Thanks for the explanation. I hate to malign numbers between 90 and 100, but I must say when followed by a percentage sign I have of late become rather suspicious of them. Whether it's a percent efficacy or a percent of deaths who are unvaccinated, a number of our officials seem to have studied at the Soviet School of Surplus Statistics.
Yes, what Fiona said. There is a reason I keep coming back to read your stuff. Thank you.
"it’s figuring out why they want us to be this fearful that is not so easy"
The pursuit of money and profits is, to my mind, an adequate explanation.
The people who dispense public funds and negotiate the secret, zero liability contracts with the pharmaceuticals can either directly hold pharmaceutical stock or are networked into informal backchannels that feed a portion of pharma's profits back into their own pockets. Likewise, information distribution is a business and monopoly, and pharma's success also accounts for a significant part of its bottom line, not to mention the phenomenon of interlocking directorates, which makes lockstep coordination between the titans of disparate economic sectors possible. This isn't so much a conspiracy as something that results from the social structure of the society we live in and the fact that production and distribution of most everything is geared to profit making, and that mainly for those who occupy the highest reaches of our institutions, public or private.
At bottom, I believe, we are being subjected to a profiteering operation engineered and coordinated on the fly by a highly organized, highly integrated, highly educated and generationally experienced "capitalist" ruling class.
"...directly hold pharmaceutical stock or are networked into informal backchannels that feed a portion of pharma's profits back into their own pockets." Or both.
I don't know if you've seen this Twitter thread by Kevin McKernan, but I read it as a fascinating short lesson in the political economy of COVID testing:
Speaking of tests that aren't accurate...the final set of pictures....not the c_nt part. Hopefully, people know that those temperature readers are not as accurate as a "real" thermometer under your tongue or stuck in other places. They read surface temps. Example: Summer, hot day, air conditioner on in my car, on high, full blast. Got to the Doctor's office, sat in waiting room for a few minutes, taken to exam room where I sat for several more minutes, the nurse comes in to take vitals. She couldn't, for the life of her, figure out why my "temperature" was 93 point something. I explained to her the air conditioner part. She took my "temp" 2 more times, same reading. I explained to her again about the air conditioner. She got different batteries for the "thermometer." Took my "temp" a couple more times, approximately the same reading. She finally decided the "thermometer" was broken and my "temp" didn't matter that much. I, again, started to tell her about the air conditioner. She waived her hand, blowing me off. 🙄 --- This illustrates 2 things. 1. Just because a temperature reader says you're ok, or not, it doesn't mean either assumption is correct. It depends on the ambient temperature the person has been in and for how long. 2. The difference between someone in the science profession (me), and someone in the medical profession (her). 😱
I have a theory about these PCR tests: the real reason for them (and the “pandemic”) is to collect our DNA for the CRISPR/CAS9 gene editing revolution they want. They surely would need as much DNA as possible, preferably everyone’s. Also, having every person’s DNA on file would be quite handy for the evil ones if, say, they wanted to control us. I realise gene editing can be used for good purposes. But with this lot in charge it will be used for nefarious purposes, no doubt about it. This theory came to me because I’m unvaxxed, have never had a PCR test but the evil Imperial College along with the National Hoax Service and Dept for “Health” keep harassing me (not to take the gene therapy injection) but to take part in a study this winter by testing for covid and flu over 4 months. Obviously I won’t be taking part. Have I gone down a very deep dark rabbit hole here? Or is it worth pursuing this theory? I’m not a scientist so I don’t know if this is a scientifically viable theory.
"They" don't need to collect your DNA to control you. "They" control your education from cradle to grave. And when you reach an age when you begin to be able to reflect, i.e., to ask disruptive questions, "they" bury you and everyone around you under a barrage of incessant and unrelenting propaganda, to disrupt the reach and influence of any dissent. And if that doesn't work, "they" control the military and the police and the judicial system that aims to limit the most disruptive dissidence. Complete control is impossible, of course. But it only has to be just enough to leave "their" social prerogatives more or less intact.
COVID has only made the contours of our collective imprisonment a bit more obvious to us, that what rules over us is more unaccountable and arbitrary than we had perhaps realized.
With these tests there is actually a very important issue which tends to be ignored also by those who are well aware of the common misconceptions about 99 percent sensitivty claims and the like. I noticed that hardly anyone asks "What was the experimental procedure used that resulted in these values?". Take the now ubiquitous rapid antigen tests eg. Underneath the binary yes or no outcome hides a (quasi) contiuum of ct values of the pcr test used to verify the antigen test. The pcr test itself has it's own sensitivity and specificity. And also it depends quite a bit i would guess on how you take the sample from the patient. It is clear that the manufacturers of the rapid tests must have defined a cut off value for the ct value. The lower this value, the better the test will perform (more virions). Hence if you test too early, you often get a false negative where a pcr with high ct would give you a positive result instead. So the sensitivity will depend on the timing of your test!
My impression is that we are mostly dealing with number garbage in this pandemic ("pandemic") and that is tbe reason why hardly anything seems to make sense even if you try very hard. Try making chocolate out of horse shit instead, success will be more probable.
Thank you for this. I've tried to explain positive predictive value on the neighborhood social media we have here in Vermont (called "Front Porch Forum"), but it probably fell on deaf ears, and my followup clarifying post was censored.
This video from the "MedCram" YouTube doctor has a great set of graphics that explain the concept quite clearly:
Sir! We Brussels sprouts are being embittered by that insinuation of yours!
But seriously: schol kids in Germany are tested three times a week at school.
Case rate among school children: > 900 / 100,000
Case rate among the rest: < 400 / 100,000
And I have heard that school kids sometimes have parents. Prevalence should not differ that much.
LOL
You may have had a point about wombats - but I'm not budging on this one.
Brussels sprouts are the Devil's own gonads in vegetable form.
Wow - those numbers you quote are fascinating - and very illuminating! Thanks again
Brussels sprouts are delicious! Stop it! 😉
The trick is to increase the surface area by cutting them cross-wise at the stalk before cooking. Will take some of the bitterness.
The Devil just called and mumbled something about sympathy...
Brussels sprouts belong to those foods I detested as a child and now quite like. I have outsourced the detesting to my own kids.
The factor between case rates even is more or less the same if you restrict to Bundesländer, cf: https://interaktiv.morgenpost.de/corona-inzidenz-kinder-alter-kita-schule/
Nice one. Even though I 'should' know this stuff, a refresher is always helpful.
Thanks for the explanation. I hate to malign numbers between 90 and 100, but I must say when followed by a percentage sign I have of late become rather suspicious of them. Whether it's a percent efficacy or a percent of deaths who are unvaccinated, a number of our officials seem to have studied at the Soviet School of Surplus Statistics.
The People's Numbers are always large or small enough to be emotionally resonant, comrade.
"The Soviet School of Surplus Statistics!" 🤣 I love it! (Not disagreeing in the least.) You made me LOL.
Yes, what Fiona said. There is a reason I keep coming back to read your stuff. Thank you.
"it’s figuring out why they want us to be this fearful that is not so easy"
The pursuit of money and profits is, to my mind, an adequate explanation.
The people who dispense public funds and negotiate the secret, zero liability contracts with the pharmaceuticals can either directly hold pharmaceutical stock or are networked into informal backchannels that feed a portion of pharma's profits back into their own pockets. Likewise, information distribution is a business and monopoly, and pharma's success also accounts for a significant part of its bottom line, not to mention the phenomenon of interlocking directorates, which makes lockstep coordination between the titans of disparate economic sectors possible. This isn't so much a conspiracy as something that results from the social structure of the society we live in and the fact that production and distribution of most everything is geared to profit making, and that mainly for those who occupy the highest reaches of our institutions, public or private.
At bottom, I believe, we are being subjected to a profiteering operation engineered and coordinated on the fly by a highly organized, highly integrated, highly educated and generationally experienced "capitalist" ruling class.
"...directly hold pharmaceutical stock or are networked into informal backchannels that feed a portion of pharma's profits back into their own pockets." Or both.
I don't know if you've seen this Twitter thread by Kevin McKernan, but I read it as a fascinating short lesson in the political economy of COVID testing:
https://twitter.com/Kevin_McKernan/status/1426565469276938240?s=20
Speaking of tests that aren't accurate...the final set of pictures....not the c_nt part. Hopefully, people know that those temperature readers are not as accurate as a "real" thermometer under your tongue or stuck in other places. They read surface temps. Example: Summer, hot day, air conditioner on in my car, on high, full blast. Got to the Doctor's office, sat in waiting room for a few minutes, taken to exam room where I sat for several more minutes, the nurse comes in to take vitals. She couldn't, for the life of her, figure out why my "temperature" was 93 point something. I explained to her the air conditioner part. She took my "temp" 2 more times, same reading. I explained to her again about the air conditioner. She got different batteries for the "thermometer." Took my "temp" a couple more times, approximately the same reading. She finally decided the "thermometer" was broken and my "temp" didn't matter that much. I, again, started to tell her about the air conditioner. She waived her hand, blowing me off. 🙄 --- This illustrates 2 things. 1. Just because a temperature reader says you're ok, or not, it doesn't mean either assumption is correct. It depends on the ambient temperature the person has been in and for how long. 2. The difference between someone in the science profession (me), and someone in the medical profession (her). 😱
Excellent stuff.
I have a theory about these PCR tests: the real reason for them (and the “pandemic”) is to collect our DNA for the CRISPR/CAS9 gene editing revolution they want. They surely would need as much DNA as possible, preferably everyone’s. Also, having every person’s DNA on file would be quite handy for the evil ones if, say, they wanted to control us. I realise gene editing can be used for good purposes. But with this lot in charge it will be used for nefarious purposes, no doubt about it. This theory came to me because I’m unvaxxed, have never had a PCR test but the evil Imperial College along with the National Hoax Service and Dept for “Health” keep harassing me (not to take the gene therapy injection) but to take part in a study this winter by testing for covid and flu over 4 months. Obviously I won’t be taking part. Have I gone down a very deep dark rabbit hole here? Or is it worth pursuing this theory? I’m not a scientist so I don’t know if this is a scientifically viable theory.
"They" don't need to collect your DNA to control you. "They" control your education from cradle to grave. And when you reach an age when you begin to be able to reflect, i.e., to ask disruptive questions, "they" bury you and everyone around you under a barrage of incessant and unrelenting propaganda, to disrupt the reach and influence of any dissent. And if that doesn't work, "they" control the military and the police and the judicial system that aims to limit the most disruptive dissidence. Complete control is impossible, of course. But it only has to be just enough to leave "their" social prerogatives more or less intact.
COVID has only made the contours of our collective imprisonment a bit more obvious to us, that what rules over us is more unaccountable and arbitrary than we had perhaps realized.
With these tests there is actually a very important issue which tends to be ignored also by those who are well aware of the common misconceptions about 99 percent sensitivty claims and the like. I noticed that hardly anyone asks "What was the experimental procedure used that resulted in these values?". Take the now ubiquitous rapid antigen tests eg. Underneath the binary yes or no outcome hides a (quasi) contiuum of ct values of the pcr test used to verify the antigen test. The pcr test itself has it's own sensitivity and specificity. And also it depends quite a bit i would guess on how you take the sample from the patient. It is clear that the manufacturers of the rapid tests must have defined a cut off value for the ct value. The lower this value, the better the test will perform (more virions). Hence if you test too early, you often get a false negative where a pcr with high ct would give you a positive result instead. So the sensitivity will depend on the timing of your test!
My impression is that we are mostly dealing with number garbage in this pandemic ("pandemic") and that is tbe reason why hardly anything seems to make sense even if you try very hard. Try making chocolate out of horse shit instead, success will be more probable.
Thank you for this. I've tried to explain positive predictive value on the neighborhood social media we have here in Vermont (called "Front Porch Forum"), but it probably fell on deaf ears, and my followup clarifying post was censored.
This video from the "MedCram" YouTube doctor has a great set of graphics that explain the concept quite clearly:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSRK41UbTEU&t=140s