Skip to main content

Coronamonomania Lives Forever, Part 114

By March 12, 2022Commentary

We are not hearing a word from DOH or the PW these days about the epidemic.  I suspect that is at least partly due to shame and mortification over the now-apparent lies they fed the population and the terror campaign they ran, which resulted and will result in substantial degradation of quality of health and in more deaths than the virus caused.  I hope we won’t forget this, but I am not counting on it.  Meanwhile, a few research summaries.

There has be a prize out there for worst masking study, especially in regard to schools.  And this one, published by the pediatricians society, would be a clear winner, although up against tough competition.  This society, the American Academy of Pediatrics, which is supposed to be concerned with the overall health and welfare of children, has distinguished itself by endorsing measures like school closures, masking and child vaccinations, which are abusive and harmful.  This study has already been amply derided, but it is beyond a disgrace to publish it.  The findings were so bad that the authors literally had to make up an outcome to try to even pretend that masking showed a benefit.  In fact, the raw data showed more infections in schools with mandated masks.  I will emphasize again, these supposed researchers literally made something up so they could claim masks work.  And people wonder why “science” and scientists have become so distrusted as a result of the epidemic.  (AAP Study)

Attribution of deaths to CV-19 has been atrociously excessive.  So studies trying to ascertain the effect on overall mortality are interesting.  Absolute numbers of deaths can be a little informative, but cause and even place of death are needed to really understand trends.  And large chart review studies are required to weed out deaths in which the presence of a CV-19 positive test was meaningless.  This paper in Lancet is the latest to tackle this excess mortality analysis.  The authors state their findings in a very misleading way, claiming that excess mortality during the epidemic was three times the reported deaths from CV-19.  But they then acknowledge that many of these excess deaths may have had nothing to do with CV-19 and may instead have resulted from epidemic suppression measures.  And stringency of restrictions seems to have no relationship with level of CV-19 deaths.  (Lancet Article)

And the validity of the hypothesis that the restrictions and accompanying terror campaign resulted in a lot of deaths is demonstrated by this study, which looked at trends in hospitalizations in the Medicare population during the epidemic.  It found that hospitalizations for serious conditions declined during the epidemic, while mortality rates increased, suggesting that people avoided coming to the hospital until it was too late, and died as a result.  Good work, public health experts and politicians.  And who was affected worst–that’s right, minorities and low-income people.   (JAMA Study)

At least in the period shortly after a booster shot, this study claims they were effective against infection.  I am pretty sure the “boost” didn’t last any longer than the original shots.  The booster also appeared to increase effectiveness against serious illness.  (NEJM Article)

And there has been speculation that people may actually be more vulnerable to infection for a short time following  vaccination.  I am not sure the data supports that, but this research suggests a possible explanation.  It found that in the period immediately after booster vaccination, antibody levels rose, then dropped rapidly.  It may be that the oscillating antibody levels create an opportunity for infection.  (Medrxiv Study)

Here is a study in Minnesota from the University of Minnesota, which attempts to constantly hit new lows of whacko wokeness.  The study of course has an “equity” lens.  It finds that even though middle-aged white people have lower vaccination rates than do people of other races (a very dubiously accurate finding), those unvaxed white persons have lower mortality rates than do those of other races, which the authors of course imply is due to racism.  Now I can tell you exactly why some minorities have worse outcomes from many diseases–it is because the general health of minorities is often worse, and although it may sound politically incorrect, the real explanation for that is poor health behaviors.  And if you don’t address those poor health behaviors, all the nonsense talk about equity won’t change anything.  (Medrxiv Paper)

Two years in and we still have little understanding of how, when and why CV-19 spreads.  These authors did some modeling work based on hamster research and claim that infectiousness is highest at the start of an infection and diminishes late in the infection, even if high viral loads are still present.  As you would expect, in general higher viral loads are associated with more shedding and infectiousness.   (Medrxiv Paper)

Researchers continue to desperately claim CV-19 has high risk for children.  This study compared flu and CV-19 hospitalization rates among children.  There was no difference in young children, but adolescents supposedly had higher rates of CV-19 hospitalizations.  No adjustment for how different testing is for CV-19 and no adjustment for actual hospitalizations for actual treatment of CV-19, even though the authors’ own data showed several multiples of these incidental hospitalizations for CV-19 versus flu, so I just consider this to be another fraudulent piece of garbage done for the sole purpose of justifying vaxing children and other nonsense measures.  (Medrxiv Paper)

This study comes to a conclusion that would seem obvious to anyone with a basic knowledge of vaccines and immunology.  Our current vaccines focus exclusively on spike protein and receptor binding areas.  Adaptive immunity derived from infection is broader and includes antibody and T cell responses to multiple parts of the virus.  This study found that innoculation for nucleo-capsid antibodies in an animal model resulted in a stronger response to attempted infection.  I have no clue why the vaccine designers did not mimic normal adaptive immunity, but it was stupid not to.  (Medrxiv Paper)

While there was a lot of fear-mongering about CV-19 transmission on surfaces and I still see people wiping stuff down all the time, cases of surface transmission have basically never been proven.  But the virus does have an ability to persist in viable form on surfaces, like, for example, mask surfaces.  This study found that for whatever reason, Omicron was more stable on surfaces than prior variants.  I have suspected that some of the mutations likely improved envelope stablility.  (Medrxiv Paper)


Leave a comment