As I continue to update my Plague Page with various stories and links related to the WuhanFlu, Cov19, Kung Flu, Sino-Lung Rot, I see a lot of hype, but also a lot of more cautious data, as well as a whole lot of things from “out of the blue,” anecdotal things, and rabbit-holes related to disease, vaccines in general, health, and the immune system. Here is my current big-picture take on the expected course of things. Continue reading Mid-term view of the disease course
She has a pretty impressive resume. The Powers That Be have tried to destroy her, discredit her, etc. She’s got a lot of background into on vaccinations and disease in general, things that lead us to where we are today with the Wuhan Flu. Here’s an interview, and then a list of books that may have to add to my ever-growing reading list.
I came across this on Social Galactic. Fascinating video. A two hour rant about who really runs things, etc. He says it’s the life insurance companies. Has a lot of history and science and economics, some really good, some really out there. But a very good presentation.
Fauci Dossier PDF mentioned at 55 min. The quote there is… enlightening.
Assuming these numbers are correct, which is debatable but it’s the data we have, what leaps out at you? So, China claims to have been hit very hard, had videos of people collapsing in the street, etc., and yet it appears that the vaxx rates in their enemies are the highest? I can’t imagine why Mongolia is as high as it is, with loads of resources and a resurgent nationalism and sense of identity, right on China’s border with Russia, might get priority shipments, can you? Competitors, resources rich nations, etc. tend to have high vaxx rates. wonder why that might be, while China still has a vaxx rate in the single digits.
An interview with Dr. Sean McMeekin, author of “Stalin’s War,” one of several books he’s written about the former Soviet Union and Russia.
Links to his Amazon page here, though I’d recommend you buy his books elsewhere if you can for various political reasons.
Interesting video on current political/social trends. Very good first 3/4 of it, sort of goes off the rails from my perspective near the end, but still makes some good point.
At least, diversity is not a strength the way that the left typically promotes diversity. Now, for many of us this isn’t a surprise. But it’s always interesting to see the specifics well-documented by others, especially those who are generally predisposed to believe it is. Continue reading Diversity isn’t a strength
From over at Anne Barnhardt’s blog, we come across this article about the results of India and Mexico using Ivermectin to prevent / treat Covid. Wow. (Original article here).
The top of that hump is about where they started handing out Ivermectin like candy at halloween when cases started booming. 24k down to about 1.5k. I’m sure the “experts” will dismiss it as not being properly blocked, planned, double-blinded, etc., and therefore of no value at all, and they’ll continue saying there isn’t a treatment. But that looks an awful lot like the graph of what happened in Mexico …..
From a Social Galactic post I saw this link. An interview with a science-type guy out in the field. He says it quite eloquently (paraphrased): Science is about observing, thinking, discussing, not just what’s in peer reviewed papers. By definition, published peer reviewed papers means they all thought the same and agreed. New knowledge almost always comes from outside academia. “The best candle-maker couldn’t dream of electric lights.”
Yes, indeed. It gets old trying to argue with people who don’t know, can’t think, but can easily point to a “peer reviewed article” that I can easily point out flaws with, but because I’m just some guy with a brain, not an “expert,” I don’t count.
So, it appears that they reported the wrong sort of numbers. Or, rather, they used a set of numbers that make the not-vax appear much more useful than it really is. They reported the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR), which was ~95%, rather than the Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR), variously around 1% for different versions of the vax. Meaning it was statistically insignificant.
Meanwhile, over at ZeroHedge, they have a story about big story on Ivermectin in the NY Times. (PDF of original story here.)The author is confused why it has not been pursued more aggressively when there is no money in it compared to shiny new untested but patented and expensive drugs… Hmmm… whatever could it be?