The Market Ticker - Canceled
What 'They' Don't Want Published- Category [Covid-19]
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
Full-Text Search & Archives
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions. For investment, legal or other professional advice specific to your situation contact a licensed professional in your jurisdiction.


The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2021-10-15 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 2931 references
[Comments enabled]  

Remember this article from the 11th?

Well, it has some bad news in it.  No, not just the jabs have negative efficiency bad news.

Worse news.

How would you like to get Covid-19 more than once? 

All you have to do is get vaccinated before you get Covid-19.

You should build "N" antibodies after a natural infection.

So...... with all these vaccine failures where are the N antibodies?


They're....... not there.

Indeed, as the vaccinated percentage went up the slope of that line decreased until it..... was flat.

This very strongly implies that getting Covid-19 after being vaccinated, which we now know adjusted for vaccination population percentage is more-likely now if you're vaccinated than if you're not appears to give you zero "N" antibody protection.

That is, it appears the jabs program your immune system to fight it off without building those antibodies at all.  But we know from past experience with coronaviruses that it is the "N" antibodies that are conserved across mutations and thus are critical, over time, to prevent severe outcomes.

How long this disabling of "N" antibody production is sustained nobody knows, but that it appears to be entirely suppressed in people who have been vaccinated and then get infected seems to be substantiated in that data.

Now we have an explanation for why, when someone who is jabbed gets hammered, they get hammered fast and hard.

Oh, and here's the even-better news: Covid may never stop "breaking through" in the jabbed.  If you took the jab you may well be stuck for life with repeated infections, and while protection may well be 50%, 60% or 80% against hospitalization and death for any given single infection if you roll those dice enough times they will come up snake eyes and you're screwed.

The only good news is that since Delta appears to escape the jabs sufficiently to infect the mutational pressure may be insufficient to continue generating more strains with even better escape potential.

If you got jabbed you better hope that's true; if its not, well....


View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2021-10-14 09:01 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 2072 references
[Comments enabled]  

Two days of FDA murderfest are on deck with the agenda items being Moderna and J&J "booster" shots.

As with the Fraudzer jabs there will be no data deck submitted, no side effect profile, no disclosure of the data the manufacturers have that is not in VAERS, no reconciliation of the VAERS data with clinical experience and zero accountability for any of the people already wounded, including those mortally wounded who don't know it yet all the way up to those already dead.

The screamfest about how Covid-19 infection produces "worse" myocarditis and other cardiac complications than the vaccines will, of course, be maintained.  Never mind the clinical study data that says that's a lie:

To analyse the impact of COVID-19 pandemics on CVD outcomes in Belo Horizonte (BH), the 6th greater capital city in Brazil, including: mortality, mortality at home, hospitalizations, intensive care unit utilization, and in-hospital mortality; and the differential effect according to sex, age range, social vulnerability, and pandemics phase.

Oh, you mean someone's done the work?  Why yes, yes they have.

Oh look, we have a formal study here in Brazil.  They have fat people, thin people, old people, young people, you know, humans.  And like everywhere else they get cardiovascular disease.

Like everywhere else they also have gotten hammered with Covid-19indeed, they've been hammered worse than many other places, largely because they have an extraordinarily-stratified population and a large part of it has jack for medical care, routine or otherwise.

So if Covid-19 was killing people a few weeks to months later via heart attack it would show up in the numbers.  This study ran through November of 2020, that is, all through the worst of the first wave, with months of time for those adverse impacts to show up and kill people.

By the claims all those who got Covid-19 and recovered contributed massively to CVD deaths, right?  The rate was much higher than it would otherwise be.  Why, after you got Covid-19 you were much more likely to have a heart attack and die!


Results: We found no changes in CVD mortality rates (RiR 1.01, 95%CI 0.96-1.06). However, CVD deaths occurred more at homes (RiR 1.32, 95%CI 1.20-1.46) than in hospitals (RiR 0.89, 95%CI 0.79-0.99), as a result of a substantial decline in hospitalization rates, even though proportional in-hospital deaths increased.


What did they find related to this?  That people avoided the hospital when in cardiac distress and thus the percentage of such deaths that occurred at home went up.  But wait..... is this one indictment or two indictments in one study?

You see, if going to the doctor or hospital saves your ass when in such a condition then the death rate from CVD should have gone up.  That it was difficult to figure out why it went up is still an open question, but it should have increased, assuming said hospitals and doctors actually improved outcomes.

But.... they don't improve outcomes, do they?

Need to read it again?  Results: We found no changes in CVD mortality rates

So said doctors and hospitals don't help.

That's a bummer.

What's a bigger bummer is that the jabs are killing and severely-injuring people, and not a few of them either.  If your particular "circle of friends and acquaintances" hasn't seen a spike of severe injuries, disability and mortality yet -- I'll make a prediction: It will.

People who I know reasonably well that scoffed at my "best guess" of severe and worse (mortal) injury from these jabs, which has come down (that is, in the wrong direction toward bad) from about 1 in a thousand to around one in five hundred to one in a hundred are now emailing me and saying "you know, you may be right" as suddenly one, two or three people, many in otherwise good health, either "died unexpectedly" or suffered a debilitating and presumed permanent event. All of them were jabbed.  Where are the same events among the non-jabbed controls?  Entirely absent.

I still can't give you odds on this that I'm willing to defend but since January the direction of those odds has been one way -- and its not improving.  What's especially dangerous is that there is plenty of reason from the original data to believe repeated insults with additional jabs have an exponential adverse event rate.  We do not know the exponent, but the evidence from the first two is that it is there and it is greater than 1.0 -- in fact, it may be very materially greater than 1.0, perhaps as high as 10.

Sub-clinical cardiac damage is bad news folks.  Most CVD is sub-clinical right up until its not, and takes years or decades to develop into symptomatic disease.  In nearly every case the person who gets nailed has few or no symptoms until they have a "breakthrough" event like a heart attack or serious angina.  The data from Brazil confirms what we already knew -- by the time that happens there's nothing you can do; medical intervention at that point is ineffective in reducing the death rate; it is at best palliative while making the medical system wealthy at your expense.

But Covid-19 infection does not contribute to this; it simply doesn't.  It didn't in Brazil and humans are humans.  I think we can fairly assume why that is: If it gets you and kills you then it does it right then and there; if it doesn't statistically-speaking, cardiac damage is not at issue.

But the jabs, on the other hand, do screw a decent percentage of people right up front and the longer-term damage is yet to be determined.  Statements by people like Fauci that "if nothing bad happens in 2 weeks nothing will" are flat-out lies; there are plenty of examples of people having strokes or heart attacks anywhere from a few weeks to a few months post jab, and they are people who have no risk factors for same and are too young to fit the common profile.

Go ahead folks, commit suicide.

Do stupid things, win stupid prizes -- and if you let some ghoul in government force you to do a stupid thing instead of forcing them to cut that crap out or walk the plank then you're doubly stupid and when you win the stupid prize I shall take my "two shots" with a side of schadenfreude.

I expect to be drunk on a daily basis by Thanksgiving.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2021-10-07 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 13572 references
[Comments enabled]  

Parents: If you allow this you're monsters.

We used VAERS data to examine cardiac AEs, primarily myocarditis, reported following injection of the first or second dose of the COVID-19 injectable products. Myocarditis rates reported in VAERS were significantly higher in youths between the ages of 13 to 23 (p<0.0001) with ∼80% occurring in males. Within 8 weeks of the public offering of COVID-19 products to the 12-15-year-old age group, we found 19 times the expected number of myocarditis cases in the vaccination volunteers over background myocarditis rates for this age group. In addition, a 5-fold increase in myocarditis rate was observed subsequent to dose 2 as opposed to dose 1 in 15-year-old males.

VAERS is known to materially under-report adverse events.  We do not know what the multiplication factor for these findings is as a consequence of that.  

Note that in the context of all prior years this basically never happens statistically.  The average over the three previous years associated with any vaccination is four.

Further, an extraordinary level of cardiac adverse events are associated with these jabs.  This is not uncommon or "rare" as claimed; there are in fact, as of July 9th, nearly 130,000 such reports for Covid-19 jabs.  If we accept the CDC's numbers for the number of Americans jabbed this puts the rate of cardiac adverse events are right around one in a hundred!

What's nasty is that while the myocarditis incidence is skewed heavily toward males under 30 the cardiac incidence is not; it is centered in the 20-70 range, or roughly "right up the middle" for the people in the nation as a whole.

Indeed, given the known under-reporting in VAERS a 1-in-100 incidence for a category of serious adverse events is extraordinarily significant.  There is every reason to believe we may be causing cardiac injury to as many as one in 25 people who get these shots!

Whether those injuries spontaneously resolve without permanent compromise or worse, degenerate progression is completely unknown as nobody is following up these individual cases to measure blood levels (e.g. troponins, EKGs, etc.) in an attempt to determine whether these events are transient or result in permanent impairment or worse.

 The only way to understand how common myocarditis is after COVID-19 vaccination, is to perform a prospective cohort study where all vaccinated individuals undergo clinical assessment, ECG, and troponin measurement at regular intervals post-administration.

Which is not being done, on purpose.

Incidentally the markers indicating potential trouble were present in the original studies.  They were not followed up and the reason for not doing is obvious: It would have prevented issuance of the EUAs on the original desired schedule.  As a result the firms involved and the FDA deliberately ignored that signal in the original studies and we have now jabbed somewhere around 200 million Americans -- and may have screwed as many as several million of them with irreversible, or even worse degenerate cardiac damage.

We do not know because we intentionally did not look.

COVID-19 injectable products are novel and have a genetic, pathogenic mechanism of action causing uncontrolled expression of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein within human cells. When you combine this fact with the temporal relationship of AE occurrence and reporting, biological plausibility of cause and effect, and the fact that these data are internally and externally consistent with emerging sources of clinical data, it supports a conclusion that the COVID-19 biological products are deterministic for the myocarditis cases observed after injection.

Again, as we knew and as I have documented before these jabs were first released for widespread use -- and again, deliberately ignored.

While this paper describes a specific risk with regard to myocarditis in young people the larger issue of cardiac events must not be ignored.  While it is certainly true that it in healthy young people the risk from Covid-19 infection itself is minuscule and thus appears on the data to be outweighed by the risks of the jab even without accounting for incomplete reporting in my opinion the 900lb Gorilla in the china shop does not simply lie there.

Do recall that Vioxx killed 60,000 Americans before we yanked it off the market.  There was indication of trouble in the original studies but it was not followed up upon just as it has not been here.  It was five years after full approval before that lack of follow-up and study broke through and resulted in the drug being yanked off the market.  Cardiac compromise is often "silent" from a symptomatic perspective but usually can be detected through directed lab work if you bother to look.  We didn't look with Vioxx and we're not doing it now with these jabs either -- in both cases the data was in the original pre-approval studies.

Many people in their 40s and 50s have incipient, severe cardiac compromise.  Decades of eating fast carbohydrates and listening to the talking heads from the FDA and elsewhere on "what to eat" has many such people 50 or more pounds overweight, hypertensive, in many cases Type II diabetic and at serious risk of a heart attack over the next 10 or 20 years.  I remind you that cardiac disease is the leading cause of death in the United States and kills about 650,000 people every year.

Even a 5% increase in that rate as a result of Covid-19 jabs will kill over 32,000 people annually.  If the increase in risk is 10% then we're talking over 60,000 Americans.  Given the now-evident requirement to boost every six months or so this means that 60,000 additional deaths is not a one-off; it will occur every single year for as long as we keep doing this stupid thing.

Yes, stupid.  The history of every respiratory pandemic is that it turns into an endemic flu and cold-causer within a year or two even without any intervention of any sort.  The 1918 pandemic did so, the 1890s pandemic believed to be caused by a beta coronavirus (of the same general family as Covid) did so and so have many, many others.  There have been no exceptions recorded.

I am not against vaccination on general principle.  Indeed with damn few exceptions they all have decades-long and well-documented safety records.  I am very much against a jab that carries this sort of outsized and apparent risk except on a truly-voluntary, fully-informed consent basis which, on the evidence to date, would lead anyone not at specific and identified very high risk to NOT take it.

Allegedly HHS claims we've "avoided" 30,000 deaths by vaccination.  What if we have in fact killed just as many -- or even twice as many -- through elevated cardiac disease risk, and will keep doing so every six months to a year into the future for as long as we jam needles full of this crap into arms?

Far-fetched?  Hardly.  The data supports this possibility now and while infection is not certain the risk, once you take a jab, is.

Stop the slaughter and the mandates that, on the data, are profoundly dangerous.

PS: Want to talk about how the government can materially cut Medicare (and Medicaid, for people in nursing homes with no money) expenses?  Give the above some thought.... you have to make it to 65 to collect anything, you know...

PPS: How's that dive looking $MRNA bulls?  That's a black hole you're staring into; at least Pfizer has other products.... you don't.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

Molnupiravir, a drug Merck thinks "may be the answer to Covid-19", is now all the rage.  The company will be asking for authorization to use it, presumably in an EUA since there are "no other treatments for ambulatory (non-hospital) persons."

That's bull****, of course, but bull**** is the norm; just ignore the elephants in the room -- all of them -- for which we have a crap-ton of safety data spanning decades.

This is a "new molecule."  I looked at it.  Those who are calling it Merckmectin or Phizermectin (that is, an "on-patent" reformulation of an extremely safe and widely-distributed drug) are making a serious error, and that error may kill you.

Let us remember that Thalidomide was used all over Europe in women.  One intrepid FDA official stopped it here.  Damn good thing too, because it was seriously mutagenic in a fetus and resulted in all manner of extraordinarily grotesque birth defects, such as children born with stubs instead of arms.  Most of those children died in-utero or shortly thereafter, but a few survived through childhood -- albeit with horrifying results.

Now under the law since there is now a "vaccine" that is approved in theory this drug has to go through the full set of trials and safety data.  It won't.  And that is a potentially-serious problem that could damn millions of people in America alone over the next few years.

I'm not kidding folks; I looked at this molecule and understand its mechanism of action.  Let me explain.

This drug is an analog (in other words, "looks the same to a living cell") of cytosine.  That's one of four chemical "bases" that make up DNA.  What Merck has done is "damage" it in a way that a cell still thinks its cytosine. Thus when it gets taken up in the synthesis of RNA it produces an error; the replication process doesn't know how to deal with that and, after a few of those accumulate the process fails and thus the virus (in this case Covid-19) cannot reproduce in the cell.

That's how it works, basically.

I was incorrect, by the way, in calling this a potential protease inhibitor, much like those used for HIV.  Pfizer has one of those in test for Covid-19 as well.  This is not -- it is a nucleoside (the four primary chemical bases that make up DNA) analog that has been deliberately damaged so as to screw up the replication machinery.

There are a few of these used today in humans, with most targeting HIV in "combination therapy."

Covid-19 in most people produces transient, self-limiting illness. In some people it causes dysregulation of the immune system, organizing viral pneumonia and if not stopped there can kill you either through direct spread into other organs or the dysfunction that comes from the body's response to that.  We greatly increase the risk of that happening by telling you to go home and eat chicken soup until you're choking; by the time you are choking anything you could have done, including using drugs that might partially block replication or suppress excess inflammatory response (e.g. antihistamines, drugs such as HCQ or Ivermectin, etc.) or put a stop to the organizing pneumonia (e.g. inhaled steroids such as budesonide) may not work at all or have greatly-reduced effectiveness.  That's stupid but its what damn near every so-called "medical professional" has told you to do for the last 18 months.  That advice may be valid for a cold virus but it definitely is not when the virus in question can and sometimes does result in wildly-inappropriate systemic inflammation and immune dysregulation.

HIV, on the other hand, progressively destroys your immune system and then a whole bunch of things that usually don't kill people at all (like PCP) get going in your body and finish you off.  In other words HIV is akin to cancer, which if not stopped will kill you with near 100% certainty by screwing things up to the point that your body cannot fix it anymore, whereas Covid-19, in most people, is a self-limiting respiratory infection.

The problem with developing drugs like this is that if they get into other cells, not virally-infected ones, they can also cause those errors in the DNA replication and thus terminate the cell's propagation and cellular line.  Depending on how quickly those cells replicate in the human body that might be a small and self-limiting problem (e.g. they replicate fast and only a few of them get "polluted") or it might be a ticking time bomb that ultimately screws you in hard-to-predict and impossible to treat ways (e.g. slowly-replicating types of cells where a lot of them get polluted.)

It's even worse if you're a person of reproductive age as cellular replication happens very rapidly in a developing fetus post-differentiation from the original single cell of the zygote and thus any such impact has a high probability of over-expressing in that circumstance.  This is exactly how thalidomide babies happened and its not necessarily limited to women either since half the genetic material comes from the man and unlike women who start with all of the eggs they will ever have men are continually producing new sperm cells which conceivably could carry that damage into the zygote.

Folks, it's one thing to use drugs like this in a situation where you will inevitably die if you do nothing.  Cancer is one of those situations and HIV is another.  Covid-19, unfortunately, is a viral infection where one cannot predict before the drug becomes useless (replication is complete) whether you are about to be one of the people who will die if you don't take the drug.  Indeed at the point where you must decide even if you're severely morbid only 5-9% of the time a bad thing will come from the infection; the rest of the time you will shake it off like virtually every single healthy person under 18 does.  This is not speculation, it is fact borne out by the tens if not hundreds of thousands of spouses of equal morbidity and age who had their partner get infected and die while they never even sneezed, yet they were sleeping right next to that person while they were incubating that virus and very capable of transmitting it to the other person in the bed.

The very bad news is that in the case of this drug, specifically, there are already indications that it may have mutagenic properties.  There's allegedly a whistleblower who claims that data exists; this drug, like so many others, was originally looked at years ago for other conditions -- in this case influenza.

Biden's administration has committed to buy 1.7 million courses of treatment of this drug if it gets "approved."  What's not clear is if this is EUA approval or full, formal approval.  You can bet it will be the former.  This may kill some significant percentage of those 1.7 million people over the next few years -- in other words, that Rat Bastard may well go down as one of the most-prolific mass-slaughtering douche-nozzles in history.  Worse, it may cause gross developmental defects in unborn children -- exactly as did thalidomide.  If it does either the PREP Act will give both Merch and the entire medical complex absolute legal immunity from being sued to beyond the orbit of Mars or locked up for mass-manslaughter.

There are severe risks involved in EUAs and we're playing with ticking nuclear weapons without any indication as to whether they will go off or not.  The so-called "vaccines" that cause your body to produce spike proteins are in this class because rather than deliver an inactivated virus into the body they cause your body to make part of it.  This is profoundly dangerous.  It might prove, over time, to be perfectly ok -- but we do not know and won't for another couple of years, at which point if you took those jabs you're screwed and there's nothing you can do about it.

This drug has the potential to be even more dangerous than mRNA technology because rather than "hijack" some of your cells to produce a protein that the immune system then recognizes it works by damaging the process by which DNA (and RNA) reproduce themselves in living cells.  The premise that this will will be self-limiting in the patient, suppress the infection but won't screw you over the intermediate and longer term is nothing more than a hypothesis.

If it's wrong and you took this drug, and we may not know for several years, you may well be irretrievably ****ed -- and you may also irretrievably screw any child you sire or carry.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2021-10-01 07:48 by Karl Denninger
in Covid-19 , 1302 references
[Comments enabled]  

Back in October of 2020 I stopped using "cases" with respect to Covid-19 for anything.  It became apparent that an utterly-huge number of people were told they had Covid-19 when they did not; they either had an "asymptomatic" case or something else.

Not one lab has ever returned Ct numbers to the tested person.  Not even in Florida, where DeSantis issued an Executive Order requiring it.  Was there ever any enforcement of that?  No.

Why did we know this was entirely bogus?  Simple: On the CDC's own math the fall surge -- which turned into the Winter Disaster -- was epidemiologically impossible.  Specifically, look at their mean ratio of infections to case counts and you see the problem; at 6x enough people had the virus for there be no surge.  But there was.

By the summer this was even more beclowned as on that same data everyone had been infected.  But.... there was a surge.

Do remember the admitted truth on PCR: A Ct test of 35 or more almost never results in culturable virus.

It breaks down something like this:

Ct<20 = Nearly always you can culture virus.
Ct25 = 50 - 70% of the time you can culture virus.
Ct30 = ~25-30% of the time you can culture virus.
Ct35 = ~4-8% of the time you can culture virus.
Ct40 = Statistically never can you culture virus.

Why is this important?  Many people have claimed that viral debris from your infection still means you had it, thus, positive is positive.  Nope.  This is the worst sort of fraud.

At very high Ct numbers the debris could be from contamination at the lab, or between samples.  But it could also be from your prior, non-Covid-19 immunity and anyone who is even slightly competent in understanding the immune system knows it.

The virus enters through the nose and mouth.  The upper respiratory tract is where it first gets into cells -- if it gets into cells.  Your body has a bevvy of  defensive mechanisms to prevent that from happening.  Remember that unlike bacteria a virus cannot replicate outside of a living cell.  The mucosa in your mouth and nose is not alive.  The cells under it are, but it is not.

So if a virus lands in your nose but never gets through the mucosa it will register positive on a PCR test -- because it is positive -- if the Ct is cranked up high enough.  Technically you "got" the virus (you "caught" it) but you were never infected. 

It is certainly true that some of the people who are "positive" with high Ct numbers are infected and you got them "early"; they will go on to have clinical disease and, if you test them again you will get another positive in a day or two with a much lower Ct.  But nobody does that.  In addition exactly zero health departments have validated their claimed "infected" counts by coming back to those people with a $5 antibody test two weeks later and looking for IgA, IgM and/or IgG antibodies.  IgA may be present and both IgM and likely a weak read of IgG will be present if the person was actually infected at that time.  If only IgG is present that infection was not Covid-19; they previously were infected and you lied; their body beat off the incipient infection without impact.

Now contemplate the problems this causes:

  • You think you have protection against reinfection via natural immunity.  But you don't.  You had some other virus or a claimed "asymptomatic" infection and never seroconverted.  There are plenty of people claiming that "one third or more of people who get Covid-19 never seroconvert."  In a word: Bull****.  The truth is that is 1/3rd or more of those claimed to have Covid-19 never had it at all.  They either had some other virus (e.g. RSV, OC43, influenza, etc.) or, in the case of no apparent illness they had nothing.  This is extremely dangerous to the people misled as they will believe they had the virus when they did not.  They know this and it is why the so-called "doctors", who are engaged in organized fraud, encourage people who "had" Covid-19 to get the jabs!  They know damn well that likely somewhere around half and perhaps as much as 75% or more of those who allegedly "had" Covid-19 never had the disease and are thus not protected.  A $5 test will prove this but they do not run them before jabbing you.  This is why they don't run said tests; it will blow up their "case" claims and they know it.

  • The person claimed to have been "positive" and their entire family gets hit with a quarantine ordertypically for 10 days.  The economic damage to them is immense.  They were never replication competent and could not have spread the virus to others as they were never infected in the first place.  These people were financially raped without cause and are entitled to recover every penny they were screwed out of by so-called "public health" officials and effectively placed under false arrest.  That's a criminal offense folks.

  • The number of cases are thus wildly inflated and make for insanely good "fear porn" all over the media but they're flat-out bull****.  This is active fraud, not a mistake; they could prove the "cases" are real for $5 and do not, on purpose.

  • This fraud then is used to fuel claims of re-infection when some of these people do later get Covid-19 and, in some cases, that "antibody titers disappear from actual infection within a couple of months."  Since nobody followed up on the original  infection this is not speculation -- it too is fraud because if someone never had Covid in the first place obviously they will have no antibody titer!

I had something very early in 2020 -- the first week of January.  I suspected it was Covid-19; it was nastyfar worse than my eventual actual Covid infection in August of this year.  For this reason I got very, very interested in sourcing antibody tests and eventually did.  Unfortunately they were IgG only; no IgA or IgM, but better than nothing.  I ran one on myself -- negative.

For the rest of the year I continually ran them every three months or so.  All were negative.  Whatever that was in January of 2020 it was not Covid-19, assuming the tests were valid.

Then in early August I got Covid, presumably Delta.  That was not fun.  I had one test remaining.  It was expired, but still in the sealed bag.  I ran it and got a weak positive for IgG.  I also ordered a few more tests.  They showed up a few days ago and I ran one of those.  It showed very weak IgM (some would say "inconclusive") and a definite positive for IgG.

I conclusively had Covid-19; I seroconverted where I was known negative prior to that illness.

Until and unless we prove claimed "cases" either by Ct numbers under 25, which are likely valid and followed up with an antibody test at least for those with Ct >= 25 the claimed "cases" and all claims made on that basis, including alleged "reinfections" are flat-out bull****.

Those are the facts folks.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)