COVID-19 Gibberish Mode
The Information Wars Part XVII
At some point, you have to wonder whether or not authorities want you to know how much of the pandemic is total nonsense. I'm only half kidding. But there are only two possibilities:
Authorities want you to know that much or most of the plandemonium is nonsense.
Authorities don't want for you to know, but are testing to find the limits to which they can push total absurdities at the broader population while still getting away with it. There are variations of this possibility, and we've seen many variants already.
We're not just at the "making shit up" stage of the pandemic, but at the "making goofy and contradictory shit up" phase in which massive internal contradictions are abundant, but the authorities know how to control the messaging by aiming it exactly where it needs to be to influence behavior.
Squaring the Circle, Part 1: Medicine Helped Build Herd Immunity, Cases Still High
From Medical Express this week:
The findings reflect the changing nature of the pandemic, in which the vast majority of people already have some protection against the virus due to vaccination or prior infection. For younger adults, in particular, that greatly reduces their risks of severe COVID-19 complications. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently estimated that 95% of Americans 16 and older have acquired some level of immunity against the virus.
Remember when R = 3.8 was cause for panic? For a virus with (initially) R_0 = 20, 95% immunity would be the point of endemicity—no more pandemic. That wouldn't be good for cable news ratings or the pharmafia.
Meanwhile, the U.S. case rates for COVID-19 higher than at any time during the first 19 months of the pandemic with the exception of the Winter of 2020-2021.
And contrary to some other moments during the pandemic, we can't blame this result on more testing since tests for SARS-CoV-2 are at their low point since the early months of 2020.
Previously, the kinds of case rates we are seeing were the cause of panic and distress by both public health officials and the Western media, which is to say that it seems likely somebody made the decision to tone down the messaging.
Squaring the Circle, Part 2: Paxlovid is Great, But With High Immunity We Still Need to Panic and Cancel School
I chose not to dig deep on Paxlovid research because I wanted to maintain good enough focus on a few topics to analyze them faithfully. However, my notes do add up over time, and I'm calling bullpfizer on Paxlovid. I usually wait until I can explain the magic trick, but this time I just want to note how absurdly incongruous the facts are.
On November 5, 2021, Pfizer's press release on their Paxlovid trial was not simply optimistic, but flamingly so. Anyone with sense took it with a grain of salt, or simply rolled their eyes.
10 deaths (placebo) vs. 0 deaths (paxlovid)
41 hospitalizations (placebo) vs. 6 (paxolovid)
If the vaccines are 95% effective and this drug is 89% effective, we would not still be seeing COVID-19 deaths pile up in the U.S. at rates similar to the whole pandemic.
In order to square this circle, we're now being fed the "Paxlovid rebound" story, with the Commander in Chief, the First Lady, and Dr. Anthony Fauci playing central roles in that absurd fairy tale.
At least Paxlovid was tested during the first five days of symptoms, while Western researchers never seemed much interested in running well-powered trials for the early treatment of COVID-19 using inexpensive off-patent medications.
But the story gets even more absurd as "long COVID", the bizarre myth that COVID-19 is novel as a viral condition in resulting in longer term sequelae, gets replaced with "Paxlovid rebound", which seems like something of a cover story for the fact that initial trial results were probably bullpfizer.
But the story really gets worse with the kids.
So, we're fed the story that Paxlovid doesn't work with young adults or kids. Or anyone at all under the age of 65.
Meanwhile, if you search for news about how children are faring recently around the world, it's going to be covered up by as many plausible stories as possible that children are not the victims of iatrogenocide.
Is there some grand purpose to all this, like keeping parents struggling through options (aside from committing to their children to medical experiments) or cutting education expenditures (while printing trillions for all other purposes)? Or just bringing down Western governments altogether? When the world comes to resemble a Monty Python sketch, we're in new territory. It's sometimes hard to laugh any longer.
"I can't keep you all here any longer. God has blessed us so much that I can't afford to feed you anymore…my mind's made up. I've given this long and careful thought, and it has to be medical experiments for the lot of you."
If only fertility rates were so high in what's left of the "first world".
Months ago Dr. Soumya Swaminathan at the World Health Organization (WHO) stated clearly that there was "no evidence at all that healthy children need boosters." The CDC stated late last year that 94 children ages 5 to 11 years old had died of/with COVID (out of roughly 30 million), which was 0.00012% of the national COVID-19 death toll, though to be clear, there is scant to no evidence that healthy children have ever died of COVID-19, including in this German study of children 5 to 17 (Hufnagel et al, 2021). And yet, despite all of this, D.C. schools are kicking out unvaccinated children—not even allowing them to take online courses.
Because a mind is a terrible thing to waste.