people love to trot out the old chestnut of "we did the best we could with the information we had" around covid vaccines.

the more extreme examples claim "you could not have known, you just got lucky!"

both are risibly false.

people ask: "how did you know not to take or trust the covid jab?"

here's how: (and how to spot similar in the future)

1. you could tell from the pfizer trial design that the "covid vaccine" was not assessed as a vaccine. it was never tested on spread, infection, transmission, or sterilizing immunity. at best, the trials could have shown it to be a therapeutic. even that was deeply /sus and the sudden enrollment in sites in argentina run by a doctor with a history of fraud did not reassure. neither did the all cause deaths data in the study. 2. the messaging about the covid vaccine "this will be a dead end for the virus! if you get the vaccine, you will not get covid, you will not spread covid" was obviously not supported by any clinical data.

it was a made up claim to make getting the shot look like a moral duty. it was marketing, not science.

i got curious, so i looked up the qualifications of LA mayor karen bass.

they look pretty meager. she was a physician's assistant and has since spent her whole life in politics. and activism.

not hard to see how she lacked the executive experience to be a mayor.

she's another DEI career of empty clothes playing at being an emperor. and her brand of "activism" is not one steeped in efficacy or glory.

she was an organizer for the notorious venceremos brigade, a pro communist pro castro group.

she traveled there a lot.

not an auspicious beginning.

it's amazing that people are still out peddling this obviously inaccurate data. rig your studies all you like, covid vaccines did not reduce cases, deaths, or hospitalization. they made them worse.

all these slanted studies fly in the face of the overall data. for this to be correct, covid vaccines would need to reduce hospitalization risk by ~92%. that's incredibly high efficacy. efficacy like that would create a massive, unmistakable signal in the data with populations that were 70-99% vaccinated. the curves would bend so hard that anyone could eyeball it. it would be air horn during vatican vespers unmissable.

but it's not there. not only is this signal absent, it's inverted.

let's take some obvious examples in the high risk high vaxxed populations:

i chose the top states in the US by vaxx rate and looked at 65+, the high risk high vaxx group.

95% vaxxed. hospitalizations and all cause mortality both rose post vaccine despite a less dangerous covid variant. if this were 92% effective, the 5% unvaxxed would have had to see their hospitalization rates rise 18 fold just to stay flat. and we KNOW that did not happen. this signal is not isolated. we see the same thing in maine, rhode island, massachusetts, connecticut. this is obviously the modal outcome.
more here:

boriquagato.substack.com/p/if-covid-vac…

no, it's not.

it's a model spitting out an assumed parameter. this data proves nothing and is easily contradicted.

a signal as strong as you claim would be glaringly obvious, yet nowhere on earth did covid vaccines bend all cause deaths curves down. they bent up.

covid deaths in the US actually rose and stayed elevated post vaxx rollout.

this product almost certainly cost lives. it was not a vaccine, it was an antigenic fixator and a pathogen. all cause deaths rose nearly everywhere after the vaxx rollout. so too did hospitalizations.

data from 3 highest vaxx rate US states:

it's stark and highly representative.

i dug deeper into the google memory hole issue.

surprising finding:

this same was true of all search engines i tried. it's not just google.

i suspect this is an artifact of something deeper like "media refusing to use these words" or some more generalized manipulation. literally in the time i was doing the analysis, luxxle caught up perhaps because this issue is going viral on X.

but the others had not as of this writing.

how is it that british tabloids are the only ones doing investigative journalism in the US? this US work on bat coronaviruses appears to have been widespread practice.

sure raises some interesting questions about tony's "lab leak is a conspiracy theory" stance.

the lesson from covid was simple:

there has never been a dangerous pandemic in the post antibiotics world. the only real danger is the enormous damage that can be done by bad over-reaction.

all the truly bad pandemic outcomes of modern times were own goals kicked by overzealous authorities and fueled by panic and bad pharma choices. doctors treated spanish flu with up to 30 grams a day of the new wonde-rdrug "aspirin" and were shocked to see so many deaths in "young, healthy people."

it was iatrocide

and covid was the replay

lock down, mask up, and take dodgy drugs you don't understand

history repeated.

friendly reminder that the NOAA's USHCN reference network of well sited thermometers with continuous temperature records and no urban heat island bias shows no warming trend over the past ~20 years. fewer than 8% of US weather stations meet NOAA siting guidelines.

over 70% would be expected to run over 2 degrees C hot based on heat pollution from human activity around them like machinery, asphalt, and airport activity.

these self-reporting studies are not actual data, they're associative correlation mining.

it's an association of "i think i have some ill-defined generalized feelings of being unwell" with "i was obsessed with covid and kept testing until i found trace virus and/or assumed i had it."

here's my null hypothesis: this is just measuring generalized anxiety.

it selected for anxious people and the kinds of folks that used to claim "fibromyalgia" or "chronic fatigue syndrome" and gave them a new target upon which to fixate.

these are the same people who will swear in self reporting that they have had lots of covid.

is there any data in this "study" that can invalidate or outperform that explanation?

i'll wager there is not. the strongest predictor of "long covid" has always been "anxiety or stress disorders."

it outperformed "having actually had covid" by a wide margin.

jamanetwork.com/journals/jamai…

a frequent emotive mask argument seems to be circular fallacy.

"masks don't work!"

"oh yeah, well here's something bad they could have prevented if they did work!"

it's a nasty embedding using appeal to emotion as a slight of hand to pass off presumed efficacy.

https://twitter.com/MartinKulldorff/status/1701717700483887180

then you gin up something utterly facile and baseless like "your mask protects me" to render compliance "a duty" and "not about you" so you can demand adherence and mask toddlers in the name of a grandma who never asked for your help.

this recruits all the anxious and fearful.

this new royal society study is pure garbage.

it's just "papering the file" for some forthcoming pseudoscientific outrage.

the evidence that masks and lockdowns failed is overwhelming. this study is a collection of datacrime, cherry picking, and lies.

https://twitter.com/MackayIM/status/1695269403238297636

this data has been hilariously obvious right from the beginning. not only did all the pandemic guidelines say none of this would work, but the data bore it out immediately and conclusively.

no curves were bent. lockdowns made zero difference, zero.

https://twitter.com/boriquagato/status/1266747362728280065?s=20

there is a word for people who see the same thing in every ink-bolt.

that word is not "journalist."

(it's not "leader" either...) the fact of the matter is simple:

so long as you allow government to grab additional power in "an emergency" it will invent an endless cavalcade of crises and hobgoblins to justify the taking and retention of such power.

there are no exceptions.

i agree with this assessment.

it took me a while to realize it and in early 2020, i found this to be implausible because if you were going to make a bioweapon, covid would be a lousy base.

then i saw daszak's DARPA grant application and realized what probably happened. 🙀

https://twitter.com/ProfKarolSikora/status/1680908508735176704

as to why it was covered up, that seems easy: lots of powerful people funded it.

when you have the NIH and DoD funding viral hotwiring in china so they can color outside the lines and they fail to supervise it, it goes way too far, and then escapes, of course they cover it up.

of course it is.

control of money is vital to the conception of the modern nation state.

if commerce, savings, and investment become opaque to government it would represent the greatest transfer of power away from the center and to "we the people" since the conception of rights

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1667559581193469954

it would undermine everything they use to sustain control.

they could not regulate commerce, lending, banking, or investment.

they would not be able to see what you are paid or what you pay others.

and you cannot tax what you cannot see.

the level of ignorance in leo's post is astonishing.

this claim of "physical barrier" is baseless and anyone can see it.

masks do not work as protection or source control.

they show no societal impact to mitigate spread of respiratory diseases.

https://twitter.com/SeattleiteLeo/status/1654699157066776576

this was known and knowable. it's been studied for decades and the evidence is widespread and sound.

it does not work on flu, and flu would be easier to mitigate than covid which more aerosol.

this is how the botnet/activist armies are crushing accounts

they block w/ 100k bots/add you to block lists.
follow then unfollow
mass report and mute.

and you're silenced.

@elonmusk easy fix: only allow blue check mutes/blocks/reports to count.

ban blocklists

https://twitter.com/steventey/status/1641904612025200642

if you keep letting bot and list votes count, you're allowing small numbers of people to determine site wide reputation and reach by rigging votes.

it's just going to be an ugly arms race to the bottom.

well, you can say this, at least she's being honest about "i'm only willing to engage with those who wish to speak about nonsense and will vilify with silly epithets those who call me out."

last refuge of the pseudoscientist. the points she made were that "applying political pressure can make editors speak falsehoods that contradict their own scientists."

not much of a mantra for someone accusing others of "losing the scientific argument"

but sWeDen LOckED dOwN!!

no. sweden was pretty normal in 2020.

this is the google mobility data from phones.

the real lie is that norway, finland, denmark locked down either. mostly, they didn't

here's sweden and denmark. can you even tell the difference without labels?

https://twitter.com/freddiesayers/status/1633066547982876674

overall winner scandanavia had drop ~20% for maybe 4 weeks then normal mobility vs ~75% in spain and 55% in UK and long periods of suppression

lockdowns did not work to stop covid.

at all.

and they are assoc with higher all cause deaths.

buy an EV, wind up regulated by the PUC.

cannot charge at peak times.

now you're going to need to include "car to grid" capability as backup power for ruinous generation policies. as ever, the decision makers are reality deniers and have no idea what they key salients mean.

leaving aside that this is near impossible to manage, it also adds costs: $1000's per hookup and huge modifications to the grid.

this will make EV's even less affordable.

this bizarre modern fixation upon the idea that all difficulties are pathologies and that no one ever had a hard time or found adolescence confusing/disorienting and that everyone needs to be medicated has become a full blown mental illness of its own.

#MakeNormalNormalAgain

https://twitter.com/DrMcFillin/status/1626657354862190596

people do not need more pharmaceutical intervention or piles of predatory struggle session therapy/re-education regimens.

they just need fellowship, human contact, networks of friends and colleagues with whom they can express themselves and find commonality.

the US has about 1,000 train derailments a year, roughly 3 per day.

this is worth keeping in mind as we try to separate this new "oh my gawd, train sabotage!" furor that's building as stories spread.

is rate actually up?

or is it just reporting that changed? the internet seems to really struggle with the idea of "base rate" likely because you can make nearly anything look like some crazy clustering or wild trend by just starting to report on it all the time

whatever you get focused on suddenly looks like a crisis