a trial to demonstrate the practicality of what you're proposing. I think I've made that clear -- see my earlier comments about that "pup tent" and "rusty vat of ivermectin" that I'm perfectly willing to provide for you. But THAT is the way you pick and choose the portion of the medical establishment you want to utilize. Dictating to doctors a treatment that they themselves haven't put in place (for whatever combination of insurance/legal/lack-of-knowhow reasons), just because you or a relative googled something while you were waiting to recover, is a recipe for disaster, and simply an invitation to the nurses to spit in your food. Same goes for just about anything. You want the pilot to use a different wing profile or landing protocol? You think Bernouilli's principle is "overrated"? Find an airline that does what you want. Don't start carping about how your rights are not being respected by the airline establishment from some aisle seat after the plane has already taken off. Your backseat driving is not going to be appreciated.

    And again, if you don't want the "medical establishment" or Big Pharma to get rich off the next virus or infection that comes along, don't go into the hospital in the first place, because THAT is where the money really starts to disappear. Your boneheaded approach made them a lot richer than the jab would have. YOU made all that happen. If you're too lazy or paranoid to submit to that shot, at least be careful about staying away from people and wearing masks during a contagious disease pandemic, but I'm guessing you can't be bothered with any of that, either.

    Replies: @Mark G., @Mike1

  218. @HA
    @Mark G.

    "I’m curious. Do you think Pfizer gave a larger campaign contribution to Biden than any other candidate in the 2020 election for purely altruistic reasons?"

    I'm not sure, given that Pfizer is just one of the horses in a pretty big race -- with Moderna beating it in terms of longer lasting immunity (at the risk of worse side effects) and with J&J and now, as already noted, Novavax, not to mention the Chinese and Russian contenders -- why their contribution to Biden (some $300K more than they gave to Trump) would matter in the grand scheme of things. If that's all it takes to swing the government in your favor, why don't you and your buddies -- assuming your hospital bill was not too onerous (and if that's the case, it means the suckers who are in the same insurance plan you are wound up footing the bill for your "freedoms") -- pitch in and put together $301K and thereby magically make COVID go away?

    In other words, no, I don't think it would have made much of a difference. COVID is a global phenomenon, and the travails we're having are replicated in countries where Pfizer hasn't really penetrated. As for the Chinese and Indian firms that are responsible for manufacturing ivermectin (yes, I know it's not patented -- milk and gasoline don't have patents either, but that doesn't mean the dairy and and petroleum lobbies are hurting for change, so I suspect the same is true for the companies crunching out ivermectin), they seem to have plenty of pull, given that they are capable of bribing the WHO to grant approval to their loony "traditional" medicines. Same goes for the other companies that make up the substantial "alternative medicine" market (not as big as Big Pharma, but still plenty big, and in some cases, connected at the hip, if you carefully go through the supply chain). Why didn't they just shell out a few more bribes to have ivermectin be featured along with Ayurvedic cow urine and chi-balancing tiger penis and rhino horn and whatever other quack cures we're now supposed to regard as acceptable? In other words, no, given the unimpressive results ivermectin has racked up so far (i.e. possibly better than placebo, but not up to the 95% confidence interval that is typically used), while I have no problem with people taking it (since it's not as harmful as HCQ, which you also mentioned) I can see it's not nearly as good as any of the vaccines. I wouldn't be surprised if ivermectin kills more than just parasitic worms in your gut, and thereby affects your immune response (and that's a big deal as far as whether or not COVID will wind up killing you), but even if that's the case, it doesn't appear to happen all that often, else the results would have been more impressive.

    And if you don't like Remdesivir, or ventilators, or any of the other experimental and possibly harmful things that doctors do to you in their desperate attempts to keep you alive once you go to the hospital, don't go to the hospital. You passed up an easy opportunity to drastically minimize your likelihood of winding up there. That being the case, your anecdotal and childish protests about why the treatments you got weren't tailor-made just for you (and if they had been, I suspect the result would have killed significantly more people than it would have helped) do not impress me. If you read the Facebook sagas of the COVID patients who eventually died of the disease, plenty of them felt good enough to get out of the hospital and go back home after five days, only to wind up back in the hospital in worse shape than ever. So it's a judgment call as to when or if to release a patient, and good for you that releasing you turned out to be the right call, but it's not just about you, and there's no magic 8-ball that doctors can use to differentiate you from all those other hard luck cases.

    As for other "preventatives", good luck trying to sell those to people who can't be bothered to strap on a thin strip of blue fabric, or take a shot. Good luck trying to tax sugary drinks like Bloomberg did, or supporting any other governmental effort to change the terrible health choices you and others make. I have no problem with that. But for now, we have to work with the tub-of-lard, soda-guzzling buffoons we've been given, who are so dumb, they pass up an easy opportunity to get a vaccination, and then complain about the rough time they had at the hospital. It's not going to be easy to get people like that to get in shape, given that they can't be bothered with far simpler and far easier preventatives.

    Replies: @Mark G., @Greta Handel

    Did you write the histrionic HA comments to me upthread?

    This one – calm, casual yet eloquent, appealing to status insecurity, conflating the objections to masks and vaccines – sounds like That Would Be Telling.

    Or maybe you’re just in a better mood today.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Greta Handel

    "Or maybe you’re just in a better mood today."

    No, keep up. I had previously agreed upthread, in the spirit of the season, to make one more effort to address whatever single thing it was that the truthers found most compelling. If this was all he or anyone else could come up with, so be it. So, happy "4 calling birds" day to all.

    Whenever I choose to go back to outing the truthers for being the bunch of pathetic, bed-wetting sissies they are -- after they spent an entire year accusing everyone else of being that -- it won't be any sooner than they deserve.

  219. @Mark G.
    @HA


    And if you don’t like Remdesivir, or ventilators, or any of the other experimental and possibly harmful things that doctors do to you in their desperate attempts to keep you alive once you go to the hospital, don’t go to the hospital.
     
    I had read the studies on various treatments and wanted access to Dexamethasone, since it showed good results with reducing inflammation. Unfortunately, that is not available over the counter. That meant the only way I could get it was to sign on to their entire treatment program.

    You suspect the treatments I wanted to take wouldn't work but I suspect you are wrong. Why are you and the medical establishment against medical choice and want to use the force of the government to prevent me and others from taking them? If, as you say, they don't work wouldn't a good way to demonstrate that would be to allow them to be used and let everyone see they don't work? Isn't the reality here that the vaccine proponents are afraid they would work and reduce the need for their vaccines and are blocking access to them for that reason?

    Let's be honest here. The medical establishment is engaging in thuglike behavior in using the government to enforce a monopoly to eliminate competition and enrich itself. In 1960 medical spending was 6% of GDP and the U.S. was twelfth in the world in life expectancy. Now it is 17% of GDP and the U.S. is no longer even in the top twenty five in life expectancy. This is because they have replaced concern for the health of their patients with trying to squeeze as much money out of them as they can.

    Replies: @HA

    “You suspect the treatments I wanted to take wouldn’t work but I suspect you are wrong. Why are you and the medical establishment against medical choice and want to use the force of the government to prevent me and others from taking them?”

    I have no problem with you finding a doctor or a hospital that will prescribe you whatever you want. Or put your cash into a hedge fund that funds a trial to demonstrate the practicality of what you’re proposing. I think I’ve made that clear — see my earlier comments about that “pup tent” and “rusty vat of ivermectin” that I’m perfectly willing to provide for you. But THAT is the way you pick and choose the portion of the medical establishment you want to utilize. Dictating to doctors a treatment that they themselves haven’t put in place (for whatever combination of insurance/legal/lack-of-knowhow reasons), just because you or a relative googled something while you were waiting to recover, is a recipe for disaster, and simply an invitation to the nurses to spit in your food. Same goes for just about anything. You want the pilot to use a different wing profile or landing protocol? You think Bernouilli’s principle is “overrated”? Find an airline that does what you want. Don’t start carping about how your rights are not being respected by the airline establishment from some aisle seat after the plane has already taken off. Your backseat driving is not going to be appreciated.

    And again, if you don’t want the “medical establishment” or Big Pharma to get rich off the next virus or infection that comes along, don’t go into the hospital in the first place, because THAT is where the money really starts to disappear. Your boneheaded approach made them a lot richer than the jab would have. YOU made all that happen. If you’re too lazy or paranoid to submit to that shot, at least be careful about staying away from people and wearing masks during a contagious disease pandemic, but I’m guessing you can’t be bothered with any of that, either.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    @HA


    I think I’ve made that clear — see my earlier comments about that “pup tent” and “rusty vat of ivermectin” that I’m perfectly willing to provide for you. But THAT is the way you pick and choose the portion of the medical establishment you want to utilize. Dictating to doctors a treatment that they themselves haven’t put in place (for water combination of insurance/legal/lack-of-knowhow reasons) just because you or a relative googled something while you were waiting to recover is just a recipe for disaster.
     
    I don't think hospitals or doctors should be forced to provide me with any treatment. I think you are engaging in obfuscation and setting up a straw man you can knock down. There have been doctors, including doctors who practice telemedicine, who have wanted to develop, implement, and publicize alternative treatments. They have been threatened by state medical boards controlled by the medical monopoly with the loss of their licenses to practice medicine. They should be allowed to practice medicine without this threat. Patients should not have to worry about government goons with guns showing up at their home and arresting them if these doctors have given them prescriptions for drugs not approved by the medical monopoly controlled FDA. Also, government officials need to stop talking about private companies stopping "misinformation". Everyone is aware they have tax and regulatory powers they can use to punish anyone who doesn't go along with them and there is an implied threat when they do this. If you give government officials the power to stop someone saying a lie you are also giving them the power to stop someone from speaking the truth. The Founders of this country understood that, which is why they put freedom of speech and press in the First Amendment of the Constitution.

    The fact that you are talking about what you are "willing to provide" for me is revealing. You or anyone else don't have the right to make any decision that interferes with my inalienable right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. No one should be talking about what they are "willing to provide" for me since my rights don't come from them.

    Replies: @HA

    , @Mike1
    @HA

    It's amazing how certain the truly ignorant are. Remdesivir has a horrifying safety profile.

  220. @Greta Handel
    @HA

    Did you write the histrionic HA comments to me upthread?

    This one - calm, casual yet eloquent, appealing to status insecurity, conflating the objections to masks and vaccines - sounds like That Would Be Telling.

    Or maybe you’re just in a better mood today.

    Replies: @HA

    “Or maybe you’re just in a better mood today.”

    No, keep up. I had previously agreed upthread, in the spirit of the season, to make one more effort to address whatever single thing it was that the truthers found most compelling. If this was all he or anyone else could come up with, so be it. So, happy “4 calling birds” day to all.

    Whenever I choose to go back to outing the truthers for being the bunch of pathetic, bed-wetting sissies they are — after they spent an entire year accusing everyone else of being that — it won’t be any sooner than they deserve.

  221. @HA
    @Mark G.

    "You suspect the treatments I wanted to take wouldn’t work but I suspect you are wrong. Why are you and the medical establishment against medical choice and want to use the force of the government to prevent me and others from taking them?"

    I have no problem with you finding a doctor or a hospital that will prescribe you whatever you want. Or put your cash into a hedge fund that funds a trial to demonstrate the practicality of what you're proposing. I think I've made that clear -- see my earlier comments about that "pup tent" and "rusty vat of ivermectin" that I'm perfectly willing to provide for you. But THAT is the way you pick and choose the portion of the medical establishment you want to utilize. Dictating to doctors a treatment that they themselves haven't put in place (for whatever combination of insurance/legal/lack-of-knowhow reasons), just because you or a relative googled something while you were waiting to recover, is a recipe for disaster, and simply an invitation to the nurses to spit in your food. Same goes for just about anything. You want the pilot to use a different wing profile or landing protocol? You think Bernouilli's principle is "overrated"? Find an airline that does what you want. Don't start carping about how your rights are not being respected by the airline establishment from some aisle seat after the plane has already taken off. Your backseat driving is not going to be appreciated.

    And again, if you don't want the "medical establishment" or Big Pharma to get rich off the next virus or infection that comes along, don't go into the hospital in the first place, because THAT is where the money really starts to disappear. Your boneheaded approach made them a lot richer than the jab would have. YOU made all that happen. If you're too lazy or paranoid to submit to that shot, at least be careful about staying away from people and wearing masks during a contagious disease pandemic, but I'm guessing you can't be bothered with any of that, either.

    Replies: @Mark G., @Mike1

    I think I’ve made that clear — see my earlier comments about that “pup tent” and “rusty vat of ivermectin” that I’m perfectly willing to provide for you. But THAT is the way you pick and choose the portion of the medical establishment you want to utilize. Dictating to doctors a treatment that they themselves haven’t put in place (for water combination of insurance/legal/lack-of-knowhow reasons) just because you or a relative googled something while you were waiting to recover is just a recipe for disaster.

    I don’t think hospitals or doctors should be forced to provide me with any treatment. I think you are engaging in obfuscation and setting up a straw man you can knock down. There have been doctors, including doctors who practice telemedicine, who have wanted to develop, implement, and publicize alternative treatments. They have been threatened by state medical boards controlled by the medical monopoly with the loss of their licenses to practice medicine. They should be allowed to practice medicine without this threat. Patients should not have to worry about government goons with guns showing up at their home and arresting them if these doctors have given them prescriptions for drugs not approved by the medical monopoly controlled FDA. Also, government officials need to stop talking about private companies stopping “misinformation”. Everyone is aware they have tax and regulatory powers they can use to punish anyone who doesn’t go along with them and there is an implied threat when they do this. If you give government officials the power to stop someone saying a lie you are also giving them the power to stop someone from speaking the truth. The Founders of this country understood that, which is why they put freedom of speech and press in the First Amendment of the Constitution.

    The fact that you are talking about what you are “willing to provide” for me is revealing. You or anyone else don’t have the right to make any decision that interferes with my inalienable right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. No one should be talking about what they are “willing to provide” for me since my rights don’t come from them.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Mark G.

    "They have been threatened by state medical boards controlled by the medical monopoly with the loss of their licenses to practice medicine. They should be allowed to practice medicine without this threat."

    Cry me a river. I already told you, you can do what you want, as far as I'm concerned, so long as it doesn't clog up things for people I care more about and who live their lives more responsibly than you evidently do. I've read enough about leper colonies, cholera riots, Typhoid Mary, and the gun-enforced quarantine that the father of a country supposedly based on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness had no problem mandating, to know that what these dictates of yours really amount to is next to nothing.

    I'm all in favor of a health system that allows more insurance plans to compete with each other with fewer state/federal regulation to get in the way. Alas, that hasn't happened and likely won't happen any time soon. And if I'm going to wind up paying for your stupid decisions -- whether it be the ER's you clog up, the vaccines you choose to free-ride, the pointless quack treatments that you expect the FDA and your insurance plans to approve and cover, any of your overdoses or trips to so-called "free clinics", the bastards you father, etc. -- (and based on past experience, I probably will be called upon to pay for all that) then you will indeed need my approval and the approval of those who think like I do, or at least be willing to haggle, even regarding matters as personal as your drug habits, your sex life, and how you choose to behave in a pandemic.

    It's the price of living in a society with limited public resources that is all too susceptible to the tragedy of the commons. You don't like that? Tough. Find some way to exercise your freedoms so that I don't have to pay for them.

    If you don't want me acting like Big Brother, stop expecting me to act like your Rich Uncle. And stop clogging up the ER's with your dumb decisions.

    Replies: @Mark G.

  222. @HA
    @Mark G.

    "You suspect the treatments I wanted to take wouldn’t work but I suspect you are wrong. Why are you and the medical establishment against medical choice and want to use the force of the government to prevent me and others from taking them?"

    I have no problem with you finding a doctor or a hospital that will prescribe you whatever you want. Or put your cash into a hedge fund that funds a trial to demonstrate the practicality of what you're proposing. I think I've made that clear -- see my earlier comments about that "pup tent" and "rusty vat of ivermectin" that I'm perfectly willing to provide for you. But THAT is the way you pick and choose the portion of the medical establishment you want to utilize. Dictating to doctors a treatment that they themselves haven't put in place (for whatever combination of insurance/legal/lack-of-knowhow reasons), just because you or a relative googled something while you were waiting to recover, is a recipe for disaster, and simply an invitation to the nurses to spit in your food. Same goes for just about anything. You want the pilot to use a different wing profile or landing protocol? You think Bernouilli's principle is "overrated"? Find an airline that does what you want. Don't start carping about how your rights are not being respected by the airline establishment from some aisle seat after the plane has already taken off. Your backseat driving is not going to be appreciated.

    And again, if you don't want the "medical establishment" or Big Pharma to get rich off the next virus or infection that comes along, don't go into the hospital in the first place, because THAT is where the money really starts to disappear. Your boneheaded approach made them a lot richer than the jab would have. YOU made all that happen. If you're too lazy or paranoid to submit to that shot, at least be careful about staying away from people and wearing masks during a contagious disease pandemic, but I'm guessing you can't be bothered with any of that, either.

    Replies: @Mark G., @Mike1

    It’s amazing how certain the truly ignorant are. Remdesivir has a horrifying safety profile.

  223. @Mark G.
    @HA


    I think I’ve made that clear — see my earlier comments about that “pup tent” and “rusty vat of ivermectin” that I’m perfectly willing to provide for you. But THAT is the way you pick and choose the portion of the medical establishment you want to utilize. Dictating to doctors a treatment that they themselves haven’t put in place (for water combination of insurance/legal/lack-of-knowhow reasons) just because you or a relative googled something while you were waiting to recover is just a recipe for disaster.
     
    I don't think hospitals or doctors should be forced to provide me with any treatment. I think you are engaging in obfuscation and setting up a straw man you can knock down. There have been doctors, including doctors who practice telemedicine, who have wanted to develop, implement, and publicize alternative treatments. They have been threatened by state medical boards controlled by the medical monopoly with the loss of their licenses to practice medicine. They should be allowed to practice medicine without this threat. Patients should not have to worry about government goons with guns showing up at their home and arresting them if these doctors have given them prescriptions for drugs not approved by the medical monopoly controlled FDA. Also, government officials need to stop talking about private companies stopping "misinformation". Everyone is aware they have tax and regulatory powers they can use to punish anyone who doesn't go along with them and there is an implied threat when they do this. If you give government officials the power to stop someone saying a lie you are also giving them the power to stop someone from speaking the truth. The Founders of this country understood that, which is why they put freedom of speech and press in the First Amendment of the Constitution.

    The fact that you are talking about what you are "willing to provide" for me is revealing. You or anyone else don't have the right to make any decision that interferes with my inalienable right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. No one should be talking about what they are "willing to provide" for me since my rights don't come from them.

    Replies: @HA

    “They have been threatened by state medical boards controlled by the medical monopoly with the loss of their licenses to practice medicine. They should be allowed to practice medicine without this threat.”

    Cry me a river. I already told you, you can do what you want, as far as I’m concerned, so long as it doesn’t clog up things for people I care more about and who live their lives more responsibly than you evidently do. I’ve read enough about leper colonies, cholera riots, Typhoid Mary, and the gun-enforced quarantine that the father of a country supposedly based on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness had no problem mandating, to know that what these dictates of yours really amount to is next to nothing.

    I’m all in favor of a health system that allows more insurance plans to compete with each other with fewer state/federal regulation to get in the way. Alas, that hasn’t happened and likely won’t happen any time soon. And if I’m going to wind up paying for your stupid decisions — whether it be the ER’s you clog up, the vaccines you choose to free-ride, the pointless quack treatments that you expect the FDA and your insurance plans to approve and cover, any of your overdoses or trips to so-called “free clinics”, the bastards you father, etc. — (and based on past experience, I probably will be called upon to pay for all that) then you will indeed need my approval and the approval of those who think like I do, or at least be willing to haggle, even regarding matters as personal as your drug habits, your sex life, and how you choose to behave in a pandemic.

    It’s the price of living in a society with limited public resources that is all too susceptible to the tragedy of the commons. You don’t like that? Tough. Find some way to exercise your freedoms so that I don’t have to pay for them.

    If you don’t want me acting like Big Brother, stop expecting me to act like your Rich Uncle. And stop clogging up the ER’s with your dumb decisions.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    @HA


    Find some way to exercise your freedoms so that I don’t have to pay for them.

     

    Another straw man for you to set up and knock down. You have not been paying my health insurance premiums for the last forty years. I have. I paid for health insurance so I can use it if I get sick. In a free market system there would be different plans covering different things. In a free market system a doctor would be able to open a private medical clinic using alternative methods of treating Covid. Dr. Peter McCullough has estimated that hospitalizations could have been decreased 85% doing that. With hospitalization rates at such a low level, in a free market system it would not be hard to find an insurer to cover Covid. With private medical clinics available, there would be no clogging up of your hospitals. They are clogged up because of the government's use of force to prevent alternatives.

    You think people seeking alternative treatments are stupid. I think people who have caused unneeded deaths by blocking treatments that work in order to enrich themselves with their government enforced medical monopoly are evil. As for you, you have no moral right to say you are only going to allow a rusty bucket of Ivermectin for anyone who doesn't want to use a hospital. It should not be your decision what treatment I receive and what treatment doctors can offer me. Do you understand that?

    Replies: @HA

  224. @HA
    @Mark G.

    "They have been threatened by state medical boards controlled by the medical monopoly with the loss of their licenses to practice medicine. They should be allowed to practice medicine without this threat."

    Cry me a river. I already told you, you can do what you want, as far as I'm concerned, so long as it doesn't clog up things for people I care more about and who live their lives more responsibly than you evidently do. I've read enough about leper colonies, cholera riots, Typhoid Mary, and the gun-enforced quarantine that the father of a country supposedly based on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness had no problem mandating, to know that what these dictates of yours really amount to is next to nothing.

    I'm all in favor of a health system that allows more insurance plans to compete with each other with fewer state/federal regulation to get in the way. Alas, that hasn't happened and likely won't happen any time soon. And if I'm going to wind up paying for your stupid decisions -- whether it be the ER's you clog up, the vaccines you choose to free-ride, the pointless quack treatments that you expect the FDA and your insurance plans to approve and cover, any of your overdoses or trips to so-called "free clinics", the bastards you father, etc. -- (and based on past experience, I probably will be called upon to pay for all that) then you will indeed need my approval and the approval of those who think like I do, or at least be willing to haggle, even regarding matters as personal as your drug habits, your sex life, and how you choose to behave in a pandemic.

    It's the price of living in a society with limited public resources that is all too susceptible to the tragedy of the commons. You don't like that? Tough. Find some way to exercise your freedoms so that I don't have to pay for them.

    If you don't want me acting like Big Brother, stop expecting me to act like your Rich Uncle. And stop clogging up the ER's with your dumb decisions.

    Replies: @Mark G.

    Find some way to exercise your freedoms so that I don’t have to pay for them.

    Another straw man for you to set up and knock down. You have not been paying my health insurance premiums for the last forty years. I have. I paid for health insurance so I can use it if I get sick. In a free market system there would be different plans covering different things. In a free market system a doctor would be able to open a private medical clinic using alternative methods of treating Covid. Dr. Peter McCullough has estimated that hospitalizations could have been decreased 85% doing that. With hospitalization rates at such a low level, in a free market system it would not be hard to find an insurer to cover Covid. With private medical clinics available, there would be no clogging up of your hospitals. They are clogged up because of the government’s use of force to prevent alternatives.

    You think people seeking alternative treatments are stupid. I think people who have caused unneeded deaths by blocking treatments that work in order to enrich themselves with their government enforced medical monopoly are evil. As for you, you have no moral right to say you are only going to allow a rusty bucket of Ivermectin for anyone who doesn’t want to use a hospital. It should not be your decision what treatment I receive and what treatment doctors can offer me. Do you understand that?

    • Replies: @HA
    @Mark G.

    "You have not been paying my health insurance premiums for the last forty years. I have."

    And to the extent you're a net drain on the overall premium hoard, it's up to the ones who don't behave like selfish idiots to make up the shortfall -- and that's apparently where I come in. Do you understand that? The ones who make the effort to follow the health directives and to not use up more insurance money than they paid in ultimately have to bear the cost of the free-riders and the moochers -- like you, for example -- and after a while, that gets annoying. The average hospital stay for COVID is somewhere around 50K-70K, last I checked, and it ain't all just Remdesivir charges. Add up all the idiots who think they know more about how to treat a disease than someone with a medical degree who has heard the same lame conspiracy theories a dozen times or more, and that gets REALLY annoying. Talk to some parent whose 3 month old died of measles because some other kid's anti-vaxxer parents "did their own research". Now, THAT is when the fireworks will really start, but it's a variation of the same theme we're seeing with the truthers in the case of COVID: Vaccine free-riders are a menace. That's why Pelosi and Ferguson and all those high and mighty lockdowns-for-thee-not-me bureaucrats are deservedly denounced.

    Your posts are full of indignant directives about what the government needs to do, what the medical establishment needs to do, what your doctors should have done.

    Nothing there about what YOU should have done in order to make that work. And therein lies a problem for America far bigger than coronavirus. If you could bring yourself to deal more responsibly with how you dropped the ball, you'd be in a better position to dictate to others. As it is, your directives come off like a classic case of projection and blame-shifting.

    Replies: @Mark G.

  225. @Mark G.
    @HA


    Find some way to exercise your freedoms so that I don’t have to pay for them.

     

    Another straw man for you to set up and knock down. You have not been paying my health insurance premiums for the last forty years. I have. I paid for health insurance so I can use it if I get sick. In a free market system there would be different plans covering different things. In a free market system a doctor would be able to open a private medical clinic using alternative methods of treating Covid. Dr. Peter McCullough has estimated that hospitalizations could have been decreased 85% doing that. With hospitalization rates at such a low level, in a free market system it would not be hard to find an insurer to cover Covid. With private medical clinics available, there would be no clogging up of your hospitals. They are clogged up because of the government's use of force to prevent alternatives.

    You think people seeking alternative treatments are stupid. I think people who have caused unneeded deaths by blocking treatments that work in order to enrich themselves with their government enforced medical monopoly are evil. As for you, you have no moral right to say you are only going to allow a rusty bucket of Ivermectin for anyone who doesn't want to use a hospital. It should not be your decision what treatment I receive and what treatment doctors can offer me. Do you understand that?

    Replies: @HA

    “You have not been paying my health insurance premiums for the last forty years. I have.”

    And to the extent you’re a net drain on the overall premium hoard, it’s up to the ones who don’t behave like selfish idiots to make up the shortfall — and that’s apparently where I come in. Do you understand that? The ones who make the effort to follow the health directives and to not use up more insurance money than they paid in ultimately have to bear the cost of the free-riders and the moochers — like you, for example — and after a while, that gets annoying. The average hospital stay for COVID is somewhere around 50K-70K, last I checked, and it ain’t all just Remdesivir charges. Add up all the idiots who think they know more about how to treat a disease than someone with a medical degree who has heard the same lame conspiracy theories a dozen times or more, and that gets REALLY annoying. Talk to some parent whose 3 month old died of measles because some other kid’s anti-vaxxer parents “did their own research”. Now, THAT is when the fireworks will really start, but it’s a variation of the same theme we’re seeing with the truthers in the case of COVID: Vaccine free-riders are a menace. That’s why Pelosi and Ferguson and all those high and mighty lockdowns-for-thee-not-me bureaucrats are deservedly denounced.

    Your posts are full of indignant directives about what the government needs to do, what the medical establishment needs to do, what your doctors should have done.

    Nothing there about what YOU should have done in order to make that work. And therein lies a problem for America far bigger than coronavirus. If you could bring yourself to deal more responsibly with how you dropped the ball, you’d be in a better position to dictate to others. As it is, your directives come off like a classic case of projection and blame-shifting.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    @HA


    Your posts are full of indignant directives about what the government needs to do, what the medical establishment needs to do, what your doctors should have done.

    Nothing there about what YOU should have done in order to make that work.
     
    You are the one saying what the government needs to do, i.e. prevent people from having freedom of medical choice. I could not do what I should have done, get early treatment, because you and others of your ilk had the government block that.

    It's not doctors versus idiots with no medical degree. It's doctors who care more about money than their patients versus doctors who care more about their patients than money.

    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/covid-deaths-could-have-been-prevented/

    No, I don't understand where you come in on the issue of my insurance. It's between me and my insurance company. They didn't have to insure me or cover Covid and anyone who doesn't like it that they cover Covid hospitalizations can switch to another plan. The truth here is that people like you harmed me and others like me by interfering with our ability to get with doctors who could provide early effective treatments. Then, after people like you prevent that and we end up in the hospital, that is your fault because you did not allow us the right to seek effective early treatment. You need to stop pretending you are the victim here when you are really the aggressor.

    Replies: @HA

  226. @Rob
    @gda

    On the first link, The 4.45 more likely to be infected with omicron is in the population of people who have coronavirus. It says what we knew, the vaccines are less effective against omicron. Also interestingly, previous infection with covid is less protective against omicron relative to “classic coke” covid or the non-omicron variants. The first fact is not particularly surprising in light of the second. We have a hard time vaccinating against things where having had the disease before is not protective, whether this is due to multiple serotypes (versions of the bug that infection with one does not protect against the other) or the bug's ability to change the antigens displayed, like many protozoa. That the odds ratio is much higher for vaxed than for previously infected is likely due to antibodies to other viral surface proteins (M and E, maybe another) and T cell response to both surface proteins and other viral proteins.

    The first reference does not include anything that goes towards answering, “out of the total population (in each demographic category) were unvaccinated people less likely to get omicron than the vax^3 were?”

    The last item of the Results tab of the spreadsheet says


    Vaccination status: Those who have received three doses of a vaccine and test positive for COVID-19 are more likely to be infected with infections compatible with the Omicron variant compared with those who are unvaccinated, though individuals who had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine continued to be less likely to test positive for COVID-19, regardless of variant. It is too early to draw conclusions from our data on the effectiveness of vaccines against the Omicron variant.
     
    Bolded in the original.

    The second link also gives numbers for “out of people who have covid, what percent were...” Without knowing what percent of the population (in each age category) is vaccinated, it is not possible to get from the data presented to determine whether omicron is more likely to infect vaxed people than unvaxed people.

    So, yeah, the vaccine is much more protective against delta and earlier variants than it is against omicron. It is more protective against omicron than not being vaccinated is protective against omicron.

    As always, I'm not wishing coronavirus on anyone, regardless of vaccination status. Even in the counterfactual case in which vaccination made people more susceptible to omicron, the (factual) case that it is protective against the currently much more common (in Denmark, at least) delta means one’s odds of not getting very sick and possibly dying from covid are improved by vaccination, because delta is much more prevalent and seems to be much deadlier than omicron, though I don’t know how much more so.

    Replies: @HA, @gda

    Latest from Ontario:
    h ttps://twitter.com/KnowledgeAcqui1/status/1476224675042643968

    Latest from Denmark:
    h ttps://twitter.com/Covid19Crusher/status/1475798077428711425

    Latest from Wales:
    h ttps://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1476169844773031940

    (Don’t want to clutter up the thread, so do your own adjustment to get the results).

    I could go on, but what’s the point.

    Trying to convince a Pfizer employee/cult member is a never-ending proposition.

  227. @HA
    @Mark G.

    "You have not been paying my health insurance premiums for the last forty years. I have."

    And to the extent you're a net drain on the overall premium hoard, it's up to the ones who don't behave like selfish idiots to make up the shortfall -- and that's apparently where I come in. Do you understand that? The ones who make the effort to follow the health directives and to not use up more insurance money than they paid in ultimately have to bear the cost of the free-riders and the moochers -- like you, for example -- and after a while, that gets annoying. The average hospital stay for COVID is somewhere around 50K-70K, last I checked, and it ain't all just Remdesivir charges. Add up all the idiots who think they know more about how to treat a disease than someone with a medical degree who has heard the same lame conspiracy theories a dozen times or more, and that gets REALLY annoying. Talk to some parent whose 3 month old died of measles because some other kid's anti-vaxxer parents "did their own research". Now, THAT is when the fireworks will really start, but it's a variation of the same theme we're seeing with the truthers in the case of COVID: Vaccine free-riders are a menace. That's why Pelosi and Ferguson and all those high and mighty lockdowns-for-thee-not-me bureaucrats are deservedly denounced.

    Your posts are full of indignant directives about what the government needs to do, what the medical establishment needs to do, what your doctors should have done.

    Nothing there about what YOU should have done in order to make that work. And therein lies a problem for America far bigger than coronavirus. If you could bring yourself to deal more responsibly with how you dropped the ball, you'd be in a better position to dictate to others. As it is, your directives come off like a classic case of projection and blame-shifting.

    Replies: @Mark G.

    Your posts are full of indignant directives about what the government needs to do, what the medical establishment needs to do, what your doctors should have done.

    Nothing there about what YOU should have done in order to make that work.

    You are the one saying what the government needs to do, i.e. prevent people from having freedom of medical choice. I could not do what I should have done, get early treatment, because you and others of your ilk had the government block that.

    It’s not doctors versus idiots with no medical degree. It’s doctors who care more about money than their patients versus doctors who care more about their patients than money.

    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/covid-deaths-could-have-been-prevented/

    No, I don’t understand where you come in on the issue of my insurance. It’s between me and my insurance company. They didn’t have to insure me or cover Covid and anyone who doesn’t like it that they cover Covid hospitalizations can switch to another plan. The truth here is that people like you harmed me and others like me by interfering with our ability to get with doctors who could provide early effective treatments. Then, after people like you prevent that and we end up in the hospital, that is your fault because you did not allow us the right to seek effective early treatment. You need to stop pretending you are the victim here when you are really the aggressor.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Mark G.

    "You are the one saying what the government needs to do, i.e. prevent people from having freedom of medical choice."

    Nowhere do I say that. Maybe ask the people on your side of this issue who are incensed that the FDA gave emergency use approval to the Pfizer vaccine (do a ctrl-f on "0.04" if you want a repeat of that). For that matter, ask the people who think "Remdesivir has a horrifying safety profile" -- they seem to be the self-appointed experts as to what drugs should and shouldn't be allowed or given approval.

    As for me, I already told you: I don't care if you want to use ivermectin, HCQ, or bleach mouthwash, so long as you agree to stay out of the hospitals you're currently clogging up. If what the establishment is currently recommending is not up to your conspiracy-theory standards, and if they're just pawns of Pfizer, then get off the grid and go your own way like the Amish do. Set up your own "freedom clinics" for all I care. There are laws against practicing your personal brand of quack medicine on others or dispensing medical information without a license, so you probably want to watch your back, or move to Mexico, but that's on you. I'm guessing the countries where anyone can set up a clinic with little or no regulation -- like you evidently seem to support -- don't have all that high a life expectancy (and that might be more than just coincidence), but if that's what you're hankering for, go for it.

    Overall, I think you should get your own house in order regarding basic health procedures, and then you'll be in a better position to dictate to others about what you should and shouldn't be allowed to do. Demonstrating that you can utilize your freedoms responsibly goes a long way towards convincing others you should have those freedoms, especially given that the real doctors are still expected to take you in should your quack cures wind up killing you or those dumb enough to listen to you. There's a reason we don't allow 14-year-olds to drive, or vote, or the other things we allow mentally competent adults to do, and something similar can be said of those too dumb to stay out of a hospital who then have the audacity to complain about what the hospital did to them.

    Speaking of being convincing, don't ever name a website "childrenshealthdefense.org/defender". Laying it on that thick just gives the game away.

    And as for medical insurance, learn how that works before trying to tell me it's "just between you and them". Yeah, right.

    Replies: @Mark G.

  228. @Mark G.
    @HA


    Your posts are full of indignant directives about what the government needs to do, what the medical establishment needs to do, what your doctors should have done.

    Nothing there about what YOU should have done in order to make that work.
     
    You are the one saying what the government needs to do, i.e. prevent people from having freedom of medical choice. I could not do what I should have done, get early treatment, because you and others of your ilk had the government block that.

    It's not doctors versus idiots with no medical degree. It's doctors who care more about money than their patients versus doctors who care more about their patients than money.

    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/covid-deaths-could-have-been-prevented/

    No, I don't understand where you come in on the issue of my insurance. It's between me and my insurance company. They didn't have to insure me or cover Covid and anyone who doesn't like it that they cover Covid hospitalizations can switch to another plan. The truth here is that people like you harmed me and others like me by interfering with our ability to get with doctors who could provide early effective treatments. Then, after people like you prevent that and we end up in the hospital, that is your fault because you did not allow us the right to seek effective early treatment. You need to stop pretending you are the victim here when you are really the aggressor.

    Replies: @HA

    “You are the one saying what the government needs to do, i.e. prevent people from having freedom of medical choice.”

    Nowhere do I say that. Maybe ask the people on your side of this issue who are incensed that the FDA gave emergency use approval to the Pfizer vaccine (do a ctrl-f on “0.04” if you want a repeat of that). For that matter, ask the people who think “Remdesivir has a horrifying safety profile” — they seem to be the self-appointed experts as to what drugs should and shouldn’t be allowed or given approval.

    As for me, I already told you: I don’t care if you want to use ivermectin, HCQ, or bleach mouthwash, so long as you agree to stay out of the hospitals you’re currently clogging up. If what the establishment is currently recommending is not up to your conspiracy-theory standards, and if they’re just pawns of Pfizer, then get off the grid and go your own way like the Amish do. Set up your own “freedom clinics” for all I care. There are laws against practicing your personal brand of quack medicine on others or dispensing medical information without a license, so you probably want to watch your back, or move to Mexico, but that’s on you. I’m guessing the countries where anyone can set up a clinic with little or no regulation — like you evidently seem to support — don’t have all that high a life expectancy (and that might be more than just coincidence), but if that’s what you’re hankering for, go for it.

    Overall, I think you should get your own house in order regarding basic health procedures, and then you’ll be in a better position to dictate to others about what you should and shouldn’t be allowed to do. Demonstrating that you can utilize your freedoms responsibly goes a long way towards convincing others you should have those freedoms, especially given that the real doctors are still expected to take you in should your quack cures wind up killing you or those dumb enough to listen to you. There’s a reason we don’t allow 14-year-olds to drive, or vote, or the other things we allow mentally competent adults to do, and something similar can be said of those too dumb to stay out of a hospital who then have the audacity to complain about what the hospital did to them.

    Speaking of being convincing, don’t ever name a website “childrenshealthdefense.org/defender”. Laying it on that thick just gives the game away.

    And as for medical insurance, learn how that works before trying to tell me it’s “just between you and them”. Yeah, right.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    @HA


    There’s a reason we don’t allow 14-year-olds to drive, or vote, or the other things we allow mentally competent adults to do, and something similar can be said of those too dumb to stay out of a hospital who then have the audacity to complain about what the hospital did to them.

     

    I wasn't "too dumb" to stay out of the hospital. I was forced into the hospital because effective treatments were blocked to me by the government. That you don't understand that shows you are incapable of any sort of rational thinking.

    Unfortunately, there are large numbers of people like you now and that is why this country is declining. It is not a coincidence that the people who think blocking effective Covid treatments while forcing people to be subjected to inadequately tested vaccines is a good idea tend to be the same people who think it is a good idea to defund the police and that won't cause increasing crime, printing up a lot of money and passing it out won't cause inflation, blacks are only unsuccessful because they are victims of racism, having the government engage in deficit spending year after year won't cause problems down the road, having open borders won't cause an overburdened welfare system and so on.

    Fortunately, I'm old and near the end of my life so I probably won't have to watch the unpleasant end of the country I love. This country became great because of the Enlightenment era ideas of freedom and individual rights it was founded on and is declining now because there are so many people now like you who are incapable of understanding something like that.
  229. @HA
    @Mark G.

    "You are the one saying what the government needs to do, i.e. prevent people from having freedom of medical choice."

    Nowhere do I say that. Maybe ask the people on your side of this issue who are incensed that the FDA gave emergency use approval to the Pfizer vaccine (do a ctrl-f on "0.04" if you want a repeat of that). For that matter, ask the people who think "Remdesivir has a horrifying safety profile" -- they seem to be the self-appointed experts as to what drugs should and shouldn't be allowed or given approval.

    As for me, I already told you: I don't care if you want to use ivermectin, HCQ, or bleach mouthwash, so long as you agree to stay out of the hospitals you're currently clogging up. If what the establishment is currently recommending is not up to your conspiracy-theory standards, and if they're just pawns of Pfizer, then get off the grid and go your own way like the Amish do. Set up your own "freedom clinics" for all I care. There are laws against practicing your personal brand of quack medicine on others or dispensing medical information without a license, so you probably want to watch your back, or move to Mexico, but that's on you. I'm guessing the countries where anyone can set up a clinic with little or no regulation -- like you evidently seem to support -- don't have all that high a life expectancy (and that might be more than just coincidence), but if that's what you're hankering for, go for it.

    Overall, I think you should get your own house in order regarding basic health procedures, and then you'll be in a better position to dictate to others about what you should and shouldn't be allowed to do. Demonstrating that you can utilize your freedoms responsibly goes a long way towards convincing others you should have those freedoms, especially given that the real doctors are still expected to take you in should your quack cures wind up killing you or those dumb enough to listen to you. There's a reason we don't allow 14-year-olds to drive, or vote, or the other things we allow mentally competent adults to do, and something similar can be said of those too dumb to stay out of a hospital who then have the audacity to complain about what the hospital did to them.

    Speaking of being convincing, don't ever name a website "childrenshealthdefense.org/defender". Laying it on that thick just gives the game away.

    And as for medical insurance, learn how that works before trying to tell me it's "just between you and them". Yeah, right.

    Replies: @Mark G.

    There’s a reason we don’t allow 14-year-olds to drive, or vote, or the other things we allow mentally competent adults to do, and something similar can be said of those too dumb to stay out of a hospital who then have the audacity to complain about what the hospital did to them.

    I wasn’t “too dumb” to stay out of the hospital. I was forced into the hospital because effective treatments were blocked to me by the government. That you don’t understand that shows you are incapable of any sort of rational thinking.

    Unfortunately, there are large numbers of people like you now and that is why this country is declining. It is not a coincidence that the people who think blocking effective Covid treatments while forcing people to be subjected to inadequately tested vaccines is a good idea tend to be the same people who think it is a good idea to defund the police and that won’t cause increasing crime, printing up a lot of money and passing it out won’t cause inflation, blacks are only unsuccessful because they are victims of racism, having the government engage in deficit spending year after year won’t cause problems down the road, having open borders won’t cause an overburdened welfare system and so on.

    Fortunately, I’m old and near the end of my life so I probably won’t have to watch the unpleasant end of the country I love. This country became great because of the Enlightenment era ideas of freedom and individual rights it was founded on and is declining now because there are so many people now like you who are incapable of understanding something like that.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS