I hate it when I'm right.

This is about it when it comes to the jabs for me, since we're now at the point that you can pull a Hillary Clinton: "At this point, what difference does it make?"

For those who took it out of stupidity, coercion, to belong or whatever: Too bad, so sad.

To those who used their heads and deduced that between the lack of long-term longitudinal data (zero) and known, documented risks along with deliberate sandbagging by the our government and media of all sorts in reporting the bad effects that rapidly showed up, including deaths, they've made up their minds.  All we have left there is whether, if attempted to be coerced instead of cajoled, they will consider that attempted murder and destroy not only the person coercing them but everything that individual loves as well, living or not.

You can only die once and only be damned once too.  Once either happens its a very liberating thing; you now are simply evaluating whether you're going to let some SOB get away with it or whether he or she is going to Hell in front of you, even if only by a few minutes.

I am not linking source papers in this treatise, so don't ask -- go do the looking yourself this time.  I've done it for a year and a half and, frankly, you still let these ghouls mask your kids, demand you stay home and then con you into taking jabs they lied about, let them lie about "no effective treatments" and deliberately not make reasonable inquiry as regard adverse effects of the jabs despite there being plenty of scientific evidence published before they were rolled out.  I'm laying out facts here; the science is, at this point, old enough and visible enough that if you gave a crap there would have been a revolt months ago.

A real one, not some LARPers crap.  If 500,000 corpses aren't enough what is?

If you remember very early on we knew that ventilators didn't work.  In fact we knew before Trump's HHS issued their order that paid (and still pays; the Biden administration just extended the "emergency" authorizing it) hospitals nearly $40,000 to shove a tube down your throat.  Trump then upped the ante by ordering tens of thousands of them under the DPA, despite the data being on the table that they were worthless.  That was a deliberate act that was all about the money -- damn those who were killed.  This nation sat back and allowed that to happen, and still is allowing it 18 months later.

Not long after, when the first few dead were autopsied, we found out why: Covid-19, when it goes badly, is not just a viral, inflammatory disease.  It causes thrombosis (clotting) in various organs, most-particularly the lungs.  That's what kills you most of the time.

The "spike unit" that the jabs are all constructed around, it has developed, something known to the NIH and the pharmaceutical companies before Covid-19 was claimed to exist in January of 2020.  There is a transfer agreement from the NIH to a university dated prior to that time, and some evidence that the exact spike configuration found in Covid-19 was being discussed in scientific papers long before that.  How can you have a scientific discussion, write papers on and transfer technology related to something that isn't known to exist yet?  Fauci was grilled on this the other day by Congress, asked directly if the spike in Covid-19 was identical to that in said paper, and refused to answer with a yes or no.  He knows damn well what the answer is and if he lied that would be proved perjury and a criminal offense.  If he tells the truth then the etiology of Covid-19 is conclusively known to wildly pre-date the so-called "discovery" and now we must start asking all sorts of other questions; said questions degenerate very rapidly into criminal culpability on the part of many including a whole bunch of people right here in the US.  Fauci looked very nervous in that hearing -- exactly like a man who has been caught bullshitting since the start, there's a half-million bodies piled up as a result and his neck is itching.

When the jab trials started, in short, we knew that severe disease from Covid-19 was primarily a thrombotic event.  We also knew that roughly 80% of the population had decent if not excellent resistance and would get nothing more than a mild or moderate cold or flu from it.  That proof goes all the way back to Diamond Princess.  Hell, a couple reasonably well-known to me got hit by the 'Ro in the early months, both elderly and quite morbid.  He was dead in five days while she never even sneezed, a flat impossibility for two people who are married and sleeping with each other if everyone is susceptible as we were told.  We investigated and learned why that has repeatedly happened; the science was published in June, peer-reviewed by September and published in Nature -- long before the first jab went into the first arm.  These are facts.

We also knew, from decades of trying, that coronavirus vaccines had always failed in the past.

We deliberately did not look at the thrombotic profile of the trial participants in the vaccines; specifically, we did not pull d-Dimer and troponin tests (both cheap) on the participants before the jab, and then sequentially on intervals (e.g. 3 days, 1 week, 2 weeks) to detect whether we were in fact inducing damage similar to the disease.  The drugmakers did not look because quite-obviously they did not want to know; if that showed up in the trials in any sort of statistically relevant percentage of the enrollees it would have instantly shut down the trials and freaked out the thousands in said trials who put themselves at risk.  I remind you that in September of 2020 the first scientific paper was published indicating that the "Spike" was quite possibly the direct cause of the serious damage and virtually all Covid-19 deaths.  Several papers followed starting in December of 2020, prior to mass-distribution of the jabs, confirming that the spike was directly capable of causing pathology -- that is, severe damage -- without the rest of the virus being present at all.

Failing to halt the roll-out to prove that the vaccines, which all cause production of said spike in your body, would not cause the same effects was criminally insane and grossly negligent given the science at the time.  This was not an "accident" since the studies were published and known -- it was deliberate blindness undertaken in the interest of speed and money before human safety and indeed human life.

We also were told that the jabs produced a "robust" antibody response, which, on the data, is true.  What either wasn't looked at, or was known and intentionally not discussed is that the sequencing of IgA/IgM/IgG in a vaccinated person was wrong for someone who had no immune system knowledge prior to vaccination.  This is now out in the public, at least on a preliminary basis, and it shows that the jab adverse effects may in fact be a form of ADE!  If so that's extremely bad.  The original studies either developed this information and it was hidden or they deliberately did not look; what we do know is that it was not run down.

Now there's potentially worse evidence showing up that the jabs may be destroying existing coronavirus T-cell recognition.  That, if confirmed, is profound because natural infection preferentially builds "N" protein T-cell reactivity.  The spike on a coronavirus evades immune recognition; that's how you get infected in the first place.  That more-severe infections had higher IgG antibody titers to the spike would appear counter-intuitive (after all, you'd think the more-severe the infection the less your immune system was able to respond) but it makes sense once you realize what's going on with a severe infection; you are in fact having a thrombotic problem caused by the spike, and thus you get the higher titer.

That should have raised all sorts of eyebrows and alarms in that it strongly implies that all the vaccine formulations were at best backward and at worst directly harmful but, again, it didn't.

So what we have at this point appears to be the following:

• The jabs are quite worthless in preventing either infection or transmission.  We knew that after Diamond Princess 80% of the population, approximately, was resistant before Covid showed up and either couldn't get infected at all or if they did had almost no ill effects.  There were multiple instances of couples where one person got a symptomatic case and the other did not get infected at all despite being quarantined together in a 10x10 room for a month.  That means if you have 10% of a vaccinated population that gets symptomatically infected when the base risk of symptomatic infection is 20% at best the jabs are 50% effective in preventing infection and transmission, and perhaps less than that.  So much for the "95%+" claims; that was always bullshit and now we have widely-diverse proof from all over the world that the jabs are non-sterilizing and thus effectively worthless in preventing infection and transmission of Covid.  The entire premise of "protecting others" by getting vaccinated against Covid-19 is now scientifically known to be complete and utter bullshit.
  
  
• There is now emerging evidence of another mutation against which the jabs are almost entirely worthless.  Expect the fear porn to get cranked on that soon even though for infected and recovered persons who are not vaccinated they remain almost entirely immune to that mutation just like all the others.  Even worse is that the data includes some people who recovered and then were stupid enough to take the jab anyway and it increased their risk of symptomatic disease over the other cohort which recovered and did not get vaccinated.  In other words they didn't get more protection by taking the shot after recovery they destroyed a large part of their existing protection, specifically, existing nucleocapsid recognition.  I have warned people repeatedly of this exact risk; there was never any scientific evidence that the jabs were useful if you had previously been infected and now we factually know they're harmful.  This is a very strong marker of what is called "OAS" ("Original Antigenic Sin") or ADE as described scientifically above as to mechanism.  It looks to be very real and accelerating as mutation continues.  The "vaccinated" symptomatic case line should be expected to cross over the "unvaccinated" line soon as mutation never stops and if it does all Hell will break loose as the shots will actually make symptomatic infection and thus transmission more likely compared against unvaccinated persons.
  
  
• The jabs may continue to provide some protection against severe and fatal disease from Covid-19 specifically but the duration of that protection is unknown.  If you're at severe risk then on this basis they may be a good bargain.  I say may rather than "is" for the below reasons which, if they turn out to be true in your case means on balance you got fucked more than protected, and now they're a bad deal for basically everyone.  We do not yet know the answers to the other questions but they are on the table and were deliberately not investigated before we jabbed 150 million Americans.  Some if not all of this was discoverable if anyone cared to look during the summer and fall 2020 trials, but nobody looked on purpose.
  
  
• There is evidence that roughly half of all persons jabbed may show evidence of clotting disorders caused by the jabs.  Whether this is temporary or does permanent damage is not known.  It explains, however, the heart attacks, cardiomylitis, strokes and cognitive changes (e.g. microclotting in the brain) shortly after being jabbed.  I remind you that the "associated but not proved cause" death rate from these jabs is running roughly four hundred times on a per-million-persons jabbed that of the flu shot -- and climbing.  The bad news is that endothelial damage of this sort may well be permanent.  It also raises the very real risk of PAH if some of that damage is in the lungs; there is no non-invasive way to know and by the time you become symptomatic for that your heart has been critically damaged.  To be fair some small percentage of people naturally infected get the same sort of damage but to risk same from infection which is not certain is different than taking that risk on a certain basis from being jabbed.  This could have been quantified before the EUAs were granted as a trivial test would have disclosed the problem in the Phase 1 and 2 trials and was not done or explored.  Given that by summer of 2020 we knew how Covid killed people that failure is only reasonably characterized as intentional.
  
  
• There is now evidence that the jabs destroy some part of your existing immune system T-cell recognition, replacing it with "spike" recognition.  The scope and impact of that is not yet known but the potential impact is horrifying.  The induced spike recognition is Covid-19 specific and, we now know, mutationally specific at least in part.  What is destroyed is not specific to either Covid or mutation and therefore what you destroyed was almost-certainly worth more than what you gained.  This looks very much like "OAS" and the bad news is that it may well impact across other coronaviruses such as OC43.  If that proves up then the increase in susceptibility to severe disease on balance and in whole from circulating viruses has been increased rather than decreased by getting jabbed.

All of this has come to light in about a year from the first trials of these vaccines.

I remind you that it usually takes 10 years or so to qualify a vaccine.  These sort of risks are why it takes 10 years and, let us not forget, coronavirus vaccines have been tried in the past and have universally failed, either due to adverse effects (including OAS and ADE) or they simply proved to be worthless over time with the virus evading them.  That was the history against which these jabs were developed and that we had the arrogance to believe we had magically overcome that which nature had previously thwarted without multi-year evidence may well wind up proving to be one of the most stupid undertakings ever in medicine and public health.

Yet even with this data now on the table the manufacturers are demanding "expedited" full approval reviews!

Oh, and don't start with "well, its knocking down the incidence of infections."  Is it really?

How is it that India has seen a 90% collapse in case rates with only 6% of their population vaccinated?

It clearly wasn't the vaccine over there, was it?  Gee, maybe its Farr's Law that caused that.  Just like the infection rate here in the US peaked and was falling before we had any meaningful vaccinated immunity.  That which happens before you do something cannot have been caused by the something.

This also bears on the current case rate.  Look at last summer; seasonality is real.

We'll see how bad #JabbersRemorse gets in the coming months, and whether the 150 million Americans who took the jab thus far decide they made a good decision or a critically bad one that winds up blowing up in their face -- and if the latter, what those who get screwed, which is about half the adult population at this point, decide to do about it when it comes to those who deliberately failed to investigate what we knew were serious risks that needed to be excluded.

Those who are true believers cannot be reached at this point since they've already committed to their course of action.  As a result I see no further point in writing on this in the general sense, and thus probably won't.

Right up until I wave the "Told You So" flag sometime around late fall, assuming the pattern holds.

.... every business model you see in the financial and personal world was just transplanted into health care?

Let me explain.

How many companies have gone from "you buy it, you own it" to you pay for it as a service over the last 10 or 20 years?

Quicken.

Adobe.

Music (where'd the CDs go?) and video (DVDs? Ah, Netflix!)

Accounting and sales management for business (e.g. Salesforce)

How many more would like to go there?

Transportation perhaps?  Nobody owns a car, you "hail" one?  Or more to the point, over the last 10 or so years it has become nearly impossible to do something basic like get a new key for your vehicle to replace a lost one without paying a dealer $300 for something that costs $20.  Why? Because the manufacturer has explicitly made it impossible to obtain the security key required to pair the new key; you bought the car but they won't give you the security code!  Or you have a module fail that can't be replaced without the dealer's tool to code it to your vehicle's VIN and the car won't run without that module working.  You are effectively forced to pay continuing rent on something you allegedly "own."

Housing?  Bloomberg recently ran an article on exactly that, which I reported on (and why it was bad for a huge percentage of the population.)

Now granted, there are times that paying what amounts to a rental fee is a net positive.  If you fly into some city and need a car, it would be stupid to buy one.  You only need it for a week.  Odds are you may never need it there again.  In addition there is no cost to you beyond the immediate loss of use when you terminate the agreement.

Now look at Quicken.

Your data is in their format.  Stop paying, what happens?

Adobe?

Your data is in their format.  Stop paying, what happens?

See the problem?

Same problem exists when you build for a "cloud" platform.  It's their data format and their application APIs, which are theirs.

Stop paying, what happens?

Ok, now think about this.

Pfizer is already saying they think you need a booster Covid shot.

Moderna has in the pipe a whole plethora of..... annual mRNA shots.

What happens if you stop paying?

Nobody knows in this case.

We don't know because we didn't test, we didn't force them to test and we didn't publish the data because we don't have it.  How do we know they don't have it?  How do we know that once you took the first one of these jabs you didn't buy into a perpetual "vaccines as a service" product and if you stop you will run a greatly-accelerated risk of death?

How?

OAS and ADE, to name two reasons to be concerned and one of the reasons we do not license vaccines for 5 to 10 years or more as that has to be excluded and doing so is virus-specific.

Oh, they'd never do that you might claim.

Except they already have with health care.

Obamacare anyone?

Insulin, anyone, for Type I diabetics?  A biologic that has been off patent for decades and yet has seen the price skyrocket?  How's that, when its not patented?  Simple: Nobody goes to jail because we didn't tell the government that they will either enforce the law (15 USC Chapter 1) that makes such collusive action illegal or we will make everyone involved stop.  They will either stop voluntarily or they will stop because they are no longer breathing, but they WILL stop.

Do you really think this isn't what most of medicine is about today?

Of course it is.  Why else would you have an FDA that will approve drugs that are not either (1) better or (2) cheaper with that being the requirement to be proved?  It isn't, you know.  Witness the most-outrageous recent example for Alzheimer's, which hardly stands alone and all of the advertising for various drugs, none of which is proved to be better or cheaper.  Notice how as soon as such drugs become generics all those ads disappear.  Where did Viagra ads go when the patent expired?  Notice how the advertising disappeared last April?

Oh, and as for scams, the patent was supposed to run out in 2012.  Men got fucked (no pun intended) for another eight years.

Why do you think you get told to go ahead and eat the carbs -- chase it with drugs if you're Type II diabetic?  The zero cost option is to stop eating the carbs.  If you do it early enough then there's a good chance your body will heal and the damage will not only stop, it will be reversed.  No, this doesn't mean you can go back to eating the pizzas with wild abandon, but it does mean you'll never need a single blood-sugar related drug, nor will your toes and fingers drop off and your kidneys will likely not fail.

The problem is that if you let your doctor talk you into doing it his way for long enough the damage will be irreversible and then you're beholden to ever-more expensive drugs and, ultimately, likely surgeries and even dialysis.  If you walk that path you may or may not expire from something else first but you certainly will spend a hell of a lot of money on the journey with virtually all of it being unnecessary.

What makes you think that's not what they just did under cover of a respiratory pandemic that was destined to burn itself out like every other respiratory viral pandemic for which we have good records spanning more than 100 years, and in fact which had done so in the United States and was on the wane before the first shot went into the first arm?

What if your life and that of your children are now a service, courtesy of Moderna and Pfizer at whatever cost they wish to impose on you now and into the indefinite future with the price of quitting being a much-higher risk of death, and what if that is in fact exactly what pharma, the medical industry, Trump and Biden all had in mind originally and still do?

Think I'm wrong?

Have a look at the 2018 MTS and what happened to Medicare payments.  This fiscal ended in September of 2018, the second year of Trump's Presidency.  Prescription drug spend was down from 95 billion to $82 billion, a decrease of close to 15%.  Hospital spend was nearly flat - up right at 1%.

Do you think Pharma and hospital administrators liked that?  The next year drug spend was up 3.6% and then ending in September of 2020 it was up 5.3%.

Hospitalization?  That posted a 26% increase year ending September 2020 with hospitals being paid $39,000 per person by Medicare to shove a tube down your throat and kill you instead of being paid to give you drugs early with them only getting paid when you didn't get intubated and die.

In other words health care as a service which in fact paid more to kill Seniors was good for a 26% increase in what the federal government spent despite killing a half-million people with the vast majority of them being Senior Citizens on Medicare.  We didn't pay for performance we paid for a subscription even though what it bought sucked and in fact killed your Grandmother.

Do you think that's stopped?  Well then you better look at the current MTS which says that while hospitalization spend is down (gee, all the old people who could be easily killed seem to already be dead and we ran out of suckers we could exploit by sticking a toe tag on them) when it comes to prescription drugs the current year spend via said subscription model scam is up 12.4% over last year thus far on a comparable-period basis!

Don't you think we should have proved that wasn't the model being intended for these shots to be forced on EVERYONE before we started letting people get stabbed when the data before us, on October 15st of 2020, was that indeed that was exactly the model the health care system had run for the previous fiscal year into the maw of the pandemic and got paid to deliberately not treat people early which both led to their death and got them paid a record amount, an utterly obscene additional EIGHTY TWO BILLION DOLLARS above the previous year's expense?

You better hope that's not what they tricked you into because if it is you're screwed at least economically and may be fucked out of your life.  I remind you that the MTS proves that is exactly what they did to Seniors when it came to medical care just during the first six months of the pandemic to the tune of $82 BILLION which was in fact paid out as a reward for generating 500,000 CORPSES.

But you still won't make them stop -- will you?

That refusal is why we all deserve what's probably going to happen.

When it does just remember this: That wasn't an accident, it wasn't unforeseen and all of it was and is illegal but you sat back and not only let it happen, many of you cheered it on.

You aren't going to like this article, but frankly I don't care.  I've never written an article with a single bit of concern as to whether people would like what I had to say; any so-called "journalist" who does so isn't a journalist at all.

Going back to the start of Covid-19 there were several things that were apparent:

• Not everyone was susceptible to a serious or fatal outcome irrespective of age or medical status.  Diamond Princess proved this conclusively.  It was ignored.  We later conclusively and scientifically proved that approximately 80% of all people had pre-existing resistance and, absent severe co-morbid issues that could kill them literally at any time were never at material risk.
  
  
• If you let the virus into nursing homes it will kill a lot of people.  Kirkland proved that conclusively.  We not only ignored that we called the employees of said places "heroes" and did not demand they isolate away from the general population, paying them whatever we had to in order to get them to do it, even when we had a wild excess of hotel space in which we could have as we had (foolishly) locked down basically all travel and leisure activity.
  
  
• Children and young, healthy adults are at little or no risk.  It's not zero, but it's less than the flu.  We now know fewer than 400 people under age 18 have been killed by Covid in the US and virtually all of those who died had unrelated life-threatening medical issues (such as childhood cancers.)  For older, more-morbid people it's another story entirely; they have 1,000x as much danger or more.  So what did we do?  We closed schools and forced 60 million healthy kids to wear masks.  In other words we made children pay for other people's risk, and we did it by force, screwing all those kids out of months to a year or more of schooling and treating them as plague rats who were responsible for killing their grandmother.
  
  
• Most of the morbid conditions that put you at particular risk are voluntary.  Specifically, Type II diabetes and obesity.  We not only lied to kids about their risk we forced children and young adults to bear the cost of voluntary adult behavior.  This is particularly monstrous and massively compounds the above point.
  
  
• We allowed the demonization of drugs that had been used safely for decades for other conditions and in fact let them be effectively banned.  Was there proof that they worked?  Not early on, but so what?  The so-called "right to try" that was much-ballyhooed and paraded around for over a decade disappeared instantly under force by every single social media company.  Who remembers all the crying mothers in front of Congress and elsewhere begging for access to unproved but possible treatments for their children with rare diseases and the attendant and relentless GoFraudMe cry-room campaigns?  Abortion, a purely-elective procedure undertaken by millions and considered a sacred civil right with its need arising in nearly every case from voluntary adult (irrespective of age) conduct has a higher risk of death than Ivermectin.  Where the hell did all those screaming for access to unproven therapies go and why did not that same principle apply here, especially for consenting adults?  Lupus and RA patients have taken HCQ as a maintenance drug on a daily basis for over a decade and the safety profile and its contraindications are well-known.  It also, of course, was used as a prophylaxis for malaria before that on a mass-population basis and as such its safety profile when given to people on a widespread basis is very well understood.  Ivermectin has literally had several billion human doses handed out over the last 30 or so years for the prevention of river blindness and treatment of parasitic infections.  Both are OTC (no prescription required) in many nations.  Budesonide is used by asthmatics as a daily maintenance drug by millions as well, and again, outside of the US can typically be bought OTC for a few dollars.  These are drugs with safety profiles similar to Tylenol and aspirin.  Yet we denied people the right to use them when first infected, or suspected to be and worse, we called them dangerous despite their documented safety profile on a world-wide basis.  If you're the average American you are already taking 12.2 prescription drugs per year, or at least one prescription drug at all times.  Essentially all of them are more-dangerous and likely to kill you than any of HCQ, Ivermectin or Budesonide -- that's a fact.

One of Trump's first actions when Covid-19 hit was to (1) immunize any health care provider for their failures, including refusal to treat and (2) direct CMS to pay "bounties" for anyone on Medicare who went into the hospital for Covid ($13,000 per person) and if they were ventilated then the bounty rose to $39,000.  This, despite knowing at the time that ventilators were nearly worthless; before that order was issued we knew 95% of the people in Wuhan that were put on vents died anyway.  In other words CMS issued an order offering to pay for shoving a tube down your throat that nearly always killed you instead of incentivizing hospitals and physicians to find ways to keep you from dying.

The hospitals, of course, complied with the money making path forward and 100,000 people died in those first few months as a direct consequence.

We later discovered why vents were worthless with this disease; the reason you were choking to death was that your blood was clotting in the lungs.  Forcing more oxygen into the lungs does nothing if there is no effective circulation.  Even after this discovery, which was conclusively known by summer, the bounties remained in place.  Becerra, Biden's HHS secretary, has not rescinded them.

In other words even once we knew not only that vents did not work but why, which was all known by June of 2020, HHS maintained and continues to this day to pay hospitals to shove a tube down your throat and kill you.  A sane policy would have paid only for success and let doctors figure out what works, aligning the money with outcomes.

The successful would get paid, those married to failure and dogma would get nothing.

We could have also cut off the hero worship bullshit by having the government publish the success rate for every single hospital in the US when it came to Covid-19 patients.  This many admitted, this many left in a box, success rate = X%.  HHS could have done that and suddenly all the TikTok dancers would have disappeared -- unless you walked out under your own power.

But... it gets worse.

Blocking people from using early treatment wildly inflated those hospital payments.  If you never go to the hospital then said hospital doesn't get their Covid bonus, do they?  That right there is enough reason for the corporate medical networks to ban their doctors from writing prescriptions for Budesonide, HCQ and Ivermectin, among others despite off-label use being entirely legal; indeed, about one prescription in five is written off-label!  These corporate monsters own and run the hospitals and have been buying up the doctors' practices for decades; a sick person who does not get admitted makes them nothing and the drugs cost about $10!

Never mind that issuing an EUA requires that there be no demonstrated safe and effective alternative by law.  Safe we already knew; all it took was for a large medical network to start handing this stuff out to any adult who appeared to have Covid with informed consent and the statistical evidence would show up within days.  If it proved up that would be the end of the EUAs and the pharmaceutical companies and hospitals did not want either to take place; no sick people in the hospital, no emergency and no money.

The medical systems did not know whether the drugs worked on a conclusive basis but what they did know is that if they showed effective "at first sign of infection" treatment outcomes the money spigot would shut off instantly because nobody would show up sick enough to require hospitalization.  In addition the demand for vaccines would immediately go to zero among anyone who didn't have serious multiple risk factors, such as being in a high-density living environment while seriously ill (e.g. in a nursing home.)

This particular sort of perversity where money trumps all other considerations has permeated medical care for decades.  A coronary catheter will save your life if you're having a heart attack by restoring the blood flow to the impacted area of the heart quickly.  The only other option is open heart surgery which takes longer and the longer you wait the more damage is done.  Never mind that the cath lab is much less dangerous than sawing open your chest.

But "safer" does not mean safe -- the procedure is in fact quite dangerous.  About 1 in 50 people having a stent inserted die either immediately on the table or within the next month or so, and a decent percentage have strokes caused by clots breaking off and traveling to the brain as well, which usually causes permanent and severe disability.  In people who are not having a heart attack, but who have stable angina, the data is that this procedure does not improve mortality at all.  We've known this for a couple of decades now, yet at $20,000 or so a crack these procedures are done all the time in people who are not having heart attacks.

If you are obese and Type II diabetic you can resolve both in virtually every case without spending a nickel.  Stop eating carbohydrates other than green vegetables and get all seed oils (canola, shortening, etc.) out of your diet.  Not only do you resolve the conditions but in addition all the bad things that come over time from high blood sugar, including gangrene and amputated limbs, retinal damage (blindness!), kidney failure (dialysis and ultimately death) and your early demise are all interrupted.  Instead of taking the zero-cost and superior approach in terms of outcomes you're put on drugs; first metformin which is cheap but, since the disease is progressive if you do not stop eating carbs it stops working and then the really expensive drugs come out along with mandatory insulin.  Even that does not prevent the bad; in most cases you still suffer the effects and eventually die.

But not before you leave a half-million dollar medical bill in your wake.

All of this to avoid your doc telling you the answer to your medical condition is to quit eating pizza, pasta, bread and fries?  Oh, and not pocketing the $500,000 either, never mind your misery as your toes are amputated and you go blind, have a heart attack or stroke.

These are far from the only examples.  The FDA just approved a drug for Alzheimer's that failed to demonstrate either halting cognitive decline or demonstrating improvement in treated patients.  It is, however, frightfully expensive.  FDA regulations, in fact, specifically do not require that a new drug work better than an existing drug or therapy, nor that it be cheaper, or even that it have a better safety profile.  You'd think that "better, faster, cheaper -- must show at least one" would be the law in that if you can't demonstrate by hard science at least one of those your drug does not get approved -- period.  You'd be wrong and the reason you're wrong is you let pharma, hospitals, CMS and your President pull this bullshit for decades while both robbing you blind and shortening your life.

Who writes those laws?  Congress.  How long has this gone on?  For more than 50 years.  Has either party fixed it?   NO.

Now we add this:

• The shots were given EUAs without the usual pharmacological data (e.g. where does it concentrate and distribute in the body, etc.) and full set of animal trials.  The usual dose-ranging trials were truncated.  Zero intermediate (months long) small-group human trials (a couple thousand people) were done with weekly follow-up comprehensive bloodwork to detect things like evidence of cardiac damage (e.g. myocarditis), which can be detected if troponins are checked.  For clotting, d-dimer.  Ditto for platelet disorders and similar which would show up on a CBC. These are normal, routine steps in testing any new drug and none of them were done with no results published.  Even to this day such follow-up has not been done -- at all.  The vaccine firms applied to use their shots in Japan and were forced to disclose pharmacological data which was deliberately withheld from the FDA.  That was leaked on the Internet and it is now known that the spike protein concentrates in the ovaries and spleen.  We do not know the full story on safety and thus it is impossible to make an informed decision.  Certainly, for some people even in this situation the shots may be a good bargain -- but where is the line between "good deal" and "bad deal" and how much is that line moved because of intentional obstruction of early treatment?  Further, where are the autopsy results in people who unexpectedly die after these shots?  You'd think with a new and lightly tested therapy every person who meets an untimely demise shortly thereafter would be looked at forensically to determine whether there's a potential link.  In other words we probably could have detected all of these issues, at least at a sub-clinical level, but if we had that would have stopped the roll-out until conclusive answers were obtained, and perhaps permanently.  So we blindfolded ourselves -- on purpose -- and once again you let it happen and in fact cheered it on.
  
  
• NOW data is starting to stack up showing that not only are the shots dangerous directly there is a nasty pattern appearing of viral infections, not necessarily Covid, in vaccinated people which is wildly out of the ordinary for this time of year.  Exactly what is causing that is unknown; it may just be our fascination with lockdowns and such over last winter but if not then this coming cold and flu season will be catastrophically bad.  While thus far what I have are anecdotes if this proves up your decision to believe a bunch of proved liars about safety may well have set the stage for your own serious disease or death.

Let's point out once again that even if 20% of the 600,000 or so dead aren't really Covid deaths there are still a crap-ton of dead people who should not have died, at least not right then and even if you kill someone with a week left to live under the law you still murdered them.

These people died when they did for exactly one reason: People made money on each death and the more who died the more money was made.

Blocking the use of possible effective and cheap drugs along with refusing to protect those in nursing homes by stopping the employees from being the vector into the place is why most of the people who died are dead, and a hell of a lot of money was an incentive to make them dead with a literal bounty paid for each toe tag.

Our local hospital likely got roughly $5 million -- a little county hospital -- in said bounties.  I'm guessing here since I can't see their books but I'll bet I'm close.

You let that happen.

You let the medical ghouls intentionally send sick people home without any treatment at all until they were literally choking to death, with the doctors and hospital administrators rubbing their hands in glee at the bonus payments to be received in the amount of millions of dollars per hospital.

You either Hated or Loved Orange Man and so you not only let him and his administration do it when the next one showed up the other half of the nation cheered them on doing the same damn thing.

Now you're letting 13 year old boys be jabbed with these shots and some of them are dying of enlarged hearts.  Proved caused by same?  Not yet.  Of course we're not demanding and publishing the autopsies of those bodies either! 

Isn't it supposed to be the other way around  -- you prove safety first -- before we stab children who by definition cannot give informed consent to the risk of death?

I've written dozens of articles on the medical scam for more than a decade now.  It featured prominently in Leverage.  A medical system in which there is a profit motive has both a good and bad side.  The good side is that new discoveries make people rich, and new discoveries move science and health forward.  The bad side is that if proof of improvement -- better, faster and/or cheaper -- is not required and the people are not allowed free and full access to all of the existing medical art at the time at their option, not that of someone who gets paid not for results but for treatments and drugs then it becomes extremely profitable to try to create a mandatory subscription model that puts a daily, monthly or yearly fee on keeping you alive to be distributed to the commercial interests behind same while ignoring, discouraging or even forbidding you to take actions (e.g. using drugs off label) that might interrupt that process or keep some or all of the money out of their pockets.

Now add to this toxic mix a virus that causes a pandemic.  There have been lots of pandemics across history.  Typically, a pandemic respiratory virus shows up about once every 15 or 20 years.  It always has.  We have records of them.  They have all behaved the same way: Two or three waves of infection, typically over one or two years, with the second wave usually being the worst.  The virus mutates over time and becomes more-infectious and less-deadly.  Within two years it is endemic; those who can be easily killed are dead, those who get it and survive have immunity, and whether infection confers permanent immunity does not matter.  The virus continues to circulate and causes colds and flus, but the serious health incident is over.

Every single pandemic respiratory virus for which we have decent records, which I remind you span more than 100 years, has behaved in exactly this manner and there is no evidence that Covid-19 has or will behave differently.  The jabs are, for most people, worthless as the virus will over time evade them (as flu evades the flu shot in whole or part) but it makes no difference to 90+% of the population as the virility of the circulating strains wanes.  By the time we jabbed the first arm the second, and most-serious wave had already occurred in the United States and was on the decline, even as we ignored all of the usual safety testing in the interest of speed.

The exception is that if you vaccinate into an active pandemic, leaving aside direct injury from an improperly-tested vaccine you run the risk of ADE, OAS or its more-encompassing name ("pathogenic priming") occurring, and if it does those who took the shot get fucked worse than those who did not and there's nothing the people who took the shot can do about it.

May I further remind you that coronaviruses are not new and neither are attempts to produce vaccines for them?  Every single attempt in the past has failed -- either the virus evades the vaccine, the vaccines causes severe injury on its own or on re-challenge it produces binding but not neutralizing activity and as a result makes the resulting infection much more-dangerous.  Since we now know there is cross-reaction between Covid-19 and other viral T-cell reactivity the potential for it to work the other way -- that is, for the shots to cause you get severely screwed by other, non-Covid viruses -- exists as well.

"This time its different" is one of the most-common and nearly-always wrong pronouncements -- whether the subject at hand is economics, markets or medicine.  The burden to prove that indeed it is different this time is extreme and must always fall on the person making the claim.

So here's the deal, America.

You didn't stop the killing for money.  We call that murder-for-profit, and exactly nobody has been held accountable for it and in fact people are still cheering it on, including Biden's plan to try to convince people to take the stabs by going door-to-door.

It should have been stopped.

If the government refused to stop it then the people should have risen and made clear that killing people for profit was not going to be tolerated.  The conversation could easily have gone exactly this way:

You will stop -- every hospital, every doctor, every so-called "public health" authority.

You will stop now.

If you do not stop now tomorrow at noon there will be a BBQ and the hospital administrators, doctors, nursing home operators who refused to lock in the employees and politicians who enabled it all are going to be the guests of honor.

One way or another, you will stop this perversity that has permeated our medical system for decades and instead of killing people one at a time it is now murdering them en-masse.  You will cut it out and never do it again or justice will be done -- right here, right now, by we the people.

This is not a negotiation any more than Concord was on April 19th, 1775; you stop or you will be forced to stop.

We're not asking, we're telling you.

Period.

Well, you didn't do it.  One dude, or three dudes -- you start building a gallows along with erecting a spit and firepit on the lawn of the parties to be invited to your BBQ and you go to jail immediately.  Big shock, right?  Of course if you're a pharmaceutical company, sell a drug like Vioxx after allegedly hiding evidence it has a nasty side effect profile and 60,000 people are killed by heart attacks as a consequence nobody goes to jail for doing that, and that's not threatened death, it's actual death and that it happened is fact.

First time?  Not even close.  AZT anyone?  It did not save a single AIDS patient from death.  The intentional blocking of Bactrim, which was part of getting AZT through, killed about 30,000 Americans far sooner than they would have otherwise died.  Bactrim, a combination of cheap, off-patent antibiotics, was known to prevent PCP recurrence; this had been discovered 10+ years earlier in leukemia patients.  AZT, a failed attempt at a cancer drug was, at the time, the most-expensive prescription drug ever sold.  Who was involved up to his neck in pimping AZT while blocking Bactrim?  A man by the name of Anthony Fauci.  Yes, that Anthony Fauci.

Or, as is the case this time, Remdesivir.  The data from two solid trials: RECOVERY and now this study say it's worthless.  Worse, it has a nasty side effect profile including causing cardiac damage.  But despite the data the FDA has not withdrawn its EUA.  Gee, why not?  Because it costs $3,000 and thus makes people rich, that's why.  If it kills you well, tough crap; we'll call that "Covid" even though it was the worthless drug that may have caused your heart attack and not the virus.  You still count as a Covid death though so here's the hospital's bounty for racking up another toe tag.

Why didn't Trump's HHS -- or Biden's -- do it the other way around?  You get your $13,000 bonus if the patient walks out of your hospital under his or her own power.  If he or she dies the hospital gets nothing.

Want to take a bet on how much Ivermectin, Budesonide and HCQ would have been used had the government done that?

Tell me once again why you have allowed both the previous and current Administrations to infest Washington DC given these facts -- including the fact that these so-called "experts" are all proved serial liars with multiple well-documented instances that led directly to mass-death over the last forty years.

I'm listening and have been for 18 months -- all I hear is crickets.

Here's reality whether you wish to admit it or not:  If 5%, 10% or 50% of the population decides they've had enough of this robbery and death then it stops.  One hopes the demand is enough.  It should be enough, but you have to be willing to back it up just like the Minutemen were on April 19th of 1775.

The government knows this.

They know it to their core because this nation exists due to that very demand and willingness to back it up when the King of England's men said "fuck you!" in response to a similar demand.

They get away with this sort of crap today for the same reason they got away with it in 2008 with the banking system.  You let them.

That time they stole your money, your jobs and in many cases your house.

This time they stole your grandmother's life, and in both cases they did it for one reason and one reason only: MONEY.

The proof is simple: HHS could have made the payments contingent on your discharge by means of walking out of the hospital under your own power.  They did not, on purpose, you let them slaughter your alleged loved ones and worse, you let those murderous, money-grubbing assholes walk among you to this very day, lauding them as "heroes."

That's fine.

The people of this nation, as with the people of any nation, have the right as a body politic to act like cult members and bow before those who have been demonstrably wrong on a serial basis for the last 18 months.  Remember: MASKS ARE BETTER THAN VACCINES, according to the CDC.  That was stated by the CDC Director in sworn testimony before Congress and yet winter came two months later and the virus killed a crap-ton of people anyway, proving he was completely full of crap.

That's just one of many of the lies you sucked your way all down the shaft and then swallowed whole.

So here's the deal:

If you were or are today one of those nutjobs who believed the CDC even after they were proved wrong this last winter, if you believed Fauci after he was repeatedly proved wrong, if you still listen to anything they say after Fauci got caught conspiring to hide the origins of this virus and in fact organizing censorship of its origin all over the media and you believe the government at large did not and is not to this day deliberately deceiving you and everyone else, including deception about the natural course of all pandemic viruses for the last 100 years -- every single one of them -- then if you listen to them now, take their advice, and it kills or severely disables you or your family members I am going to laugh in your face and that of your family members and loved ones.

You are stupid.

Only a mentally-compromised cult-member idiot listens to some agency or person, no matter who it is, once they make a pronouncement in front of Congress under oath and within a couple of months it is conclusively proved they're full of crap, who issue government policy incentivizing death instead of targeting said incentives to be paid only when lives are saved and as a direct result of intentional neglect for profit several hundred thousand people die.

That's what happened folks.

We're 18 months into this now.

The lies are manifest and so is the killing of people for profit.

You have to be nuts to allow anyone involved in that act of mass-manslaughter for money to get anywhere near you with any medical advice.

They already killed your grandmother and if you let them kill you or those you love then you and they both deserve to have this blow up in your face and die, I hope it hurts, and I will celebrate every one of your well-overdue express elevator rides to HELL.

"Mild" reports eh?

The Centers for Disease Control is investigating a small number of young adults and adolescents who may have experienced heart problems following a COVID-19 vaccine, though the agency stressed that it is unclear the vaccine is responsible. 

There have been "relatively few" reports of myocarditis and "most cases appear to be mild," but the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Technical Work Group said it felt the potential issue should be communicated to providers. 

The CDC says that 10-20 cases of this disorder happen in young adults and adolescents per 100,000 per year.  Let's take that at face value which would mean (at the "worst" end of the range) it's 200 per million.  But a 2 day range is 0.0055 of a year, so to bracket that to "about 4 days" means that the odds are approximately 1 case per million people in that age group stabbed.  So therefore if you jabbed 20 million people in this age group you should see about 20 cases during that couple of day period of time.

Go read the article on the other side about probability then come back here.

Then consider that Connecticut, a tiny state of 3.6 million population total, has at least 18 cases of this condition.  This means nationally it's not a few dozen cases -- it's more like 2,000 or one hundred times what the CDC is admitting.  Note that the entire cohort in question that can get the shots is about 60 million people and of those only about 15% have had the shot, if that, so this means the odds are not all that rare; it's about 1/4,500 which is approximately ten times the fatality rate of Covid-19 in that group.

Bluntly put if you're healthy you're stupid to take the jab in that age cohort and your parents, if they got you jabbed, should go to prison for felony assault and child abuse.

So this isn't a safety signal, right?

Wrong, because no cases were noted in people except in that right at 4 day window.  None were noted, for example, after the first jab, only the second, with a two week window of time between the two and yet the surveillance of said people begins on the day they get the first dose.

If the events were in fact random and not caused by the shots they would be randomly distributed over a four week period from the first jab until 2 weeks after the last.  They're not; they're all concentrated in a couple of day period after the second jab.

The odds of this cluster occurring by random chance can be computed but when the actual incidence is not across "a few dozen" events (let's call it three) it is happening at a rate 100 times that as well you need more zeros than there are on the odds of a dinosaur-killing asteroid impact next week.

This is, I remind you, a group of people who almost never suffer serious outcomes from Covid-19 absent significant comorbid events such as, for example, fighting leukemia at the time.

The fact that these cases are not random but all cluster right around day 4 of the second jab while there are zero reports distant from that over the remainder of a one month period is a screaming safety signal standing alone.

Oh, and it's not "a couple dozen" cases either.  It's over 2,000 cases.  The CDC is LYING.

THESE SHOTS MUST BE STOPPED IN ALL PERSONS IN THIS AGE RANGE NOW as the premise that such events are "mild" and do not impart permanent injury is complete crap.  Heart damage is often permanent and this condition is the third leading cause of sudden death in children and young adults.

Facebook has decided that anything you say there that discourages the use of a vaccine, including especially Covid-19 vaccines, will be removed (and you might get banned) even if its truthful.  For example, you can't talk about the fact that 95%+ of all associated deaths in VAERS for the last two years have been associated with Covid-19 vaccines, and 99% of them this year are associated with the Covid shots.  This is the truth which you can look up right here on the CDC's own web page, but if you say it on Facebook - poof.

OSHA said if your employer required the vaccine they owned the results -- including the bad results.  That quietly disappeared a day or two ago; you see, workplace injuries do not include things the government wants to happen.  One wonders why this isn't applied to coal mining, oil drilling and even asbestos abatement; after all, the government does want asbestos out of buildings, right?  So now your employer can injure or even slaughter you so long as the government approves.  Germany didn't do something like that 80 years or so back, did they?

Incidentally OSHA will likely get attacked on that and lose on a TRO and injunction because under the APA (Administrative Procedures Act) there is a specific process a government agency must use to modify a previous stance, and their previous position was consistent with both law and practice for decades: As an employer if you mandate something as a condition of employment you own the outcome -- it's deemed a workplace injury -- if it goes badly.

It gets better.  The CDC has now declared that if you've been vaccinated you are not a Covid-19 case unless you wind up in the hospital or die.  I'm not kidding.

As of May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported vaccine breakthrough cases to focus on identifying and investigating only hospitalized or fatal cases due to any cause. This shift will help maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health importance.

So now "cases" don't differentiate, or if you're vaccinated they may not report a positive result at all.

This "deems" the vaccines automatically 97-98% effective -- even if they're saline shots.  Why?  Well, you could look at our county here; as of December 1st, before there were any shots, we had 5,219 "cases" and 136 of them wound up in the hospital; 2.6%.  Thus if you refuse to count a "case" in a vaccinated person unless they go to the hospital then you have deemed the shots 96+% effective even if there's nothing in the syringe.  Magic, I tell you, magic..... and in a sane world such an open and notorious fraud would get you instantly arrested -- or worse, particularly when someone relies on that line of bullshit and dies as a consequence.

It's even worse: Unlike non-vaccinated Covid-19 people where reporting of positives and negatives was mandatory under CDC demand this is not:

The number of COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections reported to CDC likely are an undercount of all SARS-CoV-2 infections among fully vaccinated persons. National surveillance relies on passive and voluntary reporting, and data might not be complete or representative.

In other words hospitals don't have to look and see if you've been vaccinated if you show up there with Covid-19 nor is a hospitalization if you have been a mandatory reportable Covid-19 event.  Of course they can (and I presume if your Ct is low enough they will for sequencing purposes) but the mandate is gone.

That's nice.  How much resource do you spend on something that doesn't happen?  Nothing.  Therefore what is the reasonable presumption if you willfully refuse to look at and catalog data that is otherwise trivially available?

That's what I thought.

So the CDC has intentionally destroyed the integrity of the data set from April forward by introducing a new twist; they declare the shots "effective" to stop you from spreading the virus but then refuse to collect and document the data to prove it.  Indeed they deliberately eliminate the means of determining that from the data, despite having recorded and reported every shot given and thus they do in fact know.  If someone comes up PCR+ after the shot on a Ct40 test, well, whether symptomatic or not by the very rules the CDC adopted last spring they have Covid-19 and count as a "case"!  Remember, the entire premise of their campaign and everything that everyone was ordered to do since last March was that even if you weren't physically sick you were still dangerous.  After all it's obvious that someone who is sick could give whatever they have to someone else; you need no mandate other than "stay home if you're ill" if there is no asymptomatic transmission.  The actual science has failed to identify asymptomatic transmission; it was never anything more than a computer model statistically, and an attempt to actually isolate cases of it in China across a huge population failed to find even one instance.

But if in fact the CDC still believes asymptomatic transmission is a "thing" then they should be collecting any and all evidence of Ct40 positive tests among those who got one or more shots.  After all, positive is positive and any positive is dangerous, right?  We kicked kids out of schools, we quarantined people in their homes and took all manner of other "precautions" on that basis including mask orders, closing businesses and the like and now the CDC is deliberately refusing to collect data of anyone with a positive PCR test for other than sequencing purposes who has been jabbed unless they wind up in the hospital, which is wildly more serious than simply being symptomatic!

Thus we can reasonably presume that the CDC has now declared that asymptomatic transmission is in fact not a thing; in other words, they now believe in the science.  Or, to put it more-succinctly, they lied and ruined the economy, along with issuing mandates including the current mask "recommendation" in schools for no reason whatsoever.

But this also means that there is no public health argument for vaccination at all; only a personal one, and any attempt to mandate otherwise is unconstitutional since they now admit they cannot meet the first test when it comes to the burden of proof required: An unwitting person will transmit the virus to others only if not vaccinated; ergo, there is a "serious harm to others" argument which is extinguished by vaccination -- and only by vaccination.  (There are plenty of other tests to be met too but if you fail this one you lose immediately in terms of a mandate when it comes down to both Constitutional and common law principles.)  Given the CDC's actions anyone faced with such a mandate would appear to have a very good crack at nailing the issuing party to the wall on both an injunctive and final basis.

Never mind the now-irrefutable evidence coming out of India -- you know, where there are over a billion people?  The CDC, NIH and FDA continue to proclaim that there are "no early treatments" that work.  That's a damnable lie and was known in the spring of 2020.  How many people do you get to kill with lies like this before either a crap-ton of people get frog-marched to face trial for mass-murder or, if the government refuses, a gallows gets erected right next to your signboard and the people take care of ridding the place of vermin themselves?  It appears that the threshold is well beyond even a minor genocide, seeing as the body count is now over 500,000 by their own claims!

This would be truly unbelievable but of course it isn't because a huge percentage of the population have become psychotic.  They were in fact driven to psychosis due to the deliberate lying and fear porn peddled by the government and all of the media but especially CNN, Rachel Maddow and others. These actors have all determined that the psychosis must continue and in fact Zuckerpig along with the other media and "social" outlets all insist: You may not do anything that might break people out of their psychotic states and if you do we will attempt to silence you.

You see, we cannot discuss whether the shots are safe on Facebook and other social media without the risk of being banned.  If employers mandate it, which is illegal by the way as the EUAs make clear, the government doesn't give a fuck anymore.  What else is new -- when, may I ask, has the government ever prosecuted someone doing something illegal provided they liked the outcome?  Of course you get prosecuted for doing something illegal.  But that's because you're not doing what Joe Biden (and before him, Trump) along with Fauci wants.  Now about that gun Hunter bought and lied on the Form 4473... 

So let's look at the data to see if indeed on the data the shots are effective.  We already know they're not known safe; as I've pointed out back to December there have been myriad concerns with them, none answered.  This doesn't prove they're unsafe but the burden of proof when it comes to safety is on the person making the claim, and the evidence must be clear and convincing; unanswered, reasonable questions all run the wrong way here.  There's a nasty compendium that some fine folks put together, scientists and doctors all in an actual vaccine-related academic journal.  Most of these were known to be potential issues back as far as December, before the first jab went in the first arm, and some were plausibly known in September yet not addressed by any of the makers before they filed for EUA, nor is any mention of them in the EUA documents.  In fact, some of the issues now known were claimed to not occur by the manufacturers; an assertion we now is false   That's mostly because it simply takes too long to answer the questions so in order to get the speed you want you can't wait for them -- you just go ahead and hope and, if an inconvenient question does arise, you ignore it.

If you come to me as a CEO and tell me that you want something in six months that normally takes ten years, and you'll give me immunity, I'm going to direct my staff not to look where suspicions might lay.  Sure, if something is seen it has to be run down but if you don't look you're unlikely to see.  It's not like we did not know that every mRNA attempt prior had resulted in the drug ending up where it wasn't supposed to go with resulting toxicity problems in animal trials, right?  Oh wait, we did know that.  So just don't look too closely and hope it doesn't wind up in data somewhere so we maintain plausible deniability.

It is what it is and that's what we did.  It was stupid and nobody in their right mind should trust the process because it was intentionally made incurious to meet a timeline.  Go talk to Trump about it originally and then Biden for not instantly halting it at one minute past noon on January 20th.

But there still is uncorrupted data available that we can look at -- specifically, to see if the core claim for you deciding to take these stabs is true: They will prevent you from wind up in the hospital or dying.  If that test cannot be conclusively demonstrated then safety is irrelevant because the claimed benefit is either smaller than claimed or non-existent and thus no risk is acceptable.

Let's look at the hospitalization rate of people of ages from 50-64.  KFF has some pretty good data here showing that by April about 70% either had received the shots or immediately intended to when they could, and basically everyone in that group could during April.  So if the shots were 100% effective at preventing hospitalization and death and there was no preference for getting them among those who haven't had Covid-19, (there should be; if you've had the virus there's no reason to get it but all the screaming "urges" you to anyway) then hospital admissions among that group should be down about 70% from March levels plus the same sort of seasonal drop that we saw last year in the same group when there was no vaccine.  Nobody is claiming 100% effective except in a flippant manner, but all are claiming wild reductions in risk for hospitalization and death, typically in the 90%+ range.  90% of 70% is 63%.

Did it happen?

That doesn't look very different from last year, does it?  It certainly isn't 63% different; you wouldn't need to count or draw lines to see that as it's nearly two thirds.  Look at 65+, where the uptake for shots is even better; indeed there according to KFF the take rate for the shots is about 80%, and pretty-much everywhere anyone 65+ could get shots in March, not April.  There should be very close to zero -- a roughly 75% reduction -- in people 65+ going to the hospital with Covid-19.  But.... but..... but...... we were all promised!

Remember how a virus works; it can only infect people that are susceptible.  Once infected you don't count as "susceptible" anymore.  This immediately suppresses the R0 to what can be denoted as "Rt"; that is, the effective transmission rate, and once Rt goes under 1.0 then the case rate falls irrespective of all other measures because each infected person fails to find a new victim.  That doesn't mean the infection rate goes to zero because as long as there are reservoirs (e.g. in cats, ferrets, etc.) even if in a given area all the people who have it fail to give it to someone else it will come back, whether from reintroduction by a person or one of the animal reservoirs.  So all those people who got it and recovered over the spring, summer, fall and winter are neither reservoirs or transmission sources.  Thus, by the data, if the shots worked there should be a dramatic reduction in hospitalizations.

Where is it, beyond the expected seasonal drop-off that mirrors exactly what we saw last year as the weather warmed up?

Any questions?

Further a shocking number of reports on social media are out there -- including Eric Clapton -- who were not sufficiently disabused of their psychosis even after a kick in the nuts; they had a severe reaction to the first jab and still went back for the second and not only got hammered again they got it worse the second time!  Sure, it is true that the shots don't nail everyone; not even close.  But think about how far into the land of irrational, psychotic fear you have to be to to back for seconds after being kicked in the balls.  This is the world we live in today folks -- like it or not.

Don't be psychotic; it's not attractive at all and, frankly, that sort of behavior marks you as dangerous -- far more-so than any virus.