Salvador Dali The Madonna of Port Lligat 1950
Yesterday I posted this on mandates:
On Twitter, this was doubted, and a Verify thingy added.
But Snopes of all places confirms the first suggestion. After someone went through the trouble to write on Twitter that he used to love reading the Automatic Earth, but now that guy does nothing but spread misinformation on Covid. Who said the interwebs can’t be fun?
A New York Post tweet:
“Twitter cheers when an unvaxxed conservative dies and uses that fact against the right. When three Broward County, Fla., teachers died on the same day, their deaths were cited to attack Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) for refusing to mandate masks in schools. Rarely mentioned in news stories is that the school had not yet opened.”
You can read anywhere that vaccine effectiveness is down to 60% or so. The Daily Sceptic goes further.
“Calculating the vaccine effectiveness against Delta infection in the over-50s [..] gives a figure of just 15%..”
Public Health England (PHE) has released a new technical briefing on the variants of concern, number 21, and this allows us to update our estimate of (unadjusted) vaccine effectiveness against the Delta variant using the data it provides on confirmed Delta cases. We subtract the figures in briefing 21 from those in briefing 17 to give the figures for the period June 22nd to August 15th. We also use figures for proportions of the population vaccinated by age derived from the PHE Covid surveillance reports. Starting with the over-50s, for the period June 22nd to August 15th, PHE reports 29,282 Delta infections in the double vaccinated and 3,915 in the unvaccinated. PHE figures show that in this period the proportion of the over-50s double vaccinated was stable at 88% and the proportion unvaccinated was 10%.
Calculating the vaccine effectiveness against Delta infection in the over-50s (1-(29,282/88%)/(3,915/10%)) gives a figure of just 15%, down from 17% using data from the briefing two weeks ago. This is very different to the estimate in the recent Oxford University study using ONS survey data, a study which I criticised for numerous implausible findings. With regard to deaths with Covid (within 28 days of a positive test), PHE reports 602 in the double vaccinated and 280 in the unvaccinated in the over-50s in this period. This works out (1-(602/88%)/(280/10%)) at a vaccine effectiveness against death of 76%, down slightly from 77% using data from the previous briefing. This is a 76% reduction in mortality including any reduced risk of infection, not in addition to it. It’s an encouraging figure, albeit lower than earlier studies have suggested.
For the under-50s, for the period June 22nd to August 15th, PHE reports 36,855 Delta infections in the double vaccinated and 125,394 in the unvaccinated. PHE figures show that on June 20th 61% of under-50s were unvaccinated while 18% were double vaccinated. On August 15th those figures were 52% unvaccinated and 35% double vaccinated. Taking the average of these gives 56% unvaccinated and 26% double vaccinated for the period. Using this to calculate the vaccine effectiveness against Delta infection in the under-50s (1-(36,855/26%)/(125,394/56%)) gives a figure of 37%. This is higher than in the over-50s, but still very low and much lower than earlier studies (including the trial) indicated.
For deaths, PHE reports 27 in the double vaccinated and 66 in the unvaccinated in the under-50s in this period. This works out (1-(27/26%)/(66/56%)) at a vaccine effectiveness against death of just 12%. Why this would be so much lower than in the over-50s is unclear, but it’s worth bearing in mind that these are small numbers of deaths which may make the estimate unreliable. These figures are much lower than those commonly quoted and used in modelling, and if they are closer to the truth then they mean the official, self-congratulatory estimates of “100,000 deaths” and “24.4 million infections” prevented by the vaccines are huge overestimates.
“..they were just waiting to get what they felt was the real final stamp of approval, which we just got today with the Pfizer product.”
No, you did not. Pfizer was not approved. And people should be told that. Enough is enough, alright, of the lies.
After the FDA fully approved the Pfizer COVID vaccine, Anthony Fauci immediately issued a decree via his permanent CNN propaganda platform that it is time for nationwide vaccine mandates. Fauci declared that “There was some poll that showed about 30% of people who are not anti-vax, they were just waiting to get what they felt was the real final stamp of approval, which we just got today with the Pfizer product.” He continued, “And those 30% are saying when that occurs, they will feel very, very comfortable about getting vaccinated. So right away, you’re talking about 30%. I hope they come through with what the survey said.”
Fauci added “They’re going to give a lot of incentive and backing for a lot of institutions and organizations and places of employment to mandate, and that could be colleges, university, the military, organizations that employ a lot of people, some of the big corporations are going to say if you want to work for us in person, you’ve got to be there and get vaccinated.” Fauci then dismissed freedom as an after thought, noting “I know I respect people’s freedom, but when you’re talking about a public health crisis that we’ve been going through for well over a year and a half, the time has come. Enough is enough. We’ve just got to get people vaccinated.” “If we keep lingering without getting those people vaccinated that should be vaccinated, this thing could linger on, leading to the development of another variant which could complicate things.” Fauci further proclaimed.
"It's up to us," Dr. Anthony Fauci says about the effort to control Covid-19.
"If we keep lingering without getting those people vaccinated that should be vaccinated, this thing could linger on, leading to the development of another variant which could complicate things." pic.twitter.com/gcQhQvdlpg
— CNN (@CNN) August 24, 2021
What Fauci doesn’t say is that the FDA approval is not straightforward, at all. The approval is for BioNTech only, but there are no supplies of that. So the Pfizer shot you’ll get has not been approved.
This is part of a document by Jill Malone, Robert Malone’s wife. Do read the whole pdf, it’s excellent.
FDA Pfizer authorization (Comirnaty): Key points to consider and discuss.
These points are an aggregate of many minds, including Dr. Robert Malone. 23 Aug 2021
General talking points
• Why mandates if herd immunity isn’t possible?
• What happens 8 months after boosters?
• What’s the plan for the next variant?
• Why we’re messing with vaccine injury liability if the vaccines are safe and effective?
There are now TWO LEGALLY distinct (Pfizer vs. BionTech), but otherwise identical products, based on two FDA letters, as well as a press release. The analysis of these FDA products below is preliminary and subject to change.
Letter to Pfizer
• DOES NOT GIVE FULL APPROVAL
• Extends EUA to allow supply of current Pfizer under EUA because limited supply of BioNTech version.
• “The products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness. (page 2, Pfizer letter)
o here FDA quietly admits that the licensed Pfizer vaccine and the authorized Pfizer vaccine are identical with regard to safety/efficacy, but they are “legally distinct.” That’s code for one has manufacturer liability, while the other doesn’t. It is also code for “we don’t want to impose a mandate on the EUA product cause it is illegal, but we can probably get away with a mandate on the licensed product.”
o page 12 AA (Conditions with Respect to Use of Licensed Product). This tells you that yes, we licensed the vaccine, but…there is a lot of the old vaccine out there, actually “a significant amount” and this amount will be considered an EUA and will continue to be used.
o Now, why would they do that? Why specify that identical versions of the product will be legally different? Because they need the license to impose the mandates. But they need the EUA to evade liability.
o Along with the license comes liability for the manufacturer. (While all EUA products were given a liability shield.)
o Unfortunately, our federal governments would prefer us to be without recourse if we are injured, rather than have Pfizer defend its product in court. So, the feds want us to THINK the vaccine we are receiving is licensed, which will make people submit because they think it can now be mandated, but instead we are almost certain to receive the EUA vials instead, to save Pfizer’s behind. Yes, a stingy CICP injury program exists, but it has not paid out for a single COVID vaccine injury yet.
• Warning about myocarditis and pericarditis
Letter to BioNTech (COMIRNATY): (signed by Mary Malarkey) – MARKET AUTHORIZES BLA (APPROVAL)
• For “active immunization to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in individuals 16 years of age and older.”
• Analysis of […] adverse events reported […] not be sufficient to assess known serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis and identify an unexpected serious risk of subclinical myocarditis.
• 13 Post marketing studies required
o Pediatric (3 studies) < 6m to <15 y
o Myocarditis and pericarditis (6 studies), with UP TO 5 years follow up
o Pregnancy – teratology (1 study)
o Dose levels, VA, effectiveness in Kaiser system (3 studies)
• The FDA bypassed/disregarded the normal advisory committee and public comment process for this license. See p2 “We did not refer your application to the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee because our review of information submitted in your BLA, including the clinical study design and trial results, did not raise concerns or controversial issues that would have benefited from an advisory committee discussion.”
[..] • FDA has licensed the BioNTech vaccine for 16 and up
• All of the authorized vaccine on shelves and in freezers will remain only authorized, until the new product with Cominaty labelling arrives.
• 3d or booster doses and vaccine for 12-15 year olds remains under EUA
• Why not also approve the Pfizer version? Why leave it under EUA?
• When the press says the “Pfizer vaccine is fully approved.” It is not. The vaccine that is likely to be supplied for some time, WILL BE THE Pfizer – EUA vaccine. So any mandates based on full approval are meaningless.
“Every time that the variant appears in the world, our scientists are getting their hands around it..”
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said on Tuesday that there will likely be a COVID-19 variant that is resistant to the vaccine, but that his company would be able to get a variant-specific shot out in about three months. “Every time that the variant appears in the world, our scientists are getting their hands around it,” Bourla said on Fox News’ America’s Newsroom. “They are researching to see if this variant can escape the protection of our vaccine. We haven’t identified any yet but we believe that it is likely that one day, one of them will emerge.” Pfizer has a process that would take 95 days to develop a variant-specific vaccine from the identification of the variant, Bourla said. In February, Bourla told Fortune that a vaccine-resistant variant was possible.
“Theoretically, it’s a very possible scenario. If you protect a very big part of the population, and if there is a strain that emerges that can use this pool of population to replicate while the current strains cannot, obviously this will overtake the original. So it’s not a certainty, but it is now, I believe, a likely scenario,” he said. The day of Bourla’s interview with Fox News, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released a report that found COVID-19 vaccines dropped from 91% effectiveness before the Delta variant to 66% effectiveness during the peak of the variant. The study included 4,217 participants who were fully vaccinated, with 65% having received the Pfizer vaccine, 33% Moderna, and 2% Johnson&Johnson.
“..For kids under 5, the dose being studied is only 3 mcg. “We can’t have physicians writing for the approved 30 mcg dose to be used in someone under 12..”
Pediatric infectious disease experts are warning that Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, now fully approved and marketed as Comirnaty, should not be used off-label in children under 12. While full approval gives physicians the legal grounds to administer the vaccine off-label, experts noted that the doses being studied in younger children are much lower than those used in adults. There also have been no data published about use of the vaccine in children under 12. David Kimberlin, MD, a pediatric infectious disease expert at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, told MedPage Today that the dose authorized for individuals 12 and up is 30 mcg — but the dose being evaluated in kids ages 5 to 11 “is a third of that,” at 10 mcg.
For kids under 5, the dose being studied is only 3 mcg. “We can’t have physicians writing for the approved 30 mcg dose to be used in someone under 12,” Kimberlin said. “It’s a much higher dose than what’s being studied.” The lower dose “was chosen because of immunogenicity and reactogenicity,” he added. “We are going to have to get the word out that we should not be simply taking the Pfizer vaccine approved for adults and putting it in the arms of those under 12.” FDA Acting Commissioner Janet Woodcock, MD, warned against off-label use of the Pfizer vaccine in younger children during a press briefing Monday, warning that they’re “not just small adults.”
“Contrariwise,’ continued Tweedledee, ‘if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.” So goes the wonderful words of Lewis Carroll from Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland…. Which is the only appropriate frame of reference for what you are about to discover. You see… …The COVID madness has created a most unusual dynamic for the resident’s down-under and the painfully monitored Australian media who have to be careful not to run afoul of the government COVID compliance watchers. Once a nation creates an alternate reality of itself, in this case a totalitarian reality based on government needing to create an irrational illusion of fear that becomes part of the accepted national identity, how can a media outlet call attention to the outcomes without finding themselves in front of the governmental board of inquisition?
Put another way,… if the pod under your bed malfunctioned, but the pods under all the other beds in the city worked, what happens when you awaken and realize you are not one of them, but you must engage in the world of them while looking for others -like yourself- whose pods hopefully malfunctioned? That is the current challenge for media in Australia trying to report on their reality and yet avoid the ire from the national board of COVID compliance who have successfully brainwashed the audience. One Australian media outlet seems to have found a way. In this report from Sky News Australia, they avoid the censors by reporting on how the world is viewing Australian news, by sharing American news clips of Australian news. It is weird and the perfect example of how bizarre the world has become over COVID. WATCH:
Sky News host Rita Panahi says “to us, a bunch of teenagers being handcuffed in the middle of the night and fined $1,000 each for the crime of meeting at a Sydney beach has become normal,” she said. “But the rest of the world looks in abject horror.” Ms Panahi then shares how people around the world are “marveling” at what’s happening in Australia, noting Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson has taken aim at how Australian police are treating protesters. “There is similar commentary and discussions I’ve seen from the UK,” Ms Panahi said. “Is this how we want to be perceived as a country?” As a rather prescient Lewis Carroll continued to share in his novel of Alice, Through The Looking Glass: “If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn’t. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn’t be. And what it wouldn’t be, it would. You see?”
So here we are. Cheers !
Wonder how many questions are asked on the TV news down there.
New Zealand’s Covid response minister says the country will not “throw in the towel” with its elimination strategy, as cases continue to rise. New Zealand announced 63 new cases of Covid-19 on Wednesday, bringing the total to 210 cases. It is the largest single-day jump since the outbreak began last week, and 12 people are hospitalised with the virus. Some commentators and media overseas have questioned whether the country should continue its elimination strategy, but Covid-19 response minister Chris Hipkins said the country would be staying its course. “To New Zealanders at home who are saying, ‘is this still the right strategy’, it’s too soon to throw in the towel,” he said. “We’ve come this far, it would be an absolute waste for us to give up on this now. We still want to drive this particular outbreak of Covid-19 out of our community and get back to a sense of normality.”
“Of course we do want to get to the point where lockdowns aren’t the answer to potential outbreaks within the community, but we’re not there yet, and we’re certainly not willing to give up before we get to that point,” Hipkins said. His comments echoed those of the prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, on Monday: “For now, everyone is in agreement: elimination is the strategy. There is no discussion or debate amongst any of us about that, because that is the safest option for us while we vaccinate our people,” she said. Support for the government’s approach to Covid remains sky high in New Zealand. According to polling conducted by The Spinoff and released on Wednesday, just 10% of New Zealanders did not think elimination was the right strategy. Sixty-nine percent still backed the approach, and 21% said they were unsure. An additional poll found 84% of New Zealanders supported the decision to move into lockdown last week.
Little dictators. It’s a small step from Hippocrates to hypocrisy.
The University of Washington Medical Center has reportedly told two patients awaiting organ transplants that they would be placed further down their respective lines over their refusal to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Sam Allen, 64, told Seattle radio station KTTH that he was informed in June he was being removed from the transplant waitlist over his refusal to be vaccinated. Allen said he has been on the list for more than two years. According to KTTH, Allen said his heart was damaged during a previous surgery and three leaky heart valves lessened the amount of blood reaching his lungs, making it hard to breathe. The problem first arose over Allen’s refusal to wear a face mask during hospital visits, saying it made his breathing problems even worse.
“The cardiologist called me and we had a discussion and he informed me that, ‘well, you’re going to have to get a vaccination to get a transplant,’ and I said that’s news to me,” Allen told KTTH. A letter Allen received from the hospital shortly after states “Your name has been removed from the waitlist at the University of Washington Medical Center. This was done in follow-up to your recent conversation with providers regarding the hear transplant selection committee’s concerns about compliance with COVID-19 related policies and recommendations.” The letter added that Allen would be reconsidered for reinstatement “should the compliance concerns resolve in the future.”
A second patient, Derek Kovic, told KTTH he is awaiting a third liver transplant due to bile duct failure and was also told by the hospital he would have to receive the vaccine to remain high on the active list. Both Kovic and Allen told news outlets that they are hesitant to get vaccinated because of physical side effects. Kovic told Fox News because of his liver problems that he already suffers from high fevers and other problems people have reported after receiving the vaccine. The University of Washington Medical Center responded to their stories, saying immunity suppression becomes an issue shortly after a transplant.
The long background story of ivermectin, before Covid.
From Nature, The Journal of Antibiotics, February 2017.
Over the past decade, the global scientific community have begun to recognize the unmatched value of an extraordinary drug, ivermectin, that originates from a single microbe unearthed from soil in Japan. Work on ivermectin has seen its discoverer, Satoshi Omura , of Tokyo’s prestigious Kitasato Institute, receive the 2014 Gairdner Global Health Award and the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, which he shared with a collaborating partner in the discovery and development of the drug, William Campbell of Merck & Co. Incorporated. Today, ivermectin is continuing to surprise and excite scientists, offering more and more promise to help improve global public health by treating a diverse range of diseases, with its unexpected potential as an antibacterial, antiviral and anti-cancer agent being particularly extraordinary.
The unique and extraordinary microorganism that produces the avermectins (from which ivermectin is derived) was discovered by Omura in 1973. It was sent to Merck laboratories to be run through a specialized screen for anthelmintics in 1974 and the avermectins were found and named in 1975. The safer and more effective derivative, ivermectin, was subsequently commercialized, entering the veterinary, agricultural and aquaculture markets in 1981. The drug’s potential in human health was confirmed a few years later and it was registered in 1987 and immediately provided free of charge (branded as Mectizan)—‘as much as needed for as long as needed’—with the goal of helping to control Onchocerciasis (also known as River Blindness) among poverty-stricken populations throughout the tropics. Uses of donated ivermectin to tackle other so-called ‘neglected tropical diseases’ soon followed, while commercially available products were introduced for the treatment of other human diseases.
[..] Today, ivermectin remains a relatively unknown drug, although few, if any, other drugs can rival ivermectin for its beneficial impact on human health and welfare. Ivermectin is a broad-spectrum anti-parasitic agent, primarily deployed to combat parasitic worms in veterinary and human medicine. This unprecedented compound has mainly been used in humans as an oral medication for treating filarial diseases but is also effective against other worm-related infections and diseases, plus several parasite-induced epidermal parasitic skin diseases, as well as insect infestations. It is approved for human use in several countries, ostensibly to treat Onchocerciasis, lymphatic filariasis (also known as Elephantiasis), strongyloidiasis and/or scabies and, very recently, to combat head lice. However, health workers are increasingly utilizing it in an unsanctioned manner to treat a diverse range of other diseases
And ivermectin today:
The exact same argument that upheld DACA against Trump’s policies. Ironic.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the Biden administration likely violated federal law in trying to end a Trump-era program that forces people to wait in Mexico while seeking asylum in the U.S. With three liberal justices in dissent, the high court refused to block a lower court ruling ordering the administration to reinstate the program informally known as Remain in Mexico. It’s not clear how many people will be affected and how quickly. Under the lower court ruling, the administration must make a “good faith effort” to restart the program. There also is nothing preventing the administration from trying again to end the program, formally called Migrant Protection Protocols.
A federal judge in Texas had previously ordered that the program be reinstated last week. Both he and the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused the administration’s request to put the ruling on hold. Justice Samuel Alito ordered a brief delay to allow the full court time to consider the administration’s appeal to keep the ruling on hold while the case continues to make its way through the courts. The 5th Circuit ordered expedited consideration of the administration’s appeal. The court offered little explanation for its action, although it cited its opinion from last year rejecting the Trump administration’s effort to end another immigration program, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.
In that case, the court held that the decision to end DACA was “arbitrary and capricious,” in violation of federal law. The administration has “failed to show a likelihood of success on the claim that the memorandum rescinding the Migrant Protection Protocols was not arbitrary and capricious,” the court wrote Tuesday in an unsigned order. The three dissenting justices, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, did not write an opinion expressing their views of the case. In a statement, the Department of Homeland Security said it regrets that the high court declined to issue a stay. The department said it would continue to challenge the district court’s order.
The Dems have sleepless nights over Kamala stepping up.
President Biden is facing severe backlash due to the failed exit from Afghanistan. According to USA Today, Biden’s approval rating has sunk to 41 percent. Up until last week, most polls showed the President sitting above 50 percent. Biden has also taken a hit beyond overall approval ratings. While he still has 87 percent of Democrats supporting him, only 32 percent of Independents say he is doing a good job. This poll was taken Thursday through Monday, as the nation and the world witnessed the shocking images of the Taliban taking Kabul, Afghanistan. Only 26 percent of Americans approve of Biden’s handling of Afghanistan and his numbers on domestic issues are not much better, with 39 percent saying he’s handling the economy well.
“Today, President Biden’s overall approval has taken a turn for the worse due to his awful job performance rating on Afghanistan,” said David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk Political Research Center. “His approval on immigration and the economy are also upside down. The only issue keeping him remotely in the game is his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, where he is barely at 50%.” Biden’s initial call to exit Afghanistan was approved by 53 percent of Americans, but a whopping 62 percent disapproved of how his administration handled the departure. “He basically handed the Taliban all these weapons, and he’s inspired a resurgent ISIS now,” said fifty-one-year-old Aubrey Schlumbrecht of Lakewood, Colorado. The home healthcare nurse and political independent was among those polled and said, “He is not even taking any responsibility. He says he owns it, but he’s blaming other people and he’s blaming the Afghan people themselves.”
No workers. But please don’t say “food inflation”. It is meaningless because from there it’s just one small step to “cookie inflation”.
One of the defining features of the early phases of the covid pandemic, when public fear was rampant and when few wanted to take chances that supply chains would remain viable, is that for a brief period US supermarkets resembled those of the USSR circa the late 1980s: many items were in short supply, and some – notably toilet paper, clorox, and perishables such as milk – were out of stock for weeks. Fast forward to today when fears about the Delta strain are being fanned by the liberal media, the US may be facing a similar shortage of key products… only this time for a very different reason: not a surge in demand, but rather a drop in supply. According to Bloomberg, some of the largest U.S. food distributors are “reporting difficulties in fulfilling orders as a lack of workers weighs on the supply chain.”
Take distribution giant Sysco, North America’s largest wholesale food distributor, which is turning away customers in some areas where demand is exceeding capacity. Worse, food inflation is about to soar: the company said prices for key goods such as chicken, pork and paper products for takeout packaging are climbing amid tight supplies. In particular, production has slowed for high-demand, labor-intensive cuts like bacon, ribs, wings and tenders, Sysco said. And if intermediate and final wholesale prices are “rising”, just wait until they emerge on the consumer side. The culprit for the coming price shock? Biden’s catastrophic stimmies and universal basic income which has unleashed havoc on the US job market and led to historic labor shortages.
“There are certain areas across the country that are more challenged by the labor shortage and our volume of orders is regularly exceeding our capacity,” Sysco Chief Executive Officer Kevin Hourican said in a letter to clients earlier this month. “This has, unfortunately, led to service disruptions for some of our customers.” Hourican’s troubling observations were confirmed by an analysis from DecaData, which tracks retailer transactions with shoppers and manufacturers; it showed that retailers are bumping up against manufacturer capacity as they stockpile ahead of the holiday season. In July, the incidence of suppliers limiting or putting a cap on orders from customers was more than double what it was in January, its data show.
We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, you are now not just a reader, but an integral part of the process that builds this site. Thank you for your support.
Support the Automatic Earth in virustime. Click at the top of the sidebars to donate with Paypal and Patreon.