In the Sunday Times, Phyllis Akalin profiles the extraordinary story of Kacper Surdy, a 20 year-old Durham University student who has unexpectedly become a go-to resource for Washington’s top policymakers, despite never having set foot in America. Here’s an excerpt:
In the past year senators, members of Congress, harried aides and political reporters have all turned to Surdy’s @Ringwiss Twitter/X account to help them through confusing legislative thickets. They use it because the account has an encyclopaedic knowledge of Congress’s arcane procedural rules, which can baffle even veteran politicos.
In the most powerful city on Earth, there is great advantage to be gained by those who are able to manipulate the complex rules of Capitol Hill. Yet as the account rose to prominence, Ringwiss’s true identity remained a mystery, its profile picture an image of Homer Simpson eating a doughnut.
Then, last weekend, it emerged that this guru was not a professor of politics, nor a fiendishly clever AI, but an economics student from Peterborough. An article on the Politico website revealed that Surdy was the brain behind Ringwiss.
Washington was stunned. “I don’t believe what I just read. I must still be asleep and dreaming,” said Eric Columbus, a congressional lawyer for Nancy Pelosi and counsel to President Biden on the Senate judiciary committee. …
Since being unmasked Surdy has been approached by political science professors from American universities, offering support in applying for master’s and PhDs, and his follower count has quadrupled to nearly 16,000. “I thought it would be quite funny to reveal who I am – and it was,” he says. “Since the article was published, I’ve had a few members of Congress follow me. It’s nice that they are taking an interest in these things – finally.” …
Surdy’s fascination with U.S. politics was sparked by the 2020 election. But while most of us were transfixed by Donald Trump’s verbal pyrotechnics, it was the procedural rules that got him hooked. “I just got so interested in all the technical stuff, I found it so fascinating,” he says. “I’ve never looked back since.”
You’ll need to set up an account to comment if you don’t already have one. We ask for a minimum donation of £5 if you'd like to make a comment or post in our Forums.
Stand in South Hill Park Bracknell every Sunday from 10am meet fellow lockdown sceptics, keep yourself sane, make new friends and have a laugh. Join our Stand in the Park – Bracknell – Telegram Group http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
If you wanted to impose a new system of health surveillance in which everybody’s health status needed to be tracked with a vaccine passport, then what you need is a vaccination that “wears off” and needs to be updated regularly.
If the vaccine worked indefinitely then once enough were vaccinated then the case for vax passports would disappear.
Precisely! If the “vaccine” tails off then that is proof for the need for boosters, forever. Probably designed in. Meanwhile some people have unadulterated immune systems . . .
Best and safest way to get immunity and herd immunity is to catch COVID and let every non-vulnerable person (and that’s the vast majority of people) recover from it with antibodies to the complete virus rather than risk an ineffective jab containing solely the spike protein clotting agent or means to make your entire body produce the viral clotting protein.
And as I understand it, this is why vaccinated people are the “variant factories” rather than the unvaccinated (understanding based on wife’s comments, who is a biologist who has worked in immunology),
We may be witnessing something in humans similar to what occurred with Marek’s syndrome in chickens.
I doubt this will happen to the full Marek’s Disease extent because we don’t live in disgusting battery cage conditions.
I do believe that we may get some very nasty variants though because it’s basic evolutionary biology and these are leaky vaccines.
A vaccine enhanced strain with higher lethality wouldn’t spread very far or for very long but that wouldn’t be of much comfort to you if you contracted it.
Of course. Which is why they are establishng the very opposite narrative most vehemently. And 99% of the 85% or so vaccination compliant have swallowed that lie and line full hook and sinker.
And most people who get the virus will not even know they’ve had it – this is the insanity of vaccinating perfectly healthy people who probably have natural immunity by now but won’t even know it and yet they still have had the experimental jab with possible serious side effects because they are being told to by this government.
One of the many ‘biggest crimes’ committed in connection with Covid.
But not asking for, or rather even mandating, antigen and T cell tests for EVERYONE before giving anyone the experimental gene therapies in particular proves that this mass ‘vaccination’ has absolutely nothing to do with proper public health.
“Fauci’s position is that if you are not vaccinated with the experimental mRNA cocktails, then you are a risk to others. Yet, if this is the case then that means the vaccines are useless. If unvaccinated people are a threat to vaccinated people, then what use are the vaccines in the first place?”
“However, if a highly vaccinated country like Israel cannot return to normal without constant threat of new restrictions you have to wonder if anyone can. “
its just a political choice whether to open up or lockdown. no-one in Israel is dying of covid
its just a political choice whether to open up or lockdown. no-one in Israel is dying of covid
That’s true but the scenario that’s now playing out is bit too similar to the one described by Geert Vanden Bossche, If the vaccinated are experiencing a reduction in protection then further mutations might result in it being lost altogether.
Let’s get a T cell or antigen test first.
If it’s positive, you will be immune for life and should not be subjected to any mandates, restrictions or coercions ever.
If not, you should get the option to get infected to obtain the same.
Obviously, either is perverse and neither should really be reality, but sadly the mandates, restrictions and coercions are.
The vaccines don’t prevent transmission.
The manufacturers have always said so.
Israel, the Seychelles, etc. prove it.
There is no game to stay ahead of.
True, but those who are peddling the idea of related “passports” ignore it. Might be wise not to invest too much in various pharmaceutical firms for the time being (not that its ever wise to put too much in one pot).
How long before this whole charade comes crashing down and the gullible souls who have taken part in this dangerous experiment demand know exactly why their health has been jeopardised this way? This is the largest medical scandal in history and could and should lead to the downfall of every government which has been pushing this junk on their populations. Maybe that is the ultimate aim of this project?
The gullible souls are unlikely to make any such demand. “It’s easier to fool people than convince them they have been fooled” with relevant credit to Mark Twain.
“Over half (55%) of the new infections are in fully vaccinated patients, according to recent data. Since the country has fully vaccinated about 60% of the population, this suggests the vaccine is not protecting from infection very much at all”
it does seem that way – makes a bit of a nonsense of passes for those who are double jabbed if they can still get it and spread it. but I suspect the carrot of freedom was more about getting more people jabbed than any health effects
There was a piece written by an Israeli saying just that. The green card scheme was never enforced, and as soon as enough younger people had been vaccinated, it was quietly dropped.
In other words they used the vaccine passport scheme as a temporary measure, which is the way such schemes are best used: as a way to allow certain activities to proceed before herd-immunity levels of vaccination are achieved.
Mhmm… it’s not looking like endemnicity will be reached by vaccination alone as sunetra Gupta has wondered. And if so governments will have no choice but to allow spread … are we then back to flatten the curve?
Herd immunity levels of vaccination are never going to be achieved. The only means by which herd immunity has been achieved is via natural infection and immunisation. Unfortunately the “vaccines” have depressed everyone’s immune systems, thereby destroying their natural immunity so now they are becoming infected again.
We’ve achieved herd immunity levels of vaccination for a whole load of diseases including measles and polio: why not for Covid?
We haven’t done it for flu, but that’s because the flu virus has a segmented genome that allows it to cut and paste entire sections (as opposed to just normal mutations which are more equivalent to changing individual words). Coronaviruses don’t have that particular trick available to them…
It was always clear.
They just invented the very opposite narrative and implemented it very successfully, above all into the jabbed sheeps head.
None of the discriminations against the unvaccinated ever were, are or will be medically justified.
They are pure evil and solely politics.
All this talk of getting jabbed
It’s getting me down, my love
Like a rat in a lab, waiting to drown
This time I’m coming down
And I hope you’re thinking of me
As you lay down on your side
Now the jabs don’t work
They just make you worse but I know I’ll see your face again
Now the jabs don’t work
They just make you worse
But I know I’ll see your face again
“But the vaccine is still conferring strong protection against severe symptoms of the virus, with hospitalisation rates remaining low.”
How do we know this? Correlation does not equal causation. Could be the rise in natural immunity, could be seasonal, could be that all the vulnerable people have died.
Most definitely so – they’re already failing as we can now see very plainly indeed.
Which brings us back to the big question: what are they really meant for?
You do not need to answer my question, we all know the answer, but the imbecilic majority do not.
Oh no, by a process of extrapolation, I think it’s fairly clear that we are not in a better position than this time last year, and therefore getting pretty poor value from those pharma billionaires we’ve created.
It will become more obvious in winter though. Unless they move the goalposts. Again.
The big question, and I don’t know if it’s addressed in the article (or elswhere) as I junked my telegraph sub, is are hospitalisation rates for younger age groups increasing for the vaccinated rather than the unvaccinated?
This will be a big canary, if it turns out to be making this pathogen more dangerous….
It’s never been addressed as the NHS still don’t distinguish between patients who’re actually admitted for respiratory disease, between those who’re already sick in hospital with something unrelated and then subsequently have a positive test but may or may not need covid treatment (if that’s even a thing) and between those who turn up with broken leg for instance, get admitted and discharged next day with a positive test in between. Plus there’s the mess of vaccine injuries now.
How ON EARTH clinicians and hospital managers manage to run the complex bed system when they have no way themselves of distinguishing between the above “covid admissions” is beyond me. They don’t even get told the threshold count and false positive/negative rates of the PCR tests they’re administering so it would appear that they have no way of diagnosing viral load without just repeating the same test again and again to see if it’s still the same.
This rather destroys the idea that you should get vaccinated to protect other people, now, doesn’t it. WIth this new evidence, we should likely vaccinate the elderly and the vulnerable and then donate the remaining vaccines to countries which still have elderly and vulnerable people to vaccinate because there’s little benefit in vaccinating people under 60 who are in good health.
Amen.
It was ever thus.
But our lockdowns already demonstrated that saving lives of ‘brown’ people was and is never on the agenda.
Least of all on that if the ‘wokes’.
The vaccine was never designed to sterilise. It was designed to reduce the impact of the disease.
Which is why the obsession with cases *and* vaccinating the young is classic mission drift.
We have vastly reduced death and reduced serious injury. That’s as much as we can reasonably do at this stage.
Time to get back to normal and push the costs of panic and fear onto those suffering from it. Once it starts to substantially impact their lives they may then reconsider.
I don’t think they designed it to minimise impact of the disease or to sterilise or not to sterilise. I think they designed it to flood the body with spike proteins and then in trials find out what the effect was.
What do they mean by “new infections”? Is this the usual nonsense of unreliable PCR testing with an absurdly high cycle threshold creating more “cases”? How many of these infected people require hospitalization or show any significant symptoms? I’m not saying the vax is good or bad. People still get sick for many different reasons.
This is something that bothers me. Say I am immune to Covid19 (either because I have had it, or because I have been vaccinated). Immunity is not like a force field just outside my body which repels the virus; it means that my immune system is ready to rock and roll as soon as a virus gets to me. But there will presumably be a short delay, so can I test positive in that gap?
Your immunity to a virus is also dependent on your overall health and particularly, with covid, vitamin D levels appear to be essential. How many people who got sick when they encountered the virus in December 2020 would have enjoyed a completely different outcome if they had encountered the virus in May or June 2020 when they were locked up in their houses?
For sure. Isn’t that what they actually mean by asymptomatic cases?
Not to mention test could also get contaminated, or if run at enough cycles could just be one broken bit of RNA that was floating around and got stuck inside your nose.
Presumeably they are talking about the relative risk reduction. Which is not that useful. Could someone actually clarify as this percentage really makes little sense.
When a manufacturers claim a vaccine is “95% effective” we must bear in mind that this is an estimate of relative risk as opposed to absolute risk, and can be somewhat misleading for the general public who will interpret this as “if I have the vaccine I’m 95% certain of not getting COVID” – this is not what “95% effective” means.
By way of example, in Pfizer’s large trial 8 of their vaccinated group of 18,198 participants went on to develop COVID-19 (0.044% risk), whereas a total of 162 of their un-vaccinated group of 18,325 participants went on to develop COVID-19 (0.88% risk).
The relative risk reduction calculation is thus 100 x 1-(0.044/0.88) = 95%, whereas the absolute risk reduction is a mere 0.88 – 0.044 = 0.84%.
Thus, if you were a vaccinated subject in Pfizer’s trial, there was a 99.96% chance you didn’t develop COVID-19. If you were an un-vaccinated subject there was still a 99.12% chance you didn’t develop COVID-19, the difference being the absolute risk of 0.84%
i.e. vaccination by Pfizer’s product actually reduces your personal risk by less than 1% and not 95%
Yes exactly this it’s reducing the chances from something incredibly unlikely to something else incredibly unlikely. Plus didn’t they have to just ignore the fact that “infections” rise in the three weeks after “vaccination” in order to get to 95%? Study also seemed to be done at a time when community prevalence was very low. I was also unable to find out whether these were just PCR cases or actual symptomatic clinical illnesses. It was a load of fudging and now it’s falling apart.
arfurmo
3 years ago
If I have understood it correctly, at one stage if you had 100 people doubly innoculated with Pfizer who were exposed to the virus only 6 of them would have tested positive.
Now 36 of them would.
Is that because Pfizer is not working against the delta variant or that the Pfizer vaccine becomes less effective in time?
Or some other reason?
Its not likely to be the time factor – there are other variants that have 10+ months of AB studies and its not showing and increase in rates.
617.2 exhibits partial evasion which is exactly what you’d expect as it acquires mutations and is put under evolutionary stress.
Ultimately even this reduced Pfizer is BETTER than the best AstraZenica can do against infection.
AZ even on PHEs own data was 59.8% effective against 617.2 for symptomatic infection.
Using the data from Table 1, we calculated the absolute risk difference to be 0.00006 (ARD for preventing one death after three to four weeks), which translates into an NNTV of 16,667. The 95% confidence interval spanned the range from 9000 to 50,000. Thus, between 9000 and 50,000 people need to be vaccinated, with a point-estimate of roughly 16,000, to prevent one COVID-19-related death.
And what a surprise, it’s been “retracted” despite having been peer reviewed.
Will
3 years ago
It is looking more and more likely that the “vaccines” do not stop infections or transmission at all, even if they appear to ameliorate symptoms in the weakest. As such, the priority now should be to expose as many people as possible to the virus in the summer months, with their immune systems replete with high levels of vitamin D. Hopefully the “vaccines” won’t have compromised the long term immunity that natural infections impart.
Absolutely, and it looks increasingly likely that they did exactly what Vallance warned they shouldn’t do if they wanted to avoid a surge in infections at the wrong time of year. Did they lockdown for such a long time last summer to precipitate the winter “surge” which would cover up the tens of thousands of vulnerable dying after having the vaccine?
It is looking more and more likely that the “vaccines” do not stop infections or transmission at all,
Agree. This has appeared to be the case for a while. If the vaccine prevented transmission then it would be unlikely that we’d see the current rate of infections in the UK.
Or in other words, the priority now should be to treat the Delta variant for what it is… The natural evolution of a severe coronavirus into a common cold. Probably would have been a hell of a lot quicker if we hadn’t been busy trying to stop it from its natural evolutionary path and doing our hardest to use experimental leaky vaccines to create a new “Marek’s disease” in humans.
I wonder if he eventually took the bullet to protect everyone else ( I know it’s a silly question). When he attempted to attend a meeting in Israel a few months ago to discuss the roll out, he was denied entry – allegedly – because he was uninjected. Waiting his turn, he said. Oh right. Pretending he’s someone with morals.
A Heretic
3 years ago
so the answer to “the vaccine doesn’t work” is “more vaccines”?
A bit like lockdowns then. Anyone see a pattern? They simply cannot and will not admit there is very little govts can do, in the short term, about covid.
In the unlikely event that Whitty and the rest get up and admit (a) lockdowns and vaccines have no useful effect on Covid19 but (b) screw the economy, then I suggest buying shares in lamp-post manufacturers.
Disclaimer: I am not a financial adviser. This is not financial advise.
Typical Cult behaviour.
Which is why they can and will only but always end in and with the catastrophe.
Here likely hundreds of millions of deaths due to the gene therapies that can’t be covered up, and/or the money having finally run out/become worthless.
Not that many members will ever really change their views thereafter, see Germans post WW2.
And in case anyone had any hopes of this mad hatter existence ending any time soon, they may need to reintroduce the Green Pass so that people who have had their vaccine and are still infectious anyway (because the vaccine doesn’t stop infection) can be distinguished from those who haven’t taken the vaccine and are also infectious.
it’s important that we distinguish between the infectious vaccinated people (they’re ok) and the infectious non-vaccinated people (who are not ok). That’s science.
And don’t forget where the term “mad hatter” came from – mercury poisoning, acquired at certain factories. They didn’t know how hazardous it was at the time, although it was a useful technique – a reasonable excuse, or maybe not?
A Heretic
3 years ago
How are those vaccine passports looking now?
“sorry, you haven’t had booster 9x12B so your holiday is cancelled.”
I’m 50 and haven’t been vaccinated. I think natural infection is probably safer. I might think differently if I was 80 – but hard to tell. They only contacted me 3 times for a vaccine and I ignored and they haven’t contacted me for months. If it stays like this and they don’t go after the kids – that’s ok for me at least. We will know in a year if the vaccines are great or a terrible idea. By that time covid will have gone the way of sars-cov-1 I expect so neither here nor there.
Absolutely. The mad and criminal rush and determination to inject everyone is not about health, we knew that for some time.
dnomsed
3 years ago
How do they determine the 94% effectiveness against severe disease or death? IMHO, this is fiction.
If you believe that vaccines are effective, then a patient who may have had mild disease were they unvaccinated, now has increased disease, but not critical, nor death.
The argument is nonsense. The person, without vaccine may have been absolutely fine. The subject was not submitted to two scenarios, nor were twins studied.
The original vaccine study results seemed to be no more than experimental noise. How on earth they made these outlandish absolute effectiveness claims from that data, makes no sense
Sandra Barwick
3 years ago
Alex Berenson thought it was really about 65 per cent in the first place. So they’re admitting what was always the truth, in order to sell the boosters. Which Pfizer has already told shareholders will be the source of ongoing profits.
This will all happen here next.
By jingo! The jollop doesn’t do the jumped-up job and the jolly old juice mightn’t be justified for jabbing, even juveniles. Just stop.
Paul Art
3 years ago
No skeptic has taken the position that life should have continued completely as normal…. excuse me, if we haven’t said that we dam well should have! Essentially that’s the whole point! I’m old enough to have lived through the last pandemic of serious note, Hong Kong flu, 1968 to 69 and I don’t ever remember having been required as a school kid to cover my face with a mask or being forbidden to play with my fellows, indeed I wasn’t at all aware there was any sort of public health emergency going on at the time until last year. Life for the majority most certainly should have continued as normal and if the arrival of the virus had been treated as a purely medical mater, rather than an opportunity to coerce the healthy we would be in at least a no worse position now, and very likely a much better one.
But then I forget, I am not a lockdown skeptic, rather a complete and implacable opponent! I am not remotely skeptical about the lockdown, it seems to me this is one area where things really are just right or wrong, and the lockdown was utterly and totally wrong, a disaster in every way, without any benefit or anything to recommend it whatsoever!
Hugh
3 years ago
“Death of a 13 year old after a ‘vaccine’ “.
Well blow me down, it’s started! If they use these things on children in Britain, they must be called outt for what they are.
marebobowl
3 years ago
Efficacy and safety data thin on the ground. No long term (like in years) efficacy and safety data. But yes, let’s just keep giving experimental biologicals to people despite the disturbing numbers of serious adverse events and over 6,000 deaths post vaccination. See CDC VAERS, which a Harvard study result shows VAERS may only represent 1% of real cases.
Glynthepin
3 years ago
Clearly the vaccine is not and has never been an immunisation against Covid, therefore how they can bring in Covid status passes on the basis of this injection is beyond me.
Stand in South Hill Park Bracknell every Sunday from 10am meet fellow lockdown sceptics, keep yourself sane, make new friends and have a laugh. Join our Stand in the Park – Bracknell – Telegram Group http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
So two shots haven’t worked as we hoped buy hey, Third Times A Charm!
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/25/dr-fauci-double-mask-during-covid-makes-common-sense-more-effective.html
Dr. Fauci: Double-masking makes ‘common sense’ and is likely more effective
Sounds like a pattern of lying.
Yes, watch Dr Byram Bridle wear 5 and still be able to emit aerosols
A pattern of sadism.
Boy, 16, had cardiac arrest after exercise following 1st Pfizer vaccine dose
Yahoo News Singapore
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/boy-16-cardiac-arrest-exercis-covid-vaccine-110750152.html?guccounter=1
Stand in South Hill Park Bracknell every Sunday from 10am meet fellow lockdown sceptics, keep yourself sane, make new friends and have a laugh.
Join our Stand in the Park – Bracknell – Telegram Group
http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
If you wanted to impose a new system of health surveillance in which everybody’s health status needed to be tracked with a vaccine passport, then what you need is a vaccination that “wears off” and needs to be updated regularly.
If the vaccine worked indefinitely then once enough were vaccinated then the case for vax passports would disappear.
Precisely! If the “vaccine” tails off then that is proof for the need for boosters, forever. Probably designed in. Meanwhile some people have unadulterated immune systems . . .
Fool me once….
Fool me twice….
Fool me a third, fourth, fifth etc. time…?!?
Best and safest way to get immunity and herd immunity is to catch COVID and let every non-vulnerable person (and that’s the vast majority of people) recover from it with antibodies to the complete virus rather than risk an ineffective jab containing solely the spike protein clotting agent or means to make your entire body produce the viral clotting protein.
How long have we been saying this?!!!
march last year! and would have been normal pre-march response to a new mild virus
And as I understand it, this is why vaccinated people are the “variant factories” rather than the unvaccinated (understanding based on wife’s comments, who is a biologist who has worked in immunology),
Tut tut, you shouldn’t be listening to your wife, you should be reporting her to the Stasi for spreading misinformation.
We may be witnessing something in humans similar to what occurred with Marek’s syndrome in chickens.
I doubt this will happen to the full Marek’s Disease extent because we don’t live in disgusting battery cage conditions.
I do believe that we may get some very nasty variants though because it’s basic evolutionary biology and these are leaky vaccines.
A vaccine enhanced strain with higher lethality wouldn’t spread very far or for very long but that wouldn’t be of much comfort to you if you contracted it.
Of course. Which is why they are establishng the very opposite narrative most vehemently. And 99% of the 85% or so vaccination compliant have swallowed that lie and line full hook and sinker.
And most people who get the virus will not even know they’ve had it – this is the insanity of vaccinating perfectly healthy people who probably have natural immunity by now but won’t even know it and yet they still have had the experimental jab with possible serious side effects because they are being told to by this government.
One of the many ‘biggest crimes’ committed in connection with Covid.
But not asking for, or rather even mandating, antigen and T cell tests for EVERYONE before giving anyone the experimental gene therapies in particular proves that this mass ‘vaccination’ has absolutely nothing to do with proper public health.
And the jabs might be deleting their natural immunity…
“Fauci’s position is that if you are not vaccinated with the experimental mRNA cocktails, then you are a risk to others. Yet, if this is the case then that means the vaccines are useless. If unvaccinated people are a threat to vaccinated people, then what use are the vaccines in the first place?”
How can you ask that? Have you not seen the numbers of new billionaires that this has created?
“However, if a highly vaccinated country like Israel cannot return to normal without constant threat of new restrictions you have to wonder if anyone can. “
its just a political choice whether to open up or lockdown. no-one in Israel is dying of covid
https://euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/
Ask Sweden, and the 40 open states in America how it’s done maybe?
That’s true but the scenario that’s now playing out is bit too similar to the one described by Geert Vanden Bossche, If the vaccinated are experiencing a reduction in protection then further mutations might result in it being lost altogether.
The vaccines will need to stay ahead of the game.
Or, maybe, people could be exposed to the virus and develop natural immunity….
my preferred solution – at least for myself and my kids
Let’s get a T cell or antigen test first.
If it’s positive, you will be immune for life and should not be subjected to any mandates, restrictions or coercions ever.
If not, you should get the option to get infected to obtain the same.
Obviously, either is perverse and neither should really be reality, but sadly the mandates, restrictions and coercions are.
The vaccines don’t prevent transmission.
The manufacturers have always said so.
Israel, the Seychelles, etc. prove it.
There is no game to stay ahead of.
This is a bit like one interpretation of the 3 laws of thermodynamics:
True, but those who are peddling the idea of related “passports” ignore it. Might be wise not to invest too much in various pharmaceutical firms for the time being (not that its ever wise to put too much in one pot).
How long before this whole charade comes crashing down and the gullible souls who have taken part in this dangerous experiment demand know exactly why their health has been jeopardised this way? This is the largest medical scandal in history and could and should lead to the downfall of every government which has been pushing this junk on their populations. Maybe that is the ultimate aim of this project?
It won’t come crashing down
Too many people have invested too much in it, including most of the populations of the rich world who have gone along with lockdowns and jabs
The chances of everyone recognising it has been a stupid mistake are zero
But we can jolly well picket them if this 13 year old (and maybe other children in the future) has died because of the “vaccine”.
The gullible souls are unlikely to make any such demand.
“It’s easier to fool people than convince them they have been fooled”
with relevant credit to Mark Twain.
“Over half (55%) of the new infections are in fully vaccinated patients, according to recent data. Since the country has fully vaccinated about 60% of the population, this suggests the vaccine is not protecting from infection very much at all”
it does seem that way – makes a bit of a nonsense of passes for those who are double jabbed if they can still get it and spread it. but I suspect the carrot of freedom was more about getting more people jabbed than any health effects
There was a piece written by an Israeli saying just that. The green card scheme was never enforced, and as soon as enough younger people had been vaccinated, it was quietly dropped.
In other words they used the vaccine passport scheme as a temporary measure, which is the way such schemes are best used: as a way to allow certain activities to proceed before herd-immunity levels of vaccination are achieved.
Mhmm… it’s not looking like endemnicity will be reached by vaccination alone as sunetra Gupta has wondered. And if so governments will have no choice but to allow spread … are we then back to flatten the curve?
If this is how it works out, I am going to be p*ss**g myself laughing at NZ.
Oh no, not another 3 weeks.
Herd immunity levels of vaccination are never going to be achieved. The only means by which herd immunity has been achieved is via natural infection and immunisation. Unfortunately the “vaccines” have depressed everyone’s immune systems, thereby destroying their natural immunity so now they are becoming infected again.
We’ve achieved herd immunity levels of vaccination for a whole load of diseases including measles and polio: why not for Covid?
We haven’t done it for flu, but that’s because the flu virus has a segmented genome that allows it to cut and paste entire sections (as opposed to just normal mutations which are more equivalent to changing individual words). Coronaviruses don’t have that particular trick available to them…
It was always clear.
They just invented the very opposite narrative and implemented it very successfully, above all into the jabbed sheeps head.
None of the discriminations against the unvaccinated ever were, are or will be medically justified.
They are pure evil and solely politics.
With apologies to the Verve in advance
All this talk of getting jabbed
It’s getting me down, my love
Like a rat in a lab, waiting to drown
This time I’m coming down
And I hope you’re thinking of me
As you lay down on your side
Now the jabs don’t work
They just make you worse but I know I’ll see your face again
Now the jabs don’t work
They just make you worse
But I know I’ll see your face again
“But the vaccine is still conferring strong protection against severe symptoms of the virus, with hospitalisation rates remaining low.”
How do we know this? Correlation does not equal causation. Could be the rise in natural immunity, could be seasonal, could be that all the vulnerable people have died.
could be the delta variant is less dangerous. we need to know who is dying/not dying, not just overall numbers
Misinformation! Misinformation! Report for reprogramming and/or organ donation!
Until winter comes along I really don’t think these vaccines will be tested.
And then they will comprehensively fail.
Most definitely so – they’re already failing as we can now see very plainly indeed.
Which brings us back to the big question: what are they really meant for?
You do not need to answer my question, we all know the answer, but the imbecilic majority do not.
ADE…
Oh no, by a process of extrapolation, I think it’s fairly clear that we are not in a better position than this time last year, and therefore getting pretty poor value from those pharma billionaires we’ve created.
It will become more obvious in winter though. Unless they move the goalposts. Again.
The big question, and I don’t know if it’s addressed in the article (or elswhere) as I junked my telegraph sub, is are hospitalisation rates for younger age groups increasing for the vaccinated rather than the unvaccinated?
This will be a big canary, if it turns out to be making this pathogen more dangerous….
It’s never been addressed as the NHS still don’t distinguish between patients who’re actually admitted for respiratory disease, between those who’re already sick in hospital with something unrelated and then subsequently have a positive test but may or may not need covid treatment (if that’s even a thing) and between those who turn up with broken leg for instance, get admitted and discharged next day with a positive test in between. Plus there’s the mess of vaccine injuries now.
How ON EARTH clinicians and hospital managers manage to run the complex bed system when they have no way themselves of distinguishing between the above “covid admissions” is beyond me. They don’t even get told the threshold count and false positive/negative rates of the PCR tests they’re administering so it would appear that they have no way of diagnosing viral load without just repeating the same test again and again to see if it’s still the same.
don’t distinguish? well I never – anyone would think they had something to hide!
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/07/joseph-mercola/might-covid-injections-reduce-lifespan/
More to come….
And some useful advice for those who’ve had the jab and are now concerned.
This rather destroys the idea that you should get vaccinated to protect other people, now, doesn’t it. WIth this new evidence, we should likely vaccinate the elderly and the vulnerable and then donate the remaining vaccines to countries which still have elderly and vulnerable people to vaccinate because there’s little benefit in vaccinating people under 60 who are in good health.
Amen.
It was ever thus.
But our lockdowns already demonstrated that saving lives of ‘brown’ people was and is never on the agenda.
Least of all on that if the ‘wokes’.
The vaccine was never designed to sterilise. It was designed to reduce the impact of the disease.
Which is why the obsession with cases *and* vaccinating the young is classic mission drift.
We have vastly reduced death and reduced serious injury. That’s as much as we can reasonably do at this stage.
Time to get back to normal and push the costs of panic and fear onto those suffering from it. Once it starts to substantially impact their lives they may then reconsider.
I don’t think they designed it to minimise impact of the disease or to sterilise or not to sterilise. I think they designed it to flood the body with spike proteins and then in trials find out what the effect was.
We will know fully in a couple of years
Mission creep?
Mission dead on track more like.
Vaccines don’t make you free
Whoever would have predicted that?
Me!
Yellow card for victims, yellow star for refusers.
In other news, garlic shown not to be as effective against new breed of vampires as previously thought.
What do they mean by “new infections”? Is this the usual nonsense of unreliable PCR testing with an absurdly high cycle threshold creating more “cases”? How many of these infected people require hospitalization or show any significant symptoms? I’m not saying the vax is good or bad. People still get sick for many different reasons.
This is something that bothers me. Say I am immune to Covid19 (either because I have had it, or because I have been vaccinated). Immunity is not like a force field just outside my body which repels the virus; it means that my immune system is ready to rock and roll as soon as a virus gets to me. But there will presumably be a short delay, so can I test positive in that gap?
Your immunity to a virus is also dependent on your overall health and particularly, with covid, vitamin D levels appear to be essential. How many people who got sick when they encountered the virus in December 2020 would have enjoyed a completely different outcome if they had encountered the virus in May or June 2020 when they were locked up in their houses?
I’m not worried about my health, it is more the question of whether I (or other people) can test positive even though they are immune.
For sure. Isn’t that what they actually mean by asymptomatic cases?
Not to mention test could also get contaminated, or if run at enough cycles could just be one broken bit of RNA that was floating around and got stuck inside your nose.
I think so.
Presumeably they are talking about the relative risk reduction. Which is not that useful. Could someone actually clarify as this percentage really makes little sense.
When a manufacturers claim a vaccine is “95% effective” we must bear in mind that this is an estimate of relative risk as opposed to absolute risk, and can be somewhat misleading for the general public who will interpret this as “if I have the vaccine I’m 95% certain of not getting COVID” – this is not what “95% effective” means.
By way of example, in Pfizer’s large trial 8 of their vaccinated group of 18,198 participants went on to develop COVID-19 (0.044% risk), whereas a total of 162 of their un-vaccinated group of 18,325 participants went on to develop COVID-19 (0.88% risk).
The relative risk reduction calculation is thus 100 x 1-(0.044/0.88) = 95%, whereas the absolute risk reduction is a mere 0.88 – 0.044 = 0.84%.
Thus, if you were a vaccinated subject in Pfizer’s trial, there was a 99.96% chance you didn’t develop COVID-19. If you were an un-vaccinated subject there was still a 99.12% chance you didn’t develop COVID-19, the difference being the absolute risk of 0.84%
i.e. vaccination by Pfizer’s product actually reduces your personal risk by less than 1% and not 95%
Yes exactly this
it’s reducing the chances from something incredibly unlikely to something else incredibly unlikely. Plus didn’t they have to just ignore the fact that “infections” rise in the three weeks after “vaccination” in order to get to 95%? Study also seemed to be done at a time when community prevalence was very low. I was also unable to find out whether these were just PCR cases or actual symptomatic clinical illnesses. It was a load of fudging and now it’s falling apart.
If I have understood it correctly, at one stage if you had 100 people doubly innoculated with Pfizer who were exposed to the virus only 6 of them would have tested positive.
Now 36 of them would.
Is that because Pfizer is not working against the delta variant or that the Pfizer vaccine becomes less effective in time?
Or some other reason?
dunno. but the cohort of double jabbed people has also changed over time which complicates matters
I doubt they really know as this is all so new.
or given the small numbers the results were just random noise.
Its not likely to be the time factor – there are other variants that have 10+ months of AB studies and its not showing and increase in rates.
617.2 exhibits partial evasion which is exactly what you’d expect as it acquires mutations and is put under evolutionary stress.
Ultimately even this reduced Pfizer is BETTER than the best AstraZenica can do against infection.
AZ even on PHEs own data was 59.8% effective against 617.2 for symptomatic infection.
Using the data from Table 1 , we calculated the absolute risk difference to be 0.00006 (ARD for preventing one death after three to four weeks), which translates into an NNTV of 16,667. The 95% confidence interval spanned the range from 9000 to 50,000. Thus, between 9000 and 50,000 people need to be vaccinated, with a point-estimate of roughly 16,000, to prevent one COVID-19-related death.
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/9/7/693/htm
And what a surprise, it’s been “retracted” despite having been peer reviewed.
It is looking more and more likely that the “vaccines” do not stop infections or transmission at all, even if they appear to ameliorate symptoms in the weakest. As such, the priority now should be to expose as many people as possible to the virus in the summer months, with their immune systems replete with high levels of vitamin D. Hopefully the “vaccines” won’t have compromised the long term immunity that natural infections impart.
shouldnt have locked down last spring but given we did we should have opened up immediately we saw hospitals weren’t being overwhelmed
Absolutely, and it looks increasingly likely that they did exactly what Vallance warned they shouldn’t do if they wanted to avoid a surge in infections at the wrong time of year. Did they lockdown for such a long time last summer to precipitate the winter “surge” which would cover up the tens of thousands of vulnerable dying after having the vaccine?
Agree. This has appeared to be the case for a while. If the vaccine prevented transmission then it would be unlikely that we’d see the current rate of infections in the UK.
Or in other words, the priority now should be to treat the Delta variant for what it is… The natural evolution of a severe coronavirus into a common cold. Probably would have been a hell of a lot quicker if we hadn’t been busy trying to stop it from its natural evolutionary path and doing our hardest to use experimental leaky vaccines to create a new “Marek’s disease” in humans.
Roll up! Roll up! Get yer next jab ere!
The CEO of Pfizer reckons everyone will need a third shot of the product his company produces.
Very objective.
That was misstated. He meant 3 shots per year, forever.
I wonder if he eventually took the bullet to protect everyone else ( I know it’s a silly question). When he attempted to attend a meeting in Israel a few months ago to discuss the roll out, he was denied entry – allegedly – because he was uninjected. Waiting his turn, he said. Oh right. Pretending he’s someone with morals.
so the answer to “the vaccine doesn’t work” is “more vaccines”?
A bit like lockdowns then. Anyone see a pattern? They simply cannot and will not admit there is very little govts can do, in the short term, about covid.
In the unlikely event that Whitty and the rest get up and admit (a) lockdowns and vaccines have no useful effect on Covid19 but (b) screw the economy, then I suggest buying shares in lamp-post manufacturers.
Disclaimer: I am not a financial adviser. This is not financial advise.
Typical Cult behaviour.
Which is why they can and will only but always end in and with the catastrophe.
Here likely hundreds of millions of deaths due to the gene therapies that can’t be covered up, and/or the money having finally run out/become worthless.
Not that many members will ever really change their views thereafter, see Germans post WW2.
Yes. This is what Einstein warned *against*. Madness is repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome.
And in case anyone had any hopes of this mad hatter existence ending any time soon, they may need to reintroduce the Green Pass so that people who have had their vaccine and are still infectious anyway (because the vaccine doesn’t stop infection) can be distinguished from those who haven’t taken the vaccine and are also infectious.
it’s important that we distinguish between the infectious vaccinated people (they’re ok) and the infectious non-vaccinated people (who are not ok). That’s science.
The pass will need constant updating depending on whether you need a booster. With boosters, the whole population will never be fully vaccinated.
And don’t forget where the term “mad hatter” came from – mercury poisoning, acquired at certain factories. They didn’t know how hazardous it was at the time, although it was a useful technique – a reasonable excuse, or maybe not?
How are those vaccine passports looking now?
“sorry, you haven’t had booster 9x12B so your holiday is cancelled.”
So the sodding snake oils don’t work.
Who’d have thought it?
…
I’m 50 and haven’t been vaccinated. I think natural infection is probably safer. I might think differently if I was 80 – but hard to tell. They only contacted me 3 times for a vaccine and I ignored and they haven’t contacted me for months. If it stays like this and they don’t go after the kids – that’s ok for me at least. We will know in a year if the vaccines are great or a terrible idea. By that time covid will have gone the way of sars-cov-1 I expect so neither here nor there.
Absolutely. The mad and criminal rush and determination to inject everyone is not about health, we knew that for some time.
How do they determine the 94% effectiveness against severe disease or death? IMHO, this is fiction.
If you believe that vaccines are effective, then a patient who may have had mild disease were they unvaccinated, now has increased disease, but not critical, nor death.
The argument is nonsense. The person, without vaccine may have been absolutely fine. The subject was not submitted to two scenarios, nor were twins studied.
The original vaccine study results seemed to be no more than experimental noise. How on earth they made these outlandish absolute effectiveness claims from that data, makes no sense
Alex Berenson thought it was really about 65 per cent in the first place. So they’re admitting what was always the truth, in order to sell the boosters. Which Pfizer has already told shareholders will be the source of ongoing profits.
This will all happen here next.
By jingo! The jollop doesn’t do the jumped-up job and the jolly old juice mightn’t be justified for jabbing, even juveniles. Just stop.
No skeptic has taken the position that life should have continued completely as normal…. excuse me, if we haven’t said that we dam well should have! Essentially that’s the whole point! I’m old enough to have lived through the last pandemic of serious note, Hong Kong flu, 1968 to 69 and I don’t ever remember having been required as a school kid to cover my face with a mask or being forbidden to play with my fellows, indeed I wasn’t at all aware there was any sort of public health emergency going on at the time until last year. Life for the majority most certainly should have continued as normal and if the arrival of the virus had been treated as a purely medical mater, rather than an opportunity to coerce the healthy we would be in at least a no worse position now, and very likely a much better one.
But then I forget, I am not a lockdown skeptic, rather a complete and implacable opponent! I am not remotely skeptical about the lockdown, it seems to me this is one area where things really are just right or wrong, and the lockdown was utterly and totally wrong, a disaster in every way, without any benefit or anything to recommend it whatsoever!
“Death of a 13 year old after a ‘vaccine’ “.
Well blow me down, it’s started! If they use these things on children in Britain, they must be called outt for what they are.
Efficacy and safety data thin on the ground. No long term (like in years) efficacy and safety data. But yes, let’s just keep giving experimental biologicals to people despite the disturbing numbers of serious adverse events and over 6,000 deaths post vaccination. See CDC VAERS, which a Harvard study result shows VAERS may only represent 1% of real cases.
Clearly the vaccine is not and has never been an immunisation against Covid, therefore how they can bring in Covid status passes on the basis of this injection is beyond me.
Boy, 16, had cardiac arrest after exercise following 1st Pfizer vaccine dose
Yahoo News Singapore
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/boy-16-cardiac-arrest-exercis-covid-vaccine-110750152.html?guccounter=1
Stand in South Hill Park Bracknell every Sunday from 10am meet fellow lockdown sceptics, keep yourself sane, make new friends and have a laugh.
Join our Stand in the Park – Bracknell – Telegram Group
http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell