Tag: science

Fred Reed is dumb enough to accept the false Ashkenazi claims of 115 IQ at face value:

Among IQists, it is doctrine that blacks have a mean IQ of 85, fifteen points below the Hagvaca average of 100, and this is held to account for the lack of success of blacks. Searching the literature reveals authorities asserting that Ashkenazi Jews have a mean IQ of 115, as far above ordinary or Hagvaca whites as whites are above blacks. Eureka, and all. Equal differences of input produce equal differences of outcome. N’est-ce pas?.

No, it’s is most definitely not so. Two points are sufficient to conclusively demolish this ridiculous and scientifically unfounded claim that everyone from Jordan Peterson to Fred Reed has mindlessly repeated without ever once thinking through its obvious implications.

First, if Ashkenazis have an average IQ of 115, then all other Israeli Jews, who are the majority of the Jewish population there, have an average IQ of 83.7. This is lower than the average IQs of Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, as well as Nigeria, Uganda, and the Israeli-Arab population. To claim that “Jews are successful because they are super smart” is tantamount to saying that Israelis are retarded. This is not a difficult concept. Even a relative moron with a mere 115 IQ should be able to follow both the math and the logic involved.

Second, the source of the fictitious “115 mean IQ” claim is the 1957 study by Boris Levinson entitled “The Intelligence of Applicants for Admission to Jewish Day Schools” published in Jewish Social Studies,Vol. 19, No. 3/4 (Jul. – Oct., 1957), pp. 129-140. In the study, which reported a 114.88 mean IQ for the 2,083 very young students sampled, the author noted its intrinsic limitations.

“This study is limited to applicants for Day Schools adhering to the principles of the National Commission for Yeshiva Education. This sampling does not claim to represent the entire Jewish school population or even those children attending yeshiva Day Schools with a different educational emphasis.”

However, the author failed to mention that he did not take into account the test results of the other 3,399 students at the 16 schools, thereby raising the obvious possibility that there was an amount of cherry-picking involved. And it may be worth noting that a similar study found a 118 mean IQ for the white Christian students sampled. But is anyone dumb enough to run around insisting that whites are successful due to their 118 mean IQ?

That’s what the Pfizer vaccine does, according to a large Pfizer-funded study:

The highly-anticipated Pfizer’s safety and efficacy study of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine is finally out. After six months of monitoring over 45,000 patients, the study found that there were 15 deaths in the vaccine group and 14 deaths in the unvaccinated placebo group.

In other words, more vaccinated people died from the virus than the unvaccinated. According to the study, there were no deaths among 12‒15-year-old participants. The study not only demonstrates the lack of efficacy in the most important group but also highlights the extremely low fatality rate of Covid-19 in most of the 45,000 participants.

And before the Vaccine Nazis jump on the claim that there were more vaccinated participants than unvaccinated, there were 21,926 vaccinated and 21,921 unvaccinated participants. That means the chance of dying is  1 in 1,462 for the vaccinated and 1 in 1,565 for the unvaccinated.

The Pfizer vaccine doesn’t even reduce the risk of death, which is the last thing the Vaccine Nazis are still trying to claim it does.

Of course, this was before ADE and the Delta variant were combining to endanger the vaccinated, so “less than nothing” is the current best case scenario for the vaccines.

Scientists have known since December 2020 that the vaccines not only do not protect against the transmission of Covid-19 or reduce the severity of it, but actually make the vaccine recipients subject to more serious cases of the disease. 

Informed consent disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of risk of COVID‐19 vaccines worsening clinical disease

COVID‐19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID‐19 disease via antibody‐dependent enhancement (ADE). This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID‐19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.

Conclusions drawn from the study and clinical implications

The specific and significant COVID‐19 risk of ADE should have been and should be prominently and independently disclosed to research subjects currently in vaccine trials, as well as those being recruited for the trials and future patients after vaccine approval, in order to meet the medical ethics standard of patient comprehension for informed consent.

This is exactly what is happening now and explains why so many incidents of the spread of the disease being reported among completely vaccinated populations. Covid-19 is increasingly becoming a disease of the vaccinated due to Antibody-Dependent Enhancement. 

You can’t escape the experiment, so be the control group.

Your Vaccine Nazi friends and family may think they were sufficiently informed to consent to be vaccinated. They were not.

CONCLUSION

Given the strong evidence that ADE is a non‐theoretical and compelling risk for COVID‐19 vaccines and the “laundry list” nature of informed consents, disclosure of the specific risk of worsened COVID‐19 disease from vaccination calls for a specific, separate, informed consent form and demonstration of patient comprehension in order to meet medical ethics standards. The informed consent process for ongoing COVID‐19 vaccine trials does not appear to meet this standard. 

The control group was vaccinated as soon as emergency authorization was granted

Mott was one of about 650 volunteers who took the experimental Moderna vaccine at a company called Johnson County Clinical Trials in Lenexa, Kan. Dr. Carlos Fierro, who runs the study there, says every participant was called back after the Food and Drug Administration authorized the vaccine.

“During that visit we discussed the options, which included staying in the study without the vaccine,” he says, “and amazingly there were people — a couple of people — who chose that.”

He suspects those individuals got spooked by rumors about the vaccine. But everybody else who had the placebo shot went ahead and got the actual vaccine. So now Fierro has essentially no comparison group left for the ongoing study.

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

Be the control group. But don’t do it for yourself, or because you’re skeptical of an experimental product from a corporation granted legal immunity, or because you are concerned about the adverse effects of the vaxxes. 

Do it for science. 

Scientists and their IFLS cheerleaders who are wringing their hands about an antiscientific backlash from the right-wing extremist anti-vaccination crowd are completely failing to understand who is going to be after their heads.

There is a troubling new expansion of antiscience aggression in the United States. It’s arising from far-right extremism, including some elected members of the US Congress and conservative news outlets that target prominent biological scientists fighting the COVID-19 pandemic.

A band of ultraconservative members of the US Congress and other public officials with far-right leanings are waging organized and seemingly well-coordinated attacks against prominent US biological scientists. In parallel, conservative news outlets repeatedly and purposefully promote disinformation designed to portray key American scientists as enemies. As a consequence, many of us receive threats via email and on social media, while some are stalked at home, to create an unprecedented culture of antiscience intimidation.

Over the spring and summer of 2021, four major incidents stand out. First, Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green (R-GA) introduced house bill 2316 [1]. The “Fire Fauci Act” called for halting payment of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s salary as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and auditing his digital correspondence and financial transactions. Green’s follow-up press conference on 21 June 2021 included 13 Republican House supporters or co-sponsors, possibly the largest congressional delegation in modern times to single out and attempt to humiliate a prominent American scientist.

Also in June, the Republicans organized a House Select Subcommittee on the origins of COVID-19 with the presumption that it was ignited by gain-of-function genetic engineering research from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Despite evidence pointing to spillover from a viral infection in bats to additional mammals and ultimately humans accounting for previous coronavirus epidemics [2], the hearings took on a sinister tone, pointing fingers at virologists both in the US and China. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), stated that Dr. Fauci was “afraid of something” and falsely claimed that he was covering up the engineering of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus [3]. The far-right media harasses or stalks other prominent US scientists, including Dr. Peter Daszak who heads the EcoHealth Alliance and conducts research on the zoonotic origins of human virus infections.

But scientists shouldn’t be worried about the staunch opposition from the people who don’t believe them, don’t trust them, and ignore their advice. They should be worried – indeed, they should be completely terrified – of the retribution that awaits them at the hands of the poor fools who were credulous enough to take them at their word and harm themselves and their children at their behest.

We’d absolutely like to see all of the scientists responsible prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned for their crimes against humanity. But because we see them as fundamentally evil and wrong, they haven’t done us any harm. Their victims, to the contrary, are almost certainly going to be much more inclined to bypass the law and seek vengeance rather than justice.

If the fake vaccine debacle turns into one of the CASE NIGHTMARE scenarios, even one of the lesser ones, science may not survive the reckoning.

Stand your ground if you’re unvaccinated. It’s already clear that in addition to all of the adverse effects, the vaccines make you more susceptible to serious harm from Covid, not less susceptible.

Fauci has now admitted, on live camera, that a person with a breakthrough infection is just as dangerous as someone who was never vaccinated and gets infected.

This was expected by anyone who has ever studied anything about viral disease and the use of non-sterilizing immunizations when infections are active in a community.  We have known this all the way back to Polio and is why we insisted on a sterilizing vaccine (OPV) following the inactivated injected vaccine (IPV) in the United States until 20 years after we were declared polio-free.

In addition it is exactly what is expected if a non-sterilizing vaccine produces both binding and neutralizing antibodies and we know, scientifically, that all the existing jabs do exactly that.  When levels wane you still have binding antibodies and when the neutralizing level falls below the threshold to protect you now have an enhancement of the disease rather than protection.  A person who was never infected and not vaccinated does not have the binding antibodies and thus, while at risk, doesn’t get the enhancement.  Now we have real-world evidence that in fact the jabs produce risk as immunity wanes and that said risk may exceed, on a personal level, what someone has who never been infected or vaccinated is exposed to.

This is why AstraZeneca is reported to be trying to get out of the vaccine business despite the massive profits the vaccine makers are presently enjoying, and why boosters are probably going to be mandated for everyone who was foolish enough to get vaccinated. The problem of Antibody Dependent Enhancement causing breakthrough infections predicted by the mRNA critics more than one year ago has come to pass, which is why vaccinated people are dying of Covid despite the fact that the virus is weaker than it was in early 2020.

The reason I’m not expecting doom, mass graveyards, and CASE NIGHTMARE KITTY is because Covid-19 is far less deadly to humans than SARS-CoV-2 is to cats and ferrets. So, even though the ADE-breakthrough cases will be fatal to a small, but statistically significant minority of the vaccinated population, most people should survive them.