by Karl Denninger, Market Ticker:
There is a reason science is a process and until you understand something you should keep your ******ned mouth shut.
Especially when all you have against 40+ years of hard science is computer models.
Massssskss was one of them. I warned early on that physics said masks could not work if the virus was in aerosols or transmitted in feces, no matter whether the feces were manually spread or through aerosols. We knew this was virtually certain when a mass-spread event happened twice in Wuhan and Hong Kong in apartments on the same vertical drain stack where there were no P-traps; the people infected did not know each other and thus any other form of transmission other than through fecal aerosol was wildly improbable. That was ignored. We then had the German meatpacking plant where everyone was wearing masks and yet a huge outbreak took place across tens of feet, a claimed impossibility. Yet it happened and was proved by RNA sequencing; the researchers were able to identify the index and daughter cases and thus conclusively prove that the infections happened in that plant via that route, despite masks.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
Now MIT has weighed in and said the same thing. They try to sidestep the mask issue in their “research” but fail; nothing less than an N95, which is not a mask but rather a respirator, stops aerosols, and source control does not work even with N95s because when you exhale the positive pressure escapes around the edges and for aerosols goes right through the gaps. Workplaces and airlines have banned N95s with exhaust valves which preserve the seal on your face and thus are the only ones that will provide protection for you against inhaling said aerosol. Non-valved respirators repeatedly break said seal and thus render it ineffective within minutes. Don’t believe me? Put on an N95 without a valve and do some sanding where there’s lots of dust, when you take it off let me know what you find around the edges where the respirator used to be. This is why you want the ones with a valve and why the ones I have for such work have a valve.
Pay attention to this paper folks and note its publication date, January 2021. Nobody has paid any attention to it at all yet it is peer-reviewed in Nature, one of the “better” medical publications. I will start right here with what you do not want to read, but you damn well should before you take the shots.
This T cell-mediated immune response is even more important as studies on humoral immunity to SARS-CoV-1 provided evidence that antibody responses are short-lived and can even cause or aggravate virus-associated lung pathology
Note that when you get the shot the first thing you get is antibodies; you may get a T-cell reaction. This pre-existing knowledge, from SARS (CoV-1) entirely explains why people who just got vaccinated often get hammered by the virus and frequently end up in the hospital or die. It marks the premise of attempting to vaccinate out of a pandemic where transmission is actively occurring as stupid.
You go get the shot. Five days later you get the virus. You have not yet developed immunity and the partial expression makes it worse.
You would have been better off, by far, taking the same infection straight up front. It likely would have harmed you less.
This generally applies, by the way, to all vaccines and all viruses. The government and researchers know this. They’ve known this for decades. It’s fact. It’s why you don’t wait until the measles is raging around you to get a measles vaccine and the same is true for the flu shot; you get it before the flu season starts for this very reason. Attempting to vaccinate out of a raging infection does not work and in fact kills people.
Yeah, if you don’t get infected during that latent period you get protection. But if you do get infected you’re screwed and all of the two-dose shots have a roughly four week window during which you get hosed instead of protected. Israel’s data, by the way, proves this is real; Berenson has been reporting on it since the beginning of the year and I’ve noted it as well.
If you remember I’ve also pointed out that multiple studies have shown that somewhere between 30-50% of the population is T-cell reactive to Covid-19 despite never having had it, nor SARS or MERS, its alleged “precursors.” But those studies were non-specific; that is, they looked for T-cell reactivity but never tried to identify the specific protein sequences and their part of the whole that was involved. This study does, and it finally puts light on basically the entire reason that what we’ve done is not only wrong it’s criminally stupid.
These folks did what we should have done originally — they isolated a panel of 120 peptides that comprised roughly 10% of the entire virus, containing 57% and 1% of the nucleocapsid and spike proteins. Note that while the “spike” facilitates entry into the cell there is evidence that it is, standing alone, pathological — that is, it causes disease in the human body without the rest of the virus. The nucleocapsid portion, on the other hand, is the part that is responsible for replication; if it is tagged and the cell containing it is destroyed then viral replication is prevented even though penetration of the cell has occurred.
I draw your attention to this graph:
This fully explains the wild divergence in outcomes even among similarly-morbid people. The more “matches” you have on a pre-existing basis the more-fully your immune system can recognize the virus and while you will get infected if those matches are among the nucleocapsid section you’re much more-likely to drive it off without serious consequence.
Note that among the “PRE” (not-infected) collection of samples all were prior to November of 2019 and thus presumed non-infected. We in fact know there were infections during that time frame but most in that group were from wildly before Covid-19 by as much as 10 years or more, so the cross-contamination percentage is going to be very low.
Now let me point to the data itself.
Of the SARS donors, 100% showed T cell responses to cross-reactive and/or specific ECs (HLA class I 86%, HLA-DR 100%; Fig. 5d,e), whereas 81% of PRE donors showed HLA class I (16%) and/or HLA-DR (77%) T cell responses to cross-reactive ECs (Fig. 5d).
81% eh? Isn’t that an interesting number? Where have we seen that before?
You know damn well where, don’t you?
It’s the rough percentage of alleged Covid-19 infections that were either asymptomatic or very low-symptom for which no medical treatment was sought and, in many cases, not detected.
So it wasn’t 30 or 50% who had pre-existing protection it’s actually roughly 8 in 10! This was not a “novel, everyone is susceptible” virus at all. It never was. You were lied to from the very beginning and thus all the “models” based on that were trash.
Again, just a bit further down:
Taken together, SARS-CoV-2 T cell epitopes enabled detection of post-infectious T cell immunity in 100% of individuals convalescing from COVID-19 and revealed pre-existing T cell responses in 81% of unexposed individuals.
Now we know why Diamond Princess happened the way it did. It was never possible for more than 20% of the people on that ship to get seriously-symptomatic Covid-19 despite being cooped up in close quarters for weeks with an aerosol-spread disease and cruise passengers generally being wildly-overrepresented for various morbidity factors. It also completely explains why one of two people quarantined in the same cabin got sick and the other did not.
We also know why my friend’s grandfather was killed by it but his equally-morbid grandmother was not touched symptomatically even though she tested positive despite literally sleeping in the same bed with him until he wound up in the hospital and ultimately expired.
We also know why there is no place on the planet that has seen >20% of people with significant, symptomatic disease from Covid-19. Not a single place has had that happen, even where sanitation is crap and people spread it like crazy (e.g. Iran where they lick monuments sequentially — literally.)
This study explains every single example seen everywhere in the world, including high-concentration examples, of infection with Covid-19 back to the start of the pandemic. We now know why no more than 20% of any exposed population has ever exhibited materially-serious disease — it simply was not possible as no more than 20% of the population was potentially susceptible to serious disease. Ever. Period.
EVERY SINGLE STATEMENT OTHERWISE WAS FALSE AND EXACTLY ZERO SO-CALLED “PUBLIC HEALTH” AUTHORITIES OR POLITICANS HAVE EVER ADMITTED TO THIS, YET IT IS NOW SCIENTIFICALLY PROVED THEY WERE COMPLETELY FULL OF CRAP FROM THE FIRST DAY ONWARD AND WE KNEW SO, BUT NOT WHY, AFTER DIAMOND PRINCESS AS I HAVE REPEATEDLY POINTED OUT.
NOW WE KNOW WHY — WITH SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY.
Let me distill this down for you before I go on:
In 100% of the persons who had and recovered from Covid-19 and 81% of those who have never had the virus a vaccine may well be worthless as they already have T-cell response. While this will not prevent them from getting it again there is questionable at best benefit over their existing immunological state but there is risk, including a risk of death, from the side effects.
Furthermore, evidence was provided for a lower recognition frequency of cross-reactive HLA-DR EC in hospitalized patients compared to donors with mild COVID-19 course, which might suggest a lack of pre-existing SARS-CoV-2 T cells in severely ill patients.
No kidding? Gee, yet more points of contact with the obvious?
Then there’s this:
Our observation that intensity of T cell responses and recognition rate of T cell epitopes was significantly higher in convalescent patients compared to unexposed individuals suggests that not only expansion, but also a spread of SARS-CoV-2 T cell response diversity occurs upon active infection.
Let me be clear: The entire premise of all of the “mitigations” and demand for mass-vaccination relied on a lie; that this was a “novel” virus to which nobody had existing resistance. We now know that’s false; 81% of the population in fact does have existing immunity and further, that immunity is strengthened, materially so, by natural infection. In short if you have said partial resistance you want to get the disease as the odds of you being seriously harmed are statistically zero yet you will perfect your immunity and from a public health perspective you want those people who are not going to be seriously harmed to get it naturally, not take a ******ned shot because it is that perfection of immunity that stops the disease from being of harm to the public on a durable basis.