Tag: science

Ivermectin vs the Vaxx

The conclusive verdict is in courtesy of a very large and peer-reviewed Brazilian study: Ivermectin is, and always was, a much safer and effective approach to combating Covid-19 than the various vaxxines.

Researchers in Brazil found that regular use of ivermectin as a prophylactic agent was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization and mortality rates.

The study was conducted in Itajaí, a port city in the state of Santa Catarina, between July and December 2020. Study authors include FLCCC physicians Dr. Flavio Cadegiani and Dr. Pierre Kory. Lead author Dr. Lucy Kerr was approached by the mayor of Itajaí, after the city began to experience a severe outbreak of COVID.

The entire population of Itajaí was invited to participate in the program, which involved a medical visit to compile baseline, personal, demographic, and medical information. In the absence of contraindications, ivermectin was offered as a preventative treatment, to be taken for two consecutive days every 15 days at a dose of 0.2 mg/kg/day.

Of the 223,128 citizens of Itajaí considered for the study, a total of 159,561 subjects elected to participate: over 70% opted to take ivermectin, and 23% chose not to.

The study found a 44% reduction in COVID-19 infection rate in favor of the group that took ivermectin (3.5% versus 8.2%).

In cases where a participating citizen of Itajaí became ill with COVID-19, they were recommended not to use ivermectin or any other medication in early outpatient treatment. Of those who did become infected, two equal-sized, highly matched groups (one that used ivermectin as a prophylaxis and one that did not) were compared. The regular use of preventative ivermectin led to a 68% reduction in COVID-19 mortality (0.8% versus 2.6%), and a 56% reduction in hospitalization rate (1.6% versus 3.3%).

Meanwhile, a small, non-peer reviewed, but nevertheless informative survey of two high school coaches reveals some remarkable negative consequences for young athletes who are vaccinated:

The two coaches, who spoke to us on condition of anonymity for all involved, retrospectively observed the following of the COVID-vaccinated student athletes, and we report their findings in this retrospective study.

1) None of the vaccinated student athletes are competing up to their own previous level; all are performing worse than in 2020, in the assessments of the two coaches.

2) None of the vaccinated student athletes can endure the same exercise drills for the same amount of time that they used to tolerate prior to vaccination.

3) Recovery from exertion took longer in the vaccinated student athletes than before vaccination and took longer than in the unvaccinated.

4) After the injections, most or all of the vaccinated student athletes talked about one or more of the following reactions after vaccination:

a) chest pain;

b) dizziness;

c) seeing stars;

d) feeling as if they would faint;

e) shortness of breath.

The student athletes talked freely and spontaneously about the above symptoms without anyone taking notes at the time. There was no prompting from coaches about reporting of symptoms.

5) The unvaccinated girls are now beating vaccinated boys in competition, whom they could not do well against last year. This change was unexpected and was considered unusual by the coaches.

So, whatever happened to “trusting the science”?

DISCUSS ON SG

Only Fools Trust Science

Science doesn’t even rise to the level of accuracy attained by gamers playing games:

Apart from a minority of professional gamers, speedrunning is a hobby, and the community is moderated by volunteers. Science is, well, science: a crucially important endeavor that we need to get right, a prestige industry employing hundreds of thousands of paid, dedicated, smart people, submitting their research to journals run by enormously profitable publishing companies.

Perhaps the very status of science is what makes its practitioners reluctant to pursue fraudsters: Not only do scientists find it difficult to imagine that their peers or colleagues could be making up the data, but questioning a suspect data set could result in anything from extended frustration and social awkwardness to the destruction of someone’s career. You can see why so many scientists, who hope for a quiet life where they can pursue their own research, aren’t motivated to grasp the nettle.

But the consequences of ignoring fraud can be drastic too, and whole evidence bases, sometimes for medical treatments, can be polluted by fraudulent studies. The entire purpose of the scientific endeavor is brought into question if its gatekeepers—the reviewers and editors and others who are supposed to be the custodians of scientific probity—are so often presented with evidence of fraud and so often fail to take action.

If unpaid Minecraft mods can produce a 29-page mathematical analysis of Dream’s contested run, then scientists and editors can find the time to treat plausible fraud allegations with the seriousness they deserve. If the maintenance of integrity can become such a crucial interest for a community of gaming hobbyists, then it can be the same for a community of professional researchers. And if the speedrunning world can learn lessons from so many cases of cheating, there’s no excuse for scientists who fail to do the same.

Not only is scientistry – the profession of science – entirely corrupt, but the massive extent of its corruption has rendered a) the knowledge base unreliable and b) cast every claim of an application of scientody – the scientific method – into intrinsic doubt.

The corollary to this is that anyone demanding that one “trust the science” is not only engaging in rhetoric, but is either doing so in ignorance or for the purposes of deceit.

Scientists don’t catch fraud because they don’t want to. It’s not in their interest and it has not been for decades. Never trust science. There is a word for the kind of science you can trust, and it is a distinct subset of science, being comprised of a hypothesis that has not only been tested, but applied in practice.

Trust God and engineering.

DISCUSS ON SG

Evil Always Eats Its Own

Those who have taken the ticket or are celebrated for their utility in building the false case against God had better enjoy their public adulation while it lasts. Even the most famous and well-respected scientists, who were lauded for their brilliance and whose work was absolutely integral in constructing the false scientific edifice of evolution by natural selection, are discovering that they and their work will be discredited and dishonored once the satanic narrative moves beyond them, as demonstrated by this article in Scientific American denigrating the legacy of evolutionary biologist E.O. Wilson:

With the death of biologist E. O. Wilson on Sunday, I find myself again reflecting on the complicated legacies of scientists whose works are built on racist ideas and how these ideas came to define our understanding of the world.

After a long clinical career as a registered nurse, I became a laboratory-trained scientist as researchers mapped the first draft of the human genome. It was during this time that I intimately familiarized myself with Wilson’s work and his dangerous ideas on what factors influence human behavior.

His influential text Sociobiology: The New Synthesis contributed to the false dichotomy of nature versus nurture and spawned an entire field of behavioral psychology grounded in the notion that differences among humans could be explained by genetics, inheritance and other biological mechanisms. Finding out that Wilson thought this way was a huge disappointment, because I had enjoyed his novel Anthill, which was published much later and written for the public.

Wilson was hardly alone in his problematic beliefs. His predecessors—mathematician Karl Pearson, anthropologist Francis Galton, Charles Darwin, Gregor Mendel and others—also published works and spoke of theories fraught with racist ideas about distributions of health and illness in populations without any attention to the context in which these distributions occur.

Even modern geneticists and genome scientists struggle with inherent racism in the way they gather and analyze data. In his memoir A Life Decoded: My Genome: My Life, geneticist J. Craig Venter writes, “The complex provenance of ideas means their origin is often open to interpretation.”

To put the legacy of their work in the proper perspective, a more nuanced understanding of problematic scientists is necessary. It is true that work can be both important and problematic—they can coexist. Therefore it is necessary to evaluate and critique these scientists, considering, specifically the value of their work and, at the same time, their contributions to scientific racism.

Those who reject Truth will eventually find their work deemed worthless, especially by those who reject the truth even more vehemently. Don’t ever curry the world’s favor. It simply isn’t worth it.

Jesus Christ stands by his followers even when they fail. Satan abandons his servants even when they succeed.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Great Barrington Declaration

For some reason, those who declare everyone should “trust the science” and “listen to the experts” absolutely refuse to listen to actual epidemoiologists, public health scientists, and Israeli academics:

In the end, the truth will always be revealed, and the truth about the coronavirus policy is beginning to be revealed. When the destructive concepts collapse one by one, there is nothing left but to tell the experts who led the management of the pandemic – we told you so.Two years late, you finally realize that a respiratory virus cannot be defeated and that any such attempt is doomed to fail. You do not admit it, because you have admitted almost no mistake in the last two years, but in retrospect it is clear that you have failed miserably in almost all of your actions, and even the media is already having a hard time covering your shame….

You refused to adopt the “Barrington Declaration”, signed by more than 60,000 scientists and medical professionals, or other common sense programs. You chose to ridicule, slander, distort and discredit them. Instead of the right programs and people, you have chosen professionals who lack relevant training for pandemic management.

THE GREAT BARRINGTON DECLARATION

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

DISCUSS ON SG

Killshots in Canada

The devil, as always, can be detected in the details:

The Covid vaccines look worse and worse.

A reader has pointed out an amazing dataset from the province of Alberta, Canada which reports Covid cases, hospitalizations, and deaths by day after the first and second vaccine doses.

Infections, hospitalizations, and deaths from Covid all soar in the days and weeks after people receive their first vaccine dose.

The charts make it completely obvious why the definition of “unvaccinated” was stretched to include “those who have been vaccinated in the last 14 days”. Most of the “unvaccinated” who are now infected with Covid were actually vaccinated, they’ve just been redefined as not having received the vaxxes with which they have, in fact, been injected.

The Gun, She Smokes

Of all the words we recollect,
The most frightening are these:
Denninger was correct!

Project Veritas publishes DARPA papers that confirm what Karl Denninger has been repeatedly telling everyone about Covid-19 and the fraudulent vaccines since February 2020.

What I’ve maintained all along is in in official government-documented form:

The virus was man-made. Ecohealth tried to get funding through DARPA and was told to go to Hell because it violated the constraint on gain-of-function research. Fauci didn’t give a **** and his part of the NIH funded it.

There were people in both China and here in the US (along with presumably other nations) who were involved. They all knew damn well what happened and all of them have lied for the last 2+ years about it.

The governments involved all knew before the shots were released that they were dangerous and would become worthless. They knew that natural infection did not, in most cases, carry the same risk because the virus never gets into the bloodstream but there is no way to avoid that risk with an injection. We now know this factually from clinical experience (and in fact knew in the early part of 2020) — viremia does not happen in other than severe and fatal cases.

The governments also knew that Covid-19 itself was not dangerous most of the time to healthy individuals and they knew why. It was deliberately engineered that way in an attempt, this paper alleges, as an experiment to be inoculated intentionally into bats in an attempt to see whether doing so could cut off future zoonotic events. Whether the experiment went wrong by accident or intent is not known, but that it was taking place and both our government and China knew about it, along with knowing that it should not be very dangerous to most people is now established as fact. So why all the histrionics ginned up worldwide continuing to this day?

The experiment went bad and if you knew why it went bad and who was involved in it you might conclude there really is a valid reason to get rid of every single government agency and individual involved. Unlike “conspiracy theories” that are flat-out crap its not crazy to contemplate doing that either, especially given the death toll. It was evident within weeks that medically frail people were going to get buttraped by this thing and thus if the government told the truth the pitchforks might well come out since they actually created this ****ing monster and it wasn’t just China – it was also the United States Government that did it and several institutions within this nation were intimately involved as well.

Oh by the way the same documents also contain evidence that the Government knew both HCQ and Ivermectin were effective against the virus by April of 2020. How many people died that were denied access to safe drugs that our government had every reason to believe worked?

The propaganda machine hasn’t been shut down yet, but the Narrative is officially shattered.

DISCUSS ON SG

Exponential Damage

Karl Denninger observes that the risk of myocarditis from the mRNA contained in the Pfizer and Moderna vaxxes appears to grow exponentially with the mRNA contained.

I noted that the original myocarditis data, which was claimed to be “rare”, contained what looked like an indicator of exponential damage. That is, the second jab was much more likely than the first to produce trouble in that regard.

Well, now it gets worse.

As is apparent from a very large study group in Britain, the data continues to show that series is valid but also has a much-more troubling aspect to it, in that it appears that the Moderna jabs are worse than the Pfizer ones. This is important because much more mRNA is in the Moderna jabs. Further, the exponential factor appears to be a doubling with each dose for the Pfizer shots, which means the risk is a power function and not linear, and the fact that now we have booster data and the series has continued means the risk does not bleed off back to baseline over time.

We don’t know with the Moderna jabs when it comes to boosters as there were not enough boosters given to get statistical power.

But the second shot showed sixteen times the risk from baseline instead of four for Pfizer.

The ugly news is that the Pfizer jabs are 30ug of mRNA each. Moderna’s are 100ug. So two Pfizers is 60ug total for a 4x increase, where two Modernas is 200ug total for a 16x increase. In other words for Pfizer its about 15ug/step, where for Moderna its 12.5ug/step.

That’s pretty close statistically and implies there is a direct dose-response relationship, the relationship is exponential rather than linear and the issue is not related to the process used by each manufacturer either, which means this isn’t manufacturer-specific.

Exponential is not a word you want to hear when health-related topics are being discussed. Don’t vaxx. Don’t boost. Live long, propagate, and prosper.

UPDATE: It’s not just the British scientists who are reaching worrisome conclusions about the relationship between the mRNA vaccines and myocarditis.

There is a significant increase in the risk of acute myocarditis/pericarditis following Comirnaty vaccination among Chinese male adolescents, especially after the second dose.

DISCUSS ON SG

It Has Always Been The Flu

The Andrew Anglin committee very patiently spells everything out for even the most retarded.

If you’ve already understood this little game you can play with the media’s “different from the flu hoax,” then I apologize for talking to you like you’re a retard, but I hope it amused you. If you still don’t understand this and are still talking about how “covid is different from the flu because you lose your sense of smell,” after reading me explain this to you for two years, then you literally are retarded, and you deserve to be talked to like a retarded person.

None of the claims that I have made have been outrageous, none of them have been disproved, all of them probably qualify as self-evident.

What we appear to have here is another “midwit crisis.”

When I tell some guy working at the Sunoco, “this is all just a big hoax – they just renamed the flu,” the standard reply is “man, that’s what I been saying!”

Meanwhile, most intelligent people on the internet have completely given up on all of this bat soup and lab leak gibberish, and have come around to agree that the alleged coronavirus is a rebranding of the flu.

This is what I have said:

It didn’t come from bat soup
It didn’t come from a laboratory
The government is openly faking the numbers
Hospitals are openly being paid by the government to fake numbers
Hospitals are being paid to put people on ventilators that kill them
It is not more deadly than the normal flu (we have no way of knowing exact numbers because of all of the fakery, but none of you know anyone who died from it)
It does not have unique characteristics that have not been recorded in previous flus
The way it was allegedly isolated is absurd, and proves nothing
The PCR test is a joke
Antibody tests pick up antibodies for the common cold, which is also a coronavirus
The widely-distributed vaccine is now causing a disease indistinguishable from “covid-19”
And, most importantly:

If the media and government wouldn’t have mentioned the existence of a new disease, no one would have noticed a new disease. That includes hospitals.

There would have been back page news stories about a flu outbreak in Italy and a malaria outbreak in India, like there are back page articles about regional disease outbreaks every year. It’s possible that papers in medical journals would have been published about differences in the 2020 flu strand, but it’s unlikely, because there are no identifiably unique characteristics of “coronavirus” in comparison with the normal respiratory viruses we’ve always had. That’s all.

The “coronavirus pandemic” is a complete creation of the government/media, and of the lying medical industrial complex, with the obvious purpose of completely restructuring global human society at rocket-pace.

They want you to stop working, they want you on a digital currency UBI system, they want to cram you into high-rise tenements where you can watch Netflix and porn until you die.

He’s generally right. There was no effective bioweapon; it is the vaccine that is the bioweapon. While there have obviously been serial attempts to manufacture a gain-of-function, disease-based bioweapon for decades, the way this scenario has played out suggests that those efforts have continued to fail and the rebranding and replacement of the flu was the result of plan F being put into play.

Even though I coined the acronym MPAI, the expansive limits of human stupidity still manage to astonish me. The way in which a substantial portion of the population actually fell for the magical “disappearance of the flu in 2020” meme will forever mark the hard boundary between “functioning mind” and “non-functioning mind” for me.

It is interesting to see the way in which “midwit” has entered the language though. I’m glad to see that other observers of the human condition are finding it to be a useful concept.

DISCUSS ON SG

Third Time’s the Charm

A dark and disturbing interpretation of the German omicron data:

In Germany 70.53% are fully vaxxed, 2.97% are partially vaxxed and 26.5% unvaxxed.

So unvaxxed have 186 cases out of 26.5% of the population
Fully vaxxed have 4020 cases out of 70.53% of the population.

So the vaxxed Omicron case incidence is 57.0 per percent of population (830,000 is 1% of the 83 million German population) And the unvaxxed Omicron case incidence is 7.02 per percent of population.

So the vaxxed are 57.0/7.02 = 8.12x more likely to be infected with Omicron than the unvaxxed in Germany That is what vaccination has done for the people of Germany.

The Koch Institut failed to produce its normal vaccine effectiveness table in its December 30 weekly report. This may have been due to the holidays or may have been because the table would be disastrous for the vaccines. But we can help the Germans out here by doing the calculation for them using Pfizer’s vaccine effectiveness formula.

Vaccine effectiveness = immune system effectiveness = (1-8.12)/8.12 = -7.12/8.12 = -87.7%.

So the vaccinated have an 87.7% lower immune response than the unvaccinated have to Omicron.

This means that the average German is down to the last 12.3% of his or her immune system for fighting certain classes of viruses and certain cancers etc. etc.

Here is the prediction, the extrapolation from UKHSA Vaccine Surveillance Report data from Weeks 35-42 that we first made on October 10th. The predicted figures are in olive green.

So Germany, at 87.7% immune system degradation, has done 6.7% worse than our model which predicted, an 81.0% degradation this year.

One can’t call this a prediction because it concerns events that have already taken place. And it can’t be ignored that the data is in line – in fact, it is even worse – than the previous extrapolation indicated. So, the best-case scenario is that the Pfizer vaccine effectiveness formula is nonsense. And, considering that it is a Big Pharma model utilized to sell vaccines, there is a reasonable probability that the formula is more or less irrelevant to the actual state of the human immune system.

But if it isn’t nonsense, then things could be looking rather grim indeed for those foolish enough to have submitted to a third or even fourth vaccination.

DISCUSS ON SG