Regular Fare:
China, Yields,
And The Coming Deflationary Impulse
The circular, or as George
Soros terms it, ‘reflexive’ nature of financial markets makes them extremely
vulnerable to being whipsawed. Yet because of the current extreme momentum, it
would take a very heavy weight of evidence to convince this market to reverse
direction.
We continue to highlight
that commodity prices are at high risk of a major reversal because of the steep
downturn in the Chinese Credit Impulse. We have highlighted this before and we
are not alone. Julien Bittel of Pictet Asset Management posted the following
chart.
Where Will The
Next Deflationary Shock Come From?
Putting it all together, in
the coming few years those “usual suspects” that previously unleashed deflation
are now more likely to raise the inflationary temperature. Hence, if
deflationary forces are going to carry the day, there will need to be
impressive productivity gains. Somewhere in the system, someone will have to
produce a whole lot more, with a whole lot less. But is this likely given the
following trends that have been covered in recent Gavekal reports?
Calm Down, Mass
Inflation Is Not Around the Corner
In the great inflation
debate (transitory or not), the rally in everything from copper to soybeans to
lumber has been a point in favor of the reflation hawks. But, as Bloombergs Tom
Orlik notes, movements in commodity prices this year have been mainly driven by
risk appetite, not fundamental demand or shortages of supply. …. as the recent
rapid decline of numerous industrial metals (and lumber) from their peak
suggests, a rise in commodity prices driven primarily by speculation is also
prone to a sudden reversal, so the inflationistas' argument may not be as
strong as it first appears, and the debate is far from over.
… But we still need to
explain inflation. Maybe this explanation would go farther if I gave it a
pompous, catchy name, like “Modern Inflation Theory”.
“Inflation is always and
everywhere a monetary phenomenon.” This is MIT’s elevator pitch. Milton
Friedman said it 50 years ago and it is still true.
Crash course in inflation: inflation is two things, A and B. A and B are
both bad. B is obviously bad. A is subtly bad. A causes B. A also causes other
things. In theory, other things can cause B. In practice, B almost always
involves A.
B, the symptom, is difficult
to measure. A, the cause, is impossible to measure — and also impossible to
mitigate, at least not without annoying its beneficiaries. B can be mitigated
by many non-monetary government policies and even organic processes.
20th-century “macroeconomic” central-planners define “inflation” as AB
or even just B, measure B, and so automatically take undeserved credit for
these exogenous or organic mitigations. Friedman’s point is that the only
important phenomenon is A. First, A causes other bad things than B. Second, you
can’t mitigate A, only conceal it.
A is monetary dilution. B is consumer appreciation. Monetary dilution causes consumer price
appreciation. Appreciation is a symptom; dilution is the disease. Diagnosing
and treating symptoms, let alone merely painting over them, is not the science
of medicine but the witch-doctor’s art.
“Inflation” is the syndrome AB—a deceptive malapropism. The main use of
this label is to divert attention from the simple cause A to the complex,
difficult syndrome AB. The label “inflation” is a semantic minefield and no one should use it both sincerely and
ambiguously. I’ll just say “inflation (A)” and “inflation (B).”
The point of Modern
Inflation Theory (presented below), is that although we cannot measure
inflation (A), or monetary dilution, directly, another proxy C is a better
metric (though still imperfect and indirect). This proxy, inflation (C), is wealth appreciation. ….
Economic growth depends on
two factors: 1) the size of employed workforce and 2) the productivity of that
workforce. On the first factor, the
advanced capitalist economies are running out of more human labour power. But
let’s concentrate on the second facto in this post: the productivity of labour.
Labour productivity growth globally has been slowing for 50 years and looks
like continuing to do so.
Why is productivity growth
in the major economies falling? The ‘productivity puzzle’ (as the mainstream
economists like to call it) has been debated about for some time now. The ‘demand pull’ Keynesian explanation that
capitalism is in secular stagnation due to a lack of effective demand needed to
encourage capitalists to invest in productivity-enhancing technology. Then
there is the supply-side argument from others that there are not enough effective
productivity-enhancing technologies to invest in anyway – the day of the
computer, the internet etc, is nearly over and there is nothing new that will
have the same impact.
Don’t expect the
world economy to resume its prior growth pattern after COVID-19
Most people seem to think
that the world economy is going through a temporary disruption, caused by a
novel coronavirus. As soon as COVID-19 goes away, they expect the economy will
be back to normal. I think that this assessment is overly optimistic. The way I
see the situation, the world economy was already having severe growth problems,
caused indirectly by resource problems, even before COVID-19 hit.
…
As I see the situation, the
world has a resource problem. Resources of many kinds, including fresh water,
energy products, and minerals of many kinds were becoming more difficult (and
expensive) to extract, even before 2020. Substitution might have worked if the
problem were only one or two resources, but not with several major resources.
Cutting back was the only answer.
…. In this post, I will try
to explain the situation.
…
There seem to be three
different approaches to doing something about the world’s resource limits
problem, without mentioning the nature of the real underlying problem:
[a] Develop a “fear of
future climate change” story by creating models that assume we have huge
amounts of fossil fuels that can be burned in the future, even though the
evidence is very much the opposite…
[b] Create a “fear of the
coronavirus” story, and use it to keep people inside and away from traveling as
much as possible. …
[c] Hide the existing
resource problem with more debt, to the extent possible …
… We seem to be headed for a
rapidly changing world economy, and unfortunately not for the better.
How the 1
percent’s savings buried the middle class in debt
What’s happening, he says,
is that disparities in income and wealth have fueled ever more saving by the
top 1 percent. But while many economists think more saving leads to productive
investment, Sufi, Princeton’s Atif Mian, and Harvard’s Ludwig Straub make a
different argument. They find that these savings are largely unproductive,
being remade by the financial system into household and government debt. And
their research outlines a cycle whereby the savings of the top 1 percent fuel
the debt and dissavings of the lower 90 percent, which in turn leads to more
savings at the top.
1 big thing: The
state of the world, according to me
This being my last Axios
Markets newsletter, I figured I'd break from tradition and tell you what I
really think. I'm not anyone important, but I read a lot of reports and I talk
to a lot of smart people, so I've learned a thing or two.
What's happening: I believe
our country is in trouble. And it's not about a loss of morality or religion or
liberals or conservatives or the current president or the last president. It's
about a fundamental problem we have as a nation — a reckless imbalance of
wealth.
The people at the top have
too much and the people at the bottom don't have enough.
Keep it 💯: This is not a philosophical matter of doing
what's "right." It's a practical matter of doing what's necessary to
uphold and maintain a consumption-based economy.
…
#BigFacts: Because consumers
don't have cash to spend, many companies struggle to generate real profits.
However, because interest
rates are so low, if a company is big enough it can just keep issuing bonds to
keep itself afloat.
Low-income employment recovery has a long way to go:
MMT Fare:
Socialism for 1% Capitalism 99%
The public is depressingly disinterested in the workings of the economy;
nowhere is this more evident than in their ignorance of the monetary system.
Banks create money by making loans to their customers. This method
accounts for around 97 per cent of the money in circulation. Nearly all money
is created as debt, repayable at interest. This means that all loans have to be
repaid with money also created as debt and loaned at interest. No wonder the
economy struggles, when the system of money creation heaps cost upon
unnecessary cost. And no wonder the banks generate such enormous profits.
… If they are to remain in private ownership, banks must be obliged to
work under a revised system of full reserve banking: they should only lend
money which they can fund from deposits and reserves. If the money supply needs
to be increased, new money can be issued through banks by a central authority.
Banks can continue to lend money at interest in order to cover their costs, and
make a reasonable profit, but they should not be permitted to create new money
at interest …
FinTech Fare:
I’ve been meaning to write about decentralised finance for a while. For
those who don’t know, decentralised finance (or DeFi) is an emerging ecosystem
of applications seeking to rebuild financial services from the ground up. Its
roots lie in crypto, where it sits on top of Ethereum blockchain technology. Truth
is though, I’ve never really understood it. ….
COVID-19 notes:
IMF: A Proposal to
End the COVID-19 Pandemic.
For Office Returns, the Vaccine May Not Be Required but It's Hard to Avoid
(not just) for the ESG crowd:
‘Don’t
decarbonise or we will divest’ US states warn banks and asset managers
Treasurers from 15 Republican-run states have threatened to pull billions
of dollars from financial institutions which halt investments and lending to
fossil fuel companies.
Biden’s Fossil
Fuel Moves Clash With Pledges on Climate Change
Prepare for
disorderly shift to low-carbon era, firms and investors told
No G20 country is on track to meet climate goals and disruption to
business is inevitable, says risk assessor
Climate crisis
inflicting huge ‘hidden costs’ on mental health
Ethane analysis
points to severe underestimation of methane emissions in oil and gas production
The Dark Side of
Congo’s Cobalt Rush
How France is testing
free public transport
Quotes of the Week:
Inflation is and remains an
always ‘transient’ factor in the economy. As shown, there is a high
correlation between economic growth and inflation. As such, given the economy
will quickly return to sub-2% growth over the next 24-months, inflation
pressures will also subside.
the standard debate about the future of the
economy is: which will we get, high inflation or a deflationary collapse of
defaults and asset bubbles popping? The debate goes round and round in widening
circles of complexity as analysts delve into every nuance of the debate. A
recent conversation with my friend A.T. raised a third possibility few seem to
consider: increasingly chaotic volatility will be the new normal, as wild
swings between inflation and deflation will increase in amplitude and ferocity
as the system destabilizes. Increasingly chaotic volatility is a classic sign
of a system that has lost equilibrium and is attempting to regain its dynamic
stability by going into overdrive. The amplitude and violence of these
fluctuations increase as each attempt to restore stability fails. This loss of
stability is not what people expect. The experience of the past 60 years has
been that any hiccup in financial stability–a recession or market crash–is
temporary, as the system responds with monetary and fiscal stimulus which
quickly restores the system’s stability. That the era of stability has ended
and a new era of increasingly chaotic volatility has begun is not on anyone’s
radar as a possibility.
Tweet of the Week:
The truth is Larry Summers has not been cancelled, but should be. Same applies to Ken Rogoff. In economic terms, if people don't get punished for catastrophically wrong analysis, then you create a moral hazard.
Other Fare:
Cops Raid 'Cannabis Farm,' Find Bitcoin Mine Instead
Pics of the Week:
A mega dam on
the Great Bend of China
Chinese scientists who surveyed the region on foot in the late 1990s
would later claim the Yarlung Tsangpo Grand Canyon was not only the world’s
longest canyon at more than 500 kilometres but also the deepest with a depth of
more than 5,300 metres. That’s almost three times as deep as the Grand Canyon
in the US. The team also identified
this area as one of the greatest untapped hydropower resources on the planet. That’s because of the huge drop in elevation
of the river over such a short period of time. From one side of the Great Bend to the other
there’s a drop in elevation of more than 2,000 metres....
EXTRA [controversial or non-market-related] FARE:
Regular Fare:
Matt Stoller: Amazon
Prime Is an Economy-Distorting Lie
Companies Paying
Starvation Wages Whine That Workers Aren’t Interested
But if austerity is such a
bad idea, sapping our economies of energy, why is it so popular among the
powerful? …. But suppose for a moment, and for argument’s sake, that everyone
agreed that printing another trillion dollars to finance a basic income for the
poor would boost neither inflation nor interest rates. The rich and powerful
would still oppose it, owing to the debilitating fear that they would end up
like Peel in Australia: monied but bereft of the power to compel the less
monied…. their
most important interest is not to conserve economic potential. It is to
preserve the power of the few to compel the many.
What happens when selfish assholes seek validation from other selfish
assholes? Alienation, loneliness, rage, mental health breakdown, suicide,
overdose, mass shootings....
Let's see, political civil war, militant activism, record wealth
inequality, rampant anxiety, what's not to like?
There is only one "cure" for all of this insanity, which is to
reject the modern way of life. To reject debt penury and otherwise stop trying
to keep up with the Kardashians. However, the Millennials are just now
experiencing their first pump and dump cycle, so they think this is all going just
fine. They've never seen a bear market, nor a housing bubble, nor a Tech
bubble. So now they will experience all three at the same time.
…
If we go by the Chinese experience in 2015, the Fed will get this all
under control after a -60% decline. Back then the PBOC did everything possible
to stop the crash - including banning short selling, then they banned
institutions from selling altogether. Next they shut down the market for days a
time. Nothing worked. The market had to clear.
Now whose turn is it?
According to the post-pandemic investment hypothesis, we are to believe
that the post-pandemic economy will be far better than the pre-pandemic
economy.
This Wall Street recovery is America's imagined reality. Lockdown,
re-open. Get rich quick. Why didn't anyone think of this sooner?
…
In summary, this is called rented prosperity. The Japanese learned the
hard way. The Chinese learned the hard way. And now the U.S. has to learn the
hard way.
COVID Fare:
So why are journalists not
covering it?
Michael Capuzzo, a New York
Times best-selling author , has just published an article titled “The Drug That
Cracked Covid”. The 15-page article
chronicles the gargantuan struggle being waged by frontline doctors on all
continents to get ivermectin approved as a Covid-19 treatment, as well as the
tireless efforts by reporters, media outlets and social media companies to
thwart them.
Because of ivermectin,
Capuzzo says, there are “hundreds of thousands, actually millions, of people
around the world, from Uttar Pradesh in India to Peru to Brazil, who are living
and not dying.” Yet media outlets have done all they can to “debunk” the notion
that ivermectin may serve as an effective, easily accessible and affordable
treatment for Covid-19. They have parroted the arguments laid out by health
regulators around the world that there just isn’t enough evidence to justify
its use.
For his part, Capuzzo, as a
reporter, “saw with [his] own eyes the other side [of the story]” that has gone
unreported, of the many patients in the US whose lives have been saved by
ivermectin and of five of the doctors that have led the battle to save lives
around the world, Paul Marik, Umberto Meduri, José Iglesias, Pierre Kory and
Joe Varon. These are all highly decorated doctors. Through their leadership of
the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance, they have already
enhanced our treatment of Covid-19 by discovering and promoting the use of
Corticoid steroids against the virus. But their calls for ivermectin to also be
used have met with a wall of resistance from healthcare regulators and a wall
of silence from media outlets.
“I really wish the world
could see both sides,” Capuzzo laments. But, unfortunately, most reporters are
not interested in telling the other side of the story. Even if they were, their
publishers would probably refuse to publish it.
That may explain why
Capuzzo, a six-time Pulitzer-nominated journalist best known for his New York
Times-bestselling nonfiction books Close to Shore and Murder Room, ended up
publishing his article on ivermectin in Mountain Home, a monthly local magazine
for the Pennsylvania mountains and New York Finger Lakes region, of which
Capuzzo’s wife is the editor. It’s also the reason why I decided to dedicate today’s
post to Capuzzo’s article. Put simply, as many people as possible –particularly
journalists — need to read his story.
As Capuzzo himself says, “I
don’t know of a bigger story in the world.”
Is Ivermectin
The New Penicillin?
Ivermectin, an
anti-parasitic drug placed the same radioactive category as Hydroxychloroquine
(HCQ) for the treatment of COVID-19, has reemerged as a promising treatment in
the battle to extinguish the pandemic.
New York Times best-selling
author Michael Capuzzo has called it the "drug that cracked Covid,"
writing that there are “hundreds of thousands, actually millions, of people
around the world, from Uttar Pradesh in India to Peru to Brazil, who are living
and not dying.”
…
Their final argument lacked
any proof. It was essentially an attempt to smear Ivermectin through
association with another drug. It attempted to link Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)
with Ivermectin unfairly. While HCQ has become a punchline by the media,
scientists like Dr. George Fareed know it is effective against COVID-19 –
especially in the early stages.
Dr. Fareed and his
associate, Dr. Brian Tyson, have treated some 6,000 patients with nearly 100%
success using a combination of HCQ, Ivermectin, Fluvoxamine, and various
nutraceuticals, including zinc Vitamin D.
‘Literally
criminal’: Suppressing data on ivermectin cost ‘half a million lives’, doctor
charges
In a recent Zoom call, Dr.
Pierre Kory of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance outlined numerous
details showing the World Health Organization (WHO) knowingly suppressed data
on the effectiveness of ivermectin against the virus in order to benefit the
vaccine interests of Big Pharma. “It’s criminal,” Kory said. “It’s literally
criminal.” The drug “could have saved half a million lives this year if it had
been approved.”
he WHO, Kory contends, is
simply taking part in the tactics of a time-worn “Disinformation Playbook.” The
term was coined by the Union of Concerned Scientists 50 years ago to describe
the strategies corporations have developed over decades to “attack science when
it goes against their financial interests.”
It consists of five parts:
1.
The Fake – Conduct
counterfeit science and try to pass it off as legitimate research.
2.
The Blitz – Harass
scientists who speak out with results reviews inconvenient for industry.
3.
The Diversion – Manufacture
uncertainty about science where little or none exists.
4.
The Screen – Buy credibility
through alliances with academia or professional societies.
5.
The Fix – Manipulate
government officials or processes to influence policy inappropriately.
……
The most egregious thing,
Kory found, is a sentence in the WHO report their researchers did not even
bother to defend, “it just simply says, ‘We did not look at randomized
controlled trials and the prevention of COVID-19.’ No reason why, no reason not
why. We just didn’t do it.”
One of the most important
indicators of effectiveness in a drug is dose response data, Kory explains.
“They deliberately avoided mention” of dose response data. “They completely
omitted really important data, because if that’s there, that’s a huge
scientific pillar showing efficacy.”
They also did not include
epidemiological studies, such as that by Juan Chamie’s research that has been
going on for a year “showing every place that does widespread distribution and
adoption you see case counts and death plummet,” and which was presented to the
WHO.
“So when I read that, I know
this data. My head was in my hands and I was just like these people or
criminals. They’re literally are criminals,” Kory said.
Ivermectin -
FLCCC Protocol for COVID-19
MATH+, I-MASK+
AND I-RECOVER PROTOCOLS: OVERVIEW AND A GUIDE TO THE MANAGEMENT OF COVID-19
Developed and Updated by
Paul Marik, MD, FCP (SA), FRCP (C), FCCP, FCCM for the COVID-19 Critical Care
Alliance (FLCCC Alliance).
This is our recommended
approach to COVID-19 based on the best (and most recent) literature….
More importantly, this just
tabulates the initial adverse effects; does not assess long-term impacts
Healthcare
Workers Refusing Covid Vaccines: A Medical Doctor Explains Why
According to the New York
Post and Newsday, around 30 percent of healthcare workers were refusing Covid
vaccines. More recently, at the end of April, we learned that 40 percent of
marines are also wary of getting vaccinated.
Thirty percent of healthcare workers refusing Covid vaccines
Everyone in the world —
quite literally— is well aware by now of the several vaccines to slow the
spread of Covid-19. But in our rush to vaccinate, we seem to have forgotten
that the Food and Drug Administration has not approved any of these Covid-19
vaccinations. A main reason that we see thirty percent of healthcare workers
refusing Covid vaccines is that these vaccines are all unapproved.
Indeed, all the Covid-19
vaccinations in the United States are administered under the FDA’s Emergency
Use Authorization. This means that the Covid vaccines are unapproved medical
products used in an emergency. Healthcare workers refusing Covid vaccines feel
concerned about getting unapproved vaccines.
Developing safe vaccines takes years
It typically takes many
years to create a new vaccine. Even after years of research and development,
success sometimes eludes scientists’ best efforts.
For example, despite many
years of trying, we have no vaccines, yet, against HIV, hepatitis C, malaria,
or the common cold. We also never developed a safe and effective vaccine
against SARS or MERS, two other potentially lethal respiratory viral
infections.
Messenger RNA technology
The vaccines used for the
first Covid-19 inoculations, brought to market by Pfizer and Moderna, employ a
messenger RNA (mRNA) technology. Significantly, this is the first time mRNA
technology has been used in a vaccine. However, mRNA technology has been used
in cancer therapy. And has shown success in producing various proteins to attack
and disrupt certain cancer cells.
Health experts have asserted
that it was not too much of a leap to use mRNA in developing vaccinations.
Normally, the DNA in the nucleus of a human cell produces mRNA. The mRNA acts
as an instruction manual to create proteins. The mRNA is released from the
cell’s nucleus into the cytoplasm of the cell where it travels to the ribosomes
to deliver its instructions.
The idea behind its use in
an anti-Covid-19 vaccine was to produce a synthetic mRNA to instruct the cell’s
ribosome protein factory to create a SARS CoV-2 spike protein.
As the CDC explains, the
appearance of a spike protein then stimulates our own immune system to create
an anti-spike antibody. Technically, then, the use of mRNA in this way is not a
true vaccine, but rather a type of immunologic or gene therapy.
AstraZeneca’s vaccine against Covid-19
The vaccine developed by
AstraZeneca for Covid-19 uses a different strategy. It takes a piece of genetic
material from the SARS CoV-2 virus and inserts it into a common cold virus — an
adenovirus. The genetics of the adenovirus vector are altered so it is not
infectious. The adenovirus then enters the cell to stimulate the creation of
the spike protein.2
The good news is that
clinics can store the AstraZeneca vaccine at normal refrigerator temperatures
for up to six months. The bad news is it seems to be less effective than either
Pfizer or Moderna.
AZ’s vaccine may become
preferred in less developed countries because of ease of storage. But it has
shown significant side effects. In particular, the vaccine seems to cause
clotting disorders. So much so that many European Union countries (including
Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and most recently Denmark) have banned its use.
Healthcare workers refusing
Covid vaccines are concerned about these side effects. As frontline workers,
they treat people with Covid-19 and people with Covid-19 vaccine side effects. Many worry that, in some
instances, the vaccine side effects are actually more severe than the disease
itself.
Johnson & Johnson Covid-19 vaccine
The Johnson & Johnson
Covid-19 vaccine also uses an adenovirus transport mechanism. This allows it to
get the SARS CoV-2 DNA into our cells in order to create the desired spike
protein antibody response. J&J’s single shot has the advantage of being
“one and done.” However, the FDA and CDC recently paused its use. Their concern
was a potentially dangerous blood clot reaction occurring a week or so after
the vaccine.
Following the 11-day
“pause,” the FDA resumed allowing the use of this vaccine. They simply added a
warning about a rare but serious type of blood clot. As of mid-April, the UK
did not approve the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. But the European Medicines
Agency (EMA) decided that a warning about unusual blood clots would suffice on
its labels, just as the health agency did for AstraZeneca’s Covid-19 vaccine.
Healthcare workers refusing Covid vaccines have concerns
Here are some of the
concerns that healthcare workers refusing Covid vaccines have. The public, too,
needs to consider these issues.
1.
Asymptomatic carriers. Could the vaccines in use now create asymptomatic carriers who
unknowingly transmit the virus to others?
2.
Other variants. Are the vaccines
protective against the new SARS CoV-2 variants — from the UK, South Africa, and
Brazil? An Israeli study has shown the Pfizer vaccine may put patients at
higher risk for Covid-19 variants. The CDC now reports over 7,000 fully
vaccinated people have contracted Covid-19 and over 500 of them required
hospitalization. We have now vaccinated over 125,000,000 people in the US.
Information about the various variant strains of SARS CoV-2 are still emerging.
Some variants may prove dangerous, others not so much.
3.
No animal trials.
Most other vaccine development programs have first used lengthy animal studies
to better assure safety in humans. This was not done with any of the new
Covid-19 vaccines. Healthcare workers refusing Covid vaccines are concerned
that the clotting problems and other side effects now being studied are the consequence
of limited animal and inadequate safety testing.
4.
Integration into the human genome. Is it possible for the synthetic SARS CoV-2 mRNA to be integrated into
the human host’s cell genome? Keep in mind that this has happened before.
Scientists at Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology produced
findings about wild coronaviruses that raise questions about how viral RNA
operates. This DNA-to-mRNA pathway is not always a one-way street. An enzyme
called reverse transcriptase can convert RNA back into DNA allowing the latter
to be integrated into the DNA in the cell nucleus.
5.
Inaccurate efficacy estimates. The high efficacy of a controlled study may prove to be very different
from the real-world experience with massive numbers of people. For example,
data from the CDC show that the influenza vaccination efficacy for the 2017-18
season was approximately 38 percent. Only 20 percent was achieved in the
2018-19 season; and 39 percent for the 2019-20 season. When the influenza
vaccination was first introduced in 1938, the efficacy was expected to be much
higher than the current numbers.
6.
Not appropriate for children. The CDC data show that the survival rate of those contracting the
disease goes up as age goes down. If you are less than 70 years old — the
survival rate is 99.5 percent; if you are less than 50 years old — the rate jumps to 99.98 percent; and
if you are under 20 years old, the chance of surviving Covid-19 is 99.997
percent. Why then would we consider vaccinating children without long term
safety data?
7.
Covid not as dangerous as the flu for kids. In fact, parents should know that seasonal
influenza is a greater risk to the very young than Covid-19. Weighing the
benefits versus the risks of accepting the Covid-19 vaccine could be a very
difficult choice, especially for the young. It is unlikely, therefore, that I
will recommend vaccinations for my young patients to protect them against a
virus that more than 99 percent of them would survive should they contract it.
8.
Companies have no liability. The same companies (and their executives) that look to profit from the
vaccines are also immune from all liability. In 1986, Congress passed the
National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA). It provides immunity from
liability to all vaccine manufacturing companies. Crony capitalism at its best
— no liability to the company or its executives should something go wrong while
mandating purchase of the product by the public. Many people are working to
change this law.
Additional concerns
·
Minorities tend to be
skeptical of the government and especially of vaccinations administered by the
U.S. Public Health Service. Why? The USPHS and the CDC carried out 40 years of
secret experiments in a study of syphilis, using black residents as test
subjects. Can we overcome such a history to get the vaccine to the most
vulnerable in the minority communities?
·
There is no long-term safety data for
these new Covid-19 vaccines.
How do we know in a few years we will not see significant problems? We clearly
don’t.
·
Industry executives are now
suggesting a 3rd shot may be necessary and then annual jabs to follow. Have we
really studied these vaccines thoroughly?
·
In 1976 we attempted a mass
vaccination program against the swine flu with a newly created vaccine. The
government aborted this vaccine program after 40 million doses. Why? Because
over 500 people developed Guillain-Barré syndrome, a rare neurological
disorder. In addition, there were 25 deaths following swine flu vaccination.
·
Pregnant women and small
children are currently participating in vaccine trials. This could be
potentially dangerous. We simply do not know what the long-term effects of mRNA
vaccines or the artificial creation of Covid-19 spike protein antibodies will
be on children or during pregnancy.
·
Could a phenomenon known as antibody-dependent
enhancement (ADE) occur with the Covid-19
vaccination? This problem occurs when viral exposure following vaccination
causes a more severe reaction than if the patient did not get the vaccine.
·
A recent study published in
JAMA showed SARS CoV-2 antibodies in breast milk. Healthcare workers refusing
Covid vaccines wonder what the long term implications could be for these
infants.
Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
The United States has a
Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. The CDC and the FDA run the VAERS
website. VAERS
is showing an alarming rise in reported side effects, more than we have seen
with any other vaccine.
This includes over 4,000 deaths and tens of thousands of ER visits associated
with the Covid-19 vaccinations.
This VAERS website requires
doctors or patients to voluntarily report side effects. It is a passive
reporting system. Studies show that only 1% to 10% of all the adverse events are reported
to this site. Most people, even
physicians, are unaware of the website’s existence.
No long-term safety data
Healthcare workers refusing
Covid vaccines point out that we have no long-term data on the safety of these
vaccines. At the same time, we are getting better at treating Covid-19. The
death rate from the disease continues to fall. Hospital stays for Covid-19 are
getting shorter. And hospital mortality from Covid-19 has plummeted. Early multi-drug outpatient
treatment with repurposed medications is showing great success. Informed
physicians are embracing this approach. Even the press and social media are reporting on effective treatments.
The media have finally allowed this message to get through its gauntlet.
A Covid-19 vaccine may be one of many tools to combat the pandemic. But
it is not the savior that many believe has arrived. Skepticism is important in
science. Healthcare workers refusing Covid vaccines are skeptical about safety,
efficacy, and necessity. I
believe their skepticism is warranted
MORE Flagrant
Data Manipulation from the CDC
New report is further
evidence the CDC is deliberately hiding post-vaccine “breakthrough cases”
Ian Welsh: CDC Decides To
Just Not Count All Covid Cases
Neither the CDC nor the WHO
have covered themselves in glory during this pandemic. In fact, they have
burned credibility like it’s 10 cent oil and they want to set the world on
fire. They said masks didn’t help, then they changed their mind. The resisted
evidence that the virus was airborne vigorously and as a result didn’t emphasize
proper ventilation. They were bad on schools, where, yes, children and teachers
do get infected and pass it on.
What should have be a
disease we stomped into the ground is now likely to become chronic (also
because of refusal to share vaccine manufacturing information), which will, it
must be admitted, earn Pharma tens of billions of dollars every year, so I
guess that’s a win. And who really needed old people, or people who are immune
compromised? Think of all the saved money on pensions and healthcare for people
who are mostly worth more dead than alive to governments and corporations
Back in the Bush era a joke
I liked was “stupid or evil?”
“Why not both?”
It sure is fun to be ruled
by incompetent psychopaths.
Psychopaths. The rich get
richer if Covid isn’t stopped. The richest people in the world have seen
massive increases in their wealth and income because of Covid. Life is fucking
marvelous and Covid has been a blessing.
Understand this in your
bones. The people making decisions not only don’t care if you die, if you dying
will make them richer or more powerful, they’ll go with the decision path that
leads to you or mum or your best friend dying or winding up homeless. You
aren’t nothing to them, you’re meat. A prey animal.
Welcome to late capitalism.
Fauci Backed
Strengthening of Viruses Despite Admitting Risk of Pandemic
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of
the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, wrote in an
academic paper nine years ago that he supported “gain-of-function” research on
viruses despite admitting a “remote” possibility that such “important work”
could lead to a global pandemic if such a fortified virus escaped from a lab …. in December 2017 Fauci unilaterally reversed an Obama administration
2014 ban on such experiments precisely because of the danger that a leak could
cause a pandemic. The Australian quoted former Trump administration officials
as saying that no one at the Trump White House knew that Fauci had lifted
Obama’s ban. “It kind of just got rammed through,”
America’s
Frontline Doctors v. Beccera Petition for Temporary Restraining Order.
Hat tip naked capitalism, where Yves says:
Filed in the Northern
District of Alabama on May 20. Seeks an injunction against administering Covid
vaccines to children 16 or younger. Buried in here is what strikes me as a good
legal argument:
In the specific instance of minor Plaintiffs under 16, the Court must
consider that an “EUA requires that an intervention address a serious or life-threatening
condition, and for known and potential benefits of the intervention to be
balanced against the known and potential harms.” There is not even a pretense
of a factual basis that COVID-19 represents a serious or life-threatening
condition for children under 16, since the CDC acknowledges they face 0% risk
of mortality from COVID-19 statistically
Death and double
standards: Harder to attribute mortality to vaccine than to COVID?
Stephanie Dubois, a British
model aged 39, and Lisa Shaw, a BBC radio presenter aged 44, died within a day
of each other due to serious thrombotic episodes after receiving the
Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine. Neither had underlying health conditions.
Dubois’ case has now been referred to the European Medicines Agency (EMA), as
she lived in Cyprus, but she left her own account of her tragic decline on her
Facebook page:…
…The death of Dubois
highlights how much harder it is to attribute deaths to the vaccines than it is
to claim death by COVID.
Covid Spike
Protein, In All Vaccines, Is What Causes Deadly Blood Clots
The prestigious Salk
Institute, founded by vaccine pioneer Jonas Salk, has authored and published a
bombshell scientific article revealing that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is
what’s actually causing vascular damage in covid patients and covid vaccine
recipients, promoting the strokes, heart attacks, migraines, blood clots and
other harmful reactions that have already killed thousands of Americans
(source: VAERS.hhs.gov). Critically, all four covid vaccine brands currently in
widespread use either inject patients with the spike protein or, via mRNA
technology, instruct the patient’s own body to manufacture spike proteins and
release them into their own blood. This floods the patient’s body with the very
spike protein that the Salk Institute has now identified as the smoking gun
cause of vascular damage and related events (such as blood clots, which are
killing many people who take the vaccines).Put simply, it means the vaccines
were designed to contain the very element that’s killing people. The false
assumption of the vaccine industry and its propagandists is that the spike
protein is “inert” and harmless. The Salk Institute proves this assumption to
be dangerously inaccurate.
…
The covid vaccine injects
the patient with spike proteins, the spike proteins proceed to cause vascular
damage and blood platelet aggregation, this leads to blood clots which
circulate around the body and lodge in different organs (the heart, lungs,
brain, etc.), causing deaths that are attributed to “strokes” or “heart
attacks” or “pulmonary embolism.” The common cause is the vascular damage
stemming from the spike protein.
In essence, millions of
people are being injected with artificial blood clotting factors and then dying
from blood clots, all while the disastrously dishonest corporate media claims
all covid vaccines are completely “safe” and have harmed no one.
German
Scientists Find How Broken Parts Of COVID-19 Vaccines Mutate To Trigger Blood
Clots
Scientists believe that in
some people, the immune system sees the vaccine as a threat and over-produces
antibodies to fight it. These lead to the formation of clumps in the blood,
which can become deadly if the clots move towards vital organs and cut off
supply.
In short there is no science
that says you should take the shot if you’ve already had Covid. There are
plenty of people saying that but they cannot point to any scientific study that
shows you actually lose protection from prior infection any faster than you do
from the shots themselves. This is why someone who had the measles does not
take a measles shot; you’re presumably protected by fighting off the infection.
But what if you haven’t had Covid-19? What do you decide if you’re in that 0-25
age group and someone is trying to demand you get the jab, or all your friends
are doing it? Isn’t the first question to be asked “how dangerous is it if I
say no and get infected, assuming I haven’t been already?” It should be.
Alex talks with Dr. Byram
Bridle, an Associate Professor on Viral Immunology at the University of Guelph
about new peer-reviewed studies that suggests there may be terrifying reasons
side effects such as heart inflammation, VITT, and other serious issues may
occur in those who have been vaccinated.
Covid-19
Vaccines Lead to New Infections and Mortality: The Evidence is Overwhelming
This article demonstrates
unequivocally that mortality and morbidity has increased dramatically as a
result of the vaccine. The incidence of Covid positive cases has also
increased.
“And everywhere they have
been followed by a dramatic rise in new infections and mortality for several
weeks or months”
…
The latest official figures
for the European Union which are rarely acknowledged by the mainstream media
indicate the following:
From late December 2020
to May 22, 2021:
·
12,184 deaths and 1,196,190
injuries following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots (Moderna,
Pfizer-BionTech; AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen). Serious
injuries are of the order of 604,744 (i.e more than 50% of total injuries)
·
The Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA
gene-edited vaccine has resulted in the largest number of fatalities: Total
reactions for its mRNA vaccine Tozinameran: 5,961 deaths and 452,779 injuries
to 22/05/2021
“Unethical”… “dystopian”…
“totalitarian”…
These are the words of the
British government’s primary scientific advisory bunch — the Scientific
Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviour, by title.
These scientific advisors
presently droop their heads in shame. For these are the very words they employ
to describe their own conduct.
They concede: Last March
their wicked counsel encouraged government officials to wildly inflate the true
viral threat.
…
The way we have used fear is
dystopian. The use of fear has definitely been ethically questionable. It’s
been like a weird experiment.
…
Another member was “stunned
by the weaponisation of behavioural psychology.”
New
Paper: Masks Achieve Nothing In Terms Of Spread
Latest analysis shows yet
again – yet again – what we already knew from 40 years of published research.
And also empirically from simply glancing over the past year’s real-world data.
Masks don’t work! Our main finding is that mask mandates and use are not
associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 spread among US states.
…
Our study has implications
for respiratory virus mitigation. Public health measures should ethically
promote behaviors that prevent communicable diseases. The sudden onset of
COVID-19 compelled adoption of mask mandates before efficacy could be
evaluated. Our findings do not support the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2
transmission rates decrease with greater public mask use.
Mask mandate and use efficacy in state-level COVID-19 containment
Background
Containment of the COVID-19 pandemic requires evidence-based strategies to reduce transmission. Because COVID-19 can spread via respired droplets, many states have mandated mask use in public settings. Randomized control trials have not clearly demonstrated mask efficacy against respiratory viruses, and observational studies conflict on whether mask use predicts lower infection rates. We hypothesized that statewide mask mandates and mask use are associated with lower COVID-19 case growth rates in the United States.
Methods
We calculated total COVID-19 case growth and mask use for the continental United States with data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. We estimated post-mask mandate case growth in non-mandate states using median issuance dates of neighboring states with mandates.
Results
Case growth was not significantly different between mandate and non-mandate states at low or high transmission rates, and surges were equivocal. Mask use predicted lower case growth at low, but not high transmission rates. Growth rates were comparable between states in the first and last mask use quintiles adjusted for normalized total cases early in the pandemic and unadjusted after peak Fall-Winter infections. Mask use did not predict Summer 2020 case growth for non-Northeast states or Fall-Winter 2020 growth for all continental states.
Conclusions
Mask mandates and use are not associated with slower state-level COVID-19 spread during COVID-19 growth surges. Containment requires future research and implementation of existing efficacious strategies.
The entire pharmaceutical
industry spent just $83 billion on R&D in 2019. That sounds like a lot of
money, but it isn’t when you look at the federal budget, even confining it just
to Medicare. Indeed, there’s a serious problem here in that most of this
spending is on biologics in what is called the “specialty drug” category. These
are large-molecule, hard-to-make things that treat complex, rare or chronic
conditions. But not too rare: Nobody will spend a billion dollars to develop a
drug that only helps a thousand people at best, as the price just to cover the
development expense is over a million dollars a person. The bottom line is that
the system we have today has incentivized the development of large-molecule,
expensive and complex drugs that are ridiculously expensive and aimed at
complex and rare conditions — defined as a small body of people, but not too
small.
…
Many drugs and other
therapies developed over the last decades have, in fact, been frauds to at
least some degree. It is not that they don’t work; most of them do. It is that
they displace other working therapies without demonstrating a cost:benefit
increment and, in many cases, wind up being more harmful that either the
alternative or having no better benefit. But in every case they are
more-expensive. The most-outrageous are “re-label” events such as what happened
with Albuterol inhalers in which the propellant, but not the active ingredient,
was changed and then it was re-patented screwing asthma sufferers out of
billions of dollars. What’s happened with Covid-19 is a wildly-blinding
illustration of the problems. There was an immediate target for one
intervention against Covid-19 – inoculation. But inoculations take ten or more
years to develop, and the reason is simply that many of the longer-term side
effects take that long to find. …
Thrombosis After Covid-19 Vaccination
The recent reports of cerebral
venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) following administration of CoViD-19 viral
vector vaccines (AZ/Oxford and J&J/Janssen) have a peculiar clinical
presentation exhibiting haemorrhage, blood clots and thrombocytopenia.
We previously proposed a
mechanism [1-2] to explain the vaccine-induced prothrombotic immune
thrombocytopenia (VIPIT) and reported that the genetic CoViD-19 vaccines (both
viral and non-viral vector-based) may directly infect platelets or
megakaryocytes triggering mRNA translation and consequent spike protein
synthesis intracellularly. This may potentially result in an autoimmune
response against platelets and megakaryocytes. The consequent thrombocytopaenia
may lead to internal bleeding and spontaneous blood clots. We also proposed
that the increased circulatory levels of acute-phase proteins, as observed in
the pre-clinical vaccine studies in animals, may also be a contributory factor
in putting the haemostatic system at an increased thrombotic potential [3].
The pharmacovigilance data
confirmed the CVST incidences with all genetic vaccines (viral or non-viral
vector), however, the regulatory authorities in their recent investigations
reported that the CVST was unusually accompanied with thrombocytopenia in
subjects injected with CoViD-19 viral vector vaccines (such as AstraZeneca and
J&J/Janssen) than those injected with mRNA vaccines. We, therefore, looked
at the preclinical studies of these vaccines to ascertain their biodistribution
to body tissues (for instance brain) beyond the injection site for a possible
explanation of the rare fatal clots formed in the brain.
Although, the modern viral
vectors that are used in CoViD vaccines are silenced (replication-deficient),
each dose of the vaccine contains a very high viral load (e.g., 50 billion
viral particles per dose in Ox/AZ or J&J/Janssen CoViD-19 vaccines whereas
100 billion viral particles per dose in the Sputnik-V). The viral particles are
unlikely to be confined to the muscles at the injection site; they are free to
distribute across the body and drain through the lymphatic system; their
apparent volume of distribution is likely to be very high. The biodistribution
of ChaAdOx1 containing HBV in BALB/c mice (study 0841MV38.001) indicated the
highest viral levels at the injection site, but low levels of virus were still
detected after 24 hours of injection in all other tissues (including blood,
brain, heart, inguinal lymph node, kidney, liver, lung, gonads, and spleen).
The proportional tissue distribution of viral vectors in the body tissues away
from the injection site was likely to increase with time, however,
biodistribution beyond 24h post-dose was not studied. The biodistribution of
ChAdOx1 encoding nCoV-19 following intramuscular injection in mice (study
514559) was ongoing at the time of its regulatory approval [4]. The study
514559 was aimed to examine the biodistribution of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in bone
marrow, brain, spinal cord, sciatic nerve, and other body tissues. The data
from this study is not yet available in the public domain but this might
provide evidence of vaccine delivery in the brain. We, therefore, agree with
your comments that all vaccine-related data and analyses in possession of the
regulatory authorities must be published in full without any further delays.
…
For COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine
(Pfizer or Moderna), the biodistribution studies in animals were not conducted.
The surrogate studies with luciferase and solid-lipid nanoparticles (Pfizer)
confirm a biodistribution to the liver and other body tissues beyond the administration
site [5]. For Moderna, the biodistribution of mRNA-1647 (encoding CMV genes)
formulated in a similar lipid nanoparticulate delivery system confirms a
biodistribution beyond the injection site, in particular, the distribution to
the lymph nodes, spleen and the eye was noted [6]. However, the detailed
tissue-specific distribution of mRNA vaccines encoding SARS-CoV-2 spike
proteins (Pfizer or Moderna) is not fully known that can offer invaluable
insights into the potential safety of these vaccines in people with
pre-existing conditions or those on certain medications.
The detailed biodistribution
data including pharmacokinetics of various CoViD vaccines were not conducted by
the vaccine manufacturers because the studies demonstrating biodistribution of
antigens were considered ‘not required’ by the regulatory authorities on the
premise that vaccines work by an immunological response than the classic
pharmacological approach. However, such an exemption may barely justify the
conventional vaccines such as those incorporating whole inactivated virus,
split virion, or the sub-unit vaccines, that directly attracts an immune
response post-injection.
On the contrary, modern
genetic vaccines work on the premise of gene delivery, therefore, a detailed
biodistribution and pharmacokinetic evaluation of the formulated product is
invaluable in understanding the potential impact of vaccine encoding gene
transfection to various body tissues beyond the site of injection. Vaccines are
one of the great discoveries in medicine that has improved life expectancy
dramatically. However, if genetic vaccines were to be sustained beyond the
CoViD19 pandemic, a tissue targeted approach may be the way forward to limit
the antigen (the encoding gene) distribution to the intended tissues only to
improve the vaccine safety profile for a global mass public rollout. In
comparison, the conventional vaccine approaches (classic non-genetic
formulations) have a long history of human use across much wider age groups
(infants to elderly) and have an established safety profile despite the current
challenges in antigen propagation and large-scale production in a timely manner
using conventional methods.
The Basic
Foolishness With The Path
Moderna, for example, is not
a new company. They have repeatedly tried to get their mRNA technology to be
taken up preferentially by parts of the body that have some disease or disorder
and thus attempt to treat that. It has never worked, because while some
preference can be expressed for the particular particles injected too much of
it winds up in other places where it’s not wanted and causes problems. Let me
repeat this for emphasis: Nobody has managed to come up with an injected,
complex substance such as “nanoparticles” that are only taken up by the tissues
desired and not by any of the others. This in turn means you must use very
large amounts of the substance in order to get enough of it where you want it
and the unwanted part can and does cause problems in other parts of the body.
This is why Moderna, despite
ten years of trying, has never before had a successful therapy licensed
anywhere. We were told that this sort of thing does not happen with these
shots. But there was zero proof of this; in fact, quite to the contrary, there
was ten years of evidence by this company’s trials itself that said it was the
exact opposite; specificity simply could not be guaranteed and too much would
spill over into other places. We now know it happens with the mRNA shots as
well, both directly and indirectly. The second pillar of the development of
these vaccines was the claim, which the CDC still makes by the way, that the
spike protein alone is harmless. Thus, even if some of the material was taken
up in the wrong place (not the muscle and the lymph system) it was ok because
it wouldn’t hurt you.
Unfortunately we now know
that’s false as the spike alone is not inert and harmless; the first
indications of that in scientific papers came in September of 2020 and
development was not halted until the risk could be characterized. The CDC is
knowingly lying in their public statements; that the spike portion of the virus
is “harmless” is simply not subject to reasonable scientific support at this
point in time. Yes, inducing antibodies in the circulation is what you want to
happen. Causing spike protein components and the intact spike protein to be
found in the circulation, however, you definitely do not want to happen because
we now know, on the body of evidence, that both S1 standing alone and the whole
spike are pathogenic — that is, they cause disorders in the body.
Indeed the evidence is quite
strong that when you get hammered by Covid the reason you get hammered is that
the infection becomes systemic and the part of the virus that causes the
systemic problem is the spike when it gets into the circulation and then is
disseminated through the body’s systems. We now know that the spike protein
alone is capable of producing abnormal clotting absent the rest of the virus —
that is, the entire virus isn’t necessary to do it and it’s not the virus
infecting cells and replicating in them that causes it; it is the spike alone
that induces the body to inappropriately produce blood clots where they do not
belong.
CO-Vid Fare:
World-Renowned Academic Physician Blows Lid Off COVID Vaccines
COVID Quotes of the Week:
“We’ve never seen this level of side effects for any vaccine without the FDA taking action,” stated Dr. Angelina Farella, AFLDS Pediatric Medical Director. “The Rotavirus vaccine was pulled for 15 cases of non-lethal side effects and the Swine Flu vaccine was pulled for 25 deaths. But now, by the CDC’s own data, we are seeing a 12,000 percent increase in deaths with these vaccines and they’re still talking about giving this to our kids.” “Our children should never be the experiment,” she continued. “No additional authorizations or mandates should be granted. We want to preserve the previously established safety standards.” Dr. Farella also cited statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which confirms “children are at statistically zero risk for COVID-19, making expansion of the EUA for younger children medically unnecessary.”
COVID Tweets of the Week:
If mRNA VX experiments in
Kenya made million girls infertile then the real goal of this experiments wasn’t polio
or flu but INFERTILITY.
The real pandemic isn’t the
virus but human fertility and this is
what global vaccination is targeting.
Maybe the most surreal
aspect of the current chapter of
the covid hysteria is watching the corporate press slowly admit what everyone
who listens to independent voices has known for at least a year. I just read an
article saying we don’t have to wipe down groceries anymore.
GeoPolitical Fare:
Since the overpaid corporate
media whores will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must
rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality. After
systematically corrupting the entire media, thereby hijacking the mainstream
narrative, corporate power, led by the US, has practically killed democracy
wherever it managed to survive, including in the US itself, easily one of the
most heavily propagandised nations in history. The consequences of this
disgraceful situation can be seen everywhere, and that's why the fight for the
truth has never been so vital. We stand on the edge of an ecological abyss
precipitated by a cancerous industrial system devoid of any moral restraints.
Furthermore, dripping hypocrisy, the West has unilaterally declared war on
China, Russia and Iran, which threatens a nuclear confrontation, plus other
nations like Venezuela or Cuba that also dare to resist the tyrannical diktats
emanating from Washington. It's clear that war, ceaseless propaganda, and the
immiseration of labor is the chosen solution of the empire managers to the
capitalist system's incurable crisis, a crisis rendered all the more
intractable by the computer revolution which has only deepened capital's
legendary "overproduction" contradiction.
In this ridiculously uneven
struggle between people's voices like Caitlin Johnstone, Jonathan Cook, Jimmy
Dore, Lee Camp, Glenn Greenwald, Abby Martin, Jeff Brown, Godfree Roberts, the
Grayzone team, the folks at Consortium News, and others of equally impressive
merit, and the capitalist system's Orwellian media machine, our role must
always be to help distribute far and wide what these journalists produce—to act
as "influence multipliers". There's power in numbers, power that the
enemy cannot hope to match. This is the primal power that the masses possess
and which the oligarchs fear. Put it to use by becoming an influence
multiplier. Repost this material anywhere you can. Send it to your friends and
kin. Discuss it with your workmates. Liberation from this infernal and
mendacious system is in your hands.
Fiorella Isabel conducts an
in-depth discussion on the plight of Palestinians with Mideast expert, longtime
activist and citizen journalist Eva K. Bartlett. Few people can touch Bartlett
for her comprehensive grasp of Mideast history and politics, and for the sheer
bravery of her political positions. Kudos to Fiorella and the folks at Convo
Couch for this indispensable interview.
Eva Bartlett:
Convo Couch in-depth interview on Palestinian plight
A People’s Guide
to the War Industry -2: Profits & Deception
Recall George Orwell’s 1946 essay “Politics and the English Language”: “In
our time, political speech and writing are largely the defence of the
indefensible… Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism,
question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness.”
In Pictures: The
world’s most neglected crises
The Norwegian Refugee Council unveiled its annual index of the 10 most
neglected displacement crises in the world.
… Countries in Africa dominated this year’s list of the world’s 10 most
neglected displacement crises once again, with DRC topping the list, followed
by Cameroon, Burundi, Venezuela, Honduras, Nigeria, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia,
Central African Republic and Mali.
Big Thoughts:
As far as our love of nature is concerned, this does not express itself
in the desire to exploit or monetise nature, or to use it as an excuse to
destroy human cultures, as the ruling class plans to do with its New Deal for
Nature.
Instead, we insist on the idea of nature as a living organism to which
human beings inherently and unavoidably belong.
Human vanity in imagining that we are somehow not really part of nature,
that we can simply consume it, destroy it and cast it aside in the pursuit of
our own selfish material ends, has to end.
We will have to ditch the mechanistic industrial thinking that has
narrowed and hollowed out our way of seeing the world for centuries now.
Climate Tweets of the Week:
Kris Van
Steenbergen: I am very concerned about the ESAS.
We're underestimating this abrupt warming & the potential abrupt
methane eruptions. I really don't know how to convince the world this is the
top one problem for humanity. Any ideas?
Hudson Bay, Baffin Bay & Greenland Sea are getting warm fast.
Mark Cranfield: It's very interesting, though expected, that the
IPCC has ignored the world's best modellers, who independently arrived at
5.3°C, and have instead decided to slightly increase the 3°C baseline. (Rockstrom
is in the same mould as Michael Mann. They look the part, yet are actually
escapees from lunatic asylums pretending to be climate scientists….. "if
we can completely phase out greenhouse emissions and go to zero carbon in an
absolute sense, then we still have a chance to return within a Holocene-like
state." This is PROPAGANDA! It has no basis whatsoever in science or
real-world climate change! … The climate drivel coming out of @PIK_Climate needs to be robustly challenged. Its only
purpose is to pacify the public and disable the activism that's necessary to
force governments to protect our children from imminent climate impacts.)
They had to do this to achieve a carbon budget, even a fictional one.
Fenrir: Thread on the implications of climate models based on data that is inaccurate. Summary: Every single climate model & policy decision made on the basis of those models has failed to address the severity of climate collapse … Every single decision made by every single political, business, banking & military leader that was based on models using this data has been based on a falsehood. Consequently every single decision has been the wrong decision. I know who is responsible & why. It is why I alerted the authorities. But unfortunately they didn't listen. They certainly didn't act. Playing the blame game during human species collapse is pointless, so instead I will focus solely on the consequences. Firstly as the models are updated with the correct data there is a step change across all areas. Every single underlying assumption is invalid. Second all policies previously put in place have to be re-evaluated. Some will have to be stopped. Some slowed. All policies, both old & new, will require budget & manpower. Manpower who know & understand the speed & severity of climate collapse. Both are unavailable due to the failure to prepare. Most importantly of all civil defense is under-prepared. When society's rescue teams become victims it is inevitable that the weak, the vulnerable, the disabled, the elderly & the infirm will die very quickly & in vast numbers. This will have a massive psychological impact on the survivors. So here are the temps I used vs these incorrect satellite temps as at Dec 2020: IPCC first, then mine. Global: 1.1°C vs 1.35°C Mid-continent 1.5°C vs 1.94°C. Arctic 2.2° vs 2.9°C By mid/late June my temps are 1.5°C, 2.3°C & 3.1°C respectively. If we see our first Blue Ocean Event in September then we are likely to add another 0.5°C by December. In which case we will see global weather chaos & a total collapse of both agricultural production & biodiversity. Foisting fake data on public policy makers has ensured that the mega-wealthy stay that way until total collapse later this year. Human species collapse is unavoidable & because we can't mothball our nuclear reactors in time there will be multiple reactor failures & runaway nuclear meltdowns. The most likely scenario is total annihilation of 99% or more species in under 12 months. When you fail to plan then you plan to fail. Fact.
Caitlin Johnstone Quotes of the Week:
This
is all US troops have been fighting and dying for since the Berlin Wall came down. Not “freedom”, not
“democracy”, and certainly not the American people. Just continual uncontested
domination of this planet at all cost: domination of its resources, its trade
routes, its seas, its air, and its humans, no matter how many lives need to
risked and snuffed out in order to achieve it. … It’s important to spread awareness that this is all
US troops have been dying for, because the fairy tale that they fight for
freedom and for their countrymen is a major propaganda narrative used in
military recruitment. … because instead of congratulating and praising you, your
Uncle Murray would look at you and say, “So you’re gonna be killing kids for
crude oil?” And that’s
exactly how it should be. Continuing to uphold the lie that US troops fight and
die for a good cause is helping to ensure a steady supply of teenagers to feed
into the gears of the imperial war machine. Stop feeding into the lie that the
war machine is worth killing and being killed for. Not out of disrespect for
the dead, but out of reverence for the living.
If Moscow hadn’t intervened in Crimea in 2014 and Syria
in 2015, the US wouldn’t have begun training us all to hate Russia in 2016.
If Russia would’ve just let the US do its thing with the Ukraine coup and
the proxy war to topple Damascus, there would not have been a Russia panic,
because the US war machine would not have felt an argent need to manufacture one.
But then Russia would’ve eventually found itself surrounded by a sea of hostile
empire and forced to relinquish its sovereignty.
Same goes for China asserting its own power regionally and economically.
At some point Russia and China both realized that if they don’t start taking
bold action to prevent the US empire from absorbing the entire world, they’re
going to slowly see their allies and trading partners disappear until they’ve
got no choice but to join. That’s all we’re seeing with all this hysteria.
The only way to do actual
foreign policy journalism in the western world is to make a conscious
decision to tell the truth without being bullied into accepting any unproven US
narrative, no matter how badly they smear you and no matter how hard it is to
find work and make a living.
Other Quotes of the Week:
Kunstler: In today’s day, another
part of the collective personality is suddenly coming apart: science, or The
Science, as the lingo has it these days. The Science is the system of
hypotheses and proofs that normally plays the hero’s role in the task of
determining reality, especially about things that are dangerous to mankind. The
Science is supposedly behind what we know about the Covid-19 pandemic that has
turned America, and much of the whole world, upside down. The Science has
become so untrustworthy that an awful lot of people harbor suspicions that it
has been running a number on them for the past year. In the early going of the
War on Covid-19, The Science told its soldiers, the doctors, to jam ventilators
down patients’ throats. Whoops, that didn’t work so well. The Science told
everybody to fuggeddabowt Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, Zinc, and Vitamin D.
The Science told New York Governor Andrew Cuomo to stash Covid-19 infected
patients in nursing homes. The Science told everybody don’t bother with masks,
then to definitely wear masks, then to maybe not wear masks, then to wear
double masks, then to get vaccinated and wear masks. Golly, what to believe?
Some people began to think that The Science was full of shit — which is, let’s
face it, a dangerous thought, and something which, thank Gawd, Facebook,
Twitter, and Google corrected for us.
Disinformation is rampant,
because monetizing idiots is the last business model. No matter how ludicrous
asset prices become this perpetual growth model will always demand
"more". And therefore the false narratives must become more ludicrous
in lockstep. Fortunately, the collapse in average IQ is front-running these
ever-more asinine narratives we are sold.... In summary, I call today's
"inflation" Ponzi inflation. Which is what happens when a bunch of
assholes bid up their own assets and then begin to fear that central banks will
end their party early because someone gets paid a living wage. There are far
too many assholes running amok and they need to discover the joys of living in
subsistence.
Dave Collum: If you use
"conspiracy theory" or "conspiracy theorist" pejoratively,
ask yourself if it's possible that you are a dumb, profoundly gullible d-bag
for buying the narratives being fed to you. Conspiracy theory; noun.
"betting that known liars are lying." So theorize or just STFU.
OMFG Fare:
Satirical Fare:
Biden To
Continue Unpopular Trump-Obama-Bush-Clinton-Bush-Reagan-Carter-Ford-Nixon-Era
Policy
New Evidence
Shows Fauci May Have Been Created In Chinese Lab
Dr. Fauci Gets
In Heated Debate With Seventeen Previous Versions Of Himself
Pics of the Week:
The Assembly adopted the resolution “Assistance to Palestine refugees” by
a recorded vote of 169 in favour to 2 against (Israel, United States), with 7
abstentions (Cameroon, Canada, Kiribati, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Nauru,
Palau).
It went on to adopt the resolution “Operations of the United Nations
Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East” by a recorded
162 votes in favour to 4 against (Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, United
States), with 9 abstentions (Australia, Cameroon, Central African Republic,
Guatemala, Kiribati, Madagascar, Malawi, Nauru, Solomon Islands).
The Assembly also adopted the draft “Palestine refugees’ properties and
their revenues” by a recorded vote of 160 in favour to 5 against (Canada,
Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, United States), with 12 abstentions.
In another recorded vote, the Assembly narrowly adopted the resolution
“Work of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the
Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied
Territories”, by 76 in favour to 14 against, with 83 abstentions.
The Assembly then adopted the resolution “Israeli settlements in the
Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied
Syrian Golan”, by a recorded vote of 150 in favour to 7 against (Canada,
Israel, Hungary, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Nauru, United States), with 17
abstentions.
Taking up the resolution “Israeli practices affecting the human rights of
the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East
Jerusalem”, the Assembly adopted it by a recorded vote of 147 in favour to 10
against (Australia, Canada, Guatemala, Hungary, Israel, Liberia, Marshall
Islands, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, United States), with 16 abstentions.
