Monday, December 12, 2022

Crossing the Rubicon

 With his call to "terminate" the US Constitution, Trump took an irreversible step too far. You can read my take on this treasonous and dangerous call here.

Monday, November 28, 2022

A large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled US study of Ivermectin as a treatment for Covid

Many people still believe and argue vehemently that Ivermectin could have  been a miracle cure for Covid, but was suppressed by Anthony Fauci and others in order to guarantee huge profits for Big Pharma.

I report on new research that should, but will not, hammer a final nail in that argument's coffin:

How healthy is your brain?

 Cognitive neurologist Dr. James Galvin argues that we need to shift the focus from brain disease to brain health, and provides a well-researched roadmap to accomplish that. You can read about it here:

https://www.opednews.com/articles/How-healthy-is-your-brain-Alzheimers_Brain_Brain-Health_Health-221121-735.html

Where have all the sperm cells gone?

 You can read myOpEdNews post about the worldwide decline in sperm counts, and what that implies, here:

https://www.opednews.com/articles/Where-have-all-the-sperm-c-Fertility_Fertility_Health_Health-Care-Reproductive-221121-675.html

Those unpopular public health measures actually work

 You can find my OpEdNews story about some new research on the effectiveness of border closings, lockdowns and other public health measures here:

https://www.opednews.com/articles/Those-unpopular-public-hea-Corona-Virus-Coronavirus-Covid-19_Covid-Restrictions-Close-Downs_Covid-19_Public-Health-221115-172.html


Saturday, October 01, 2022

What makes nations happy or sad?

New research singles out the one factor that moves whole nations up or down the happiness scale. You can read my OpEdNews post about this here.


What makes for a happy country?

Credit: PxHere/Flickr

Tuesday, September 13, 2022

New research more than triples the value to society of cutting CO2

 As the world reels from unprecedented   heatwaves, droughts, wildfires, torrential rains and floodingwe're all learning first-hand that loading the atmosphere with carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses is costly. Unfortunately, to a large extent, those costs are not accounted for, or as economists say, they are externalized, meaning that polluters profit while society pays.

Unprecedented flooding in Pakistan, 2022

Credit: United Nations

The million of Pakistanis whose lives have been disrupted by unprecedented flooding--even though Pakistan emits less than one percent of the world's greenhouse gasses--can attest to that.

Some countries, including the United States, attempt to mitigate those externalized costs by estimating the social costs of carbon (SCC) and adjusting taxes, surcharges or subsidies accordingly. For example, industries can be taxed for the greenhouse gasses they emit, ideally resulting in lower emissions, while the revenue from those taxes can be used to subsidize green energy programs.

Since official valuations of the SCC underpin climate-related policy-making by governments and industries, it's vitally important that they be as accurate as possible.

A just-released peer-reviewed study published inNature calculates that the current SCC, used by the US government for the past decade, is far too low. The study's updated calculations set the actual cost of CO2 emissions as at least $185 per metric ton (2205 pounds), 3.6 times higher than the current figure of $51 per metric ton.

In other words, policy-makers need to multiply their current estimates of the costs to society of business-as-usual CO2 emissions by a factor of 3.6, and do the same when evaluating the benefits to society of policies to reduce future emissions.

The researchers found that three factors made the biggest contributions to this new benchmark: heat-related deaths, impacts on agriculture and an updated discount rate. As much of the US reels under record-high temperatures and drought, heat-related deaths and the impacts on agriculture of climate change are self-explanatory. The researchers' use of a revised discount rate may require some explanation:

Economists use discount rates to compare current and future consequences of a proposed action, for example a loan or investment, based on the idea that money gained or lost in the future is worth less than the same amount gained or lost today. It's a more precise version of the idea behind the aphorism "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush."

In dealing with environmental economics, the discount rate can be generalized to reflect "the rate at which society as a whole is willing to trade off present for future benefits" for example keeping fuel prices low today vs reducing temperatures ten years from now.

For the past decade evaluations of the future costs or benefits of climate-related policies have been based on a discount rate of three percent. The current research reduces that rate to two percent, a change that makes the future impacts of today's choices more salient. For example, using a discount rate of 3%, a climate-related investment of $1,000 today would have to produce more than $1,842 in benefits within the next 20 years to be economically justifiable. Using a 2% discount rate means that the same investment would only need to produce $1,497 in benefits over the same time period.

Economist Brian Prest, one of the paper's authors explains that the official discount rate of 3% was based on financial data from the 30-year period from 1973 to 2003. Updating that with data from the most recent 30 years produced the 2% figure that they folded into their calculations.

The researchers note that the actual costs to society of carbon emissions are almost certainly greater than their $185 per metric ton estimate because there are significant impacts that remain un-accounted for. Their calculations included mortality, agriculture, energy costs, and coastal impacts from sea-level rise. They plan to add impacts from biodiversity loss, reduced labor productivity, and increased inequity, conflict and migration to their future calculations.

They add that even accounting for those additional factors may not do justice to the true impacts of carbon emissions. "Other costs of climate change including the loss of cultural heritage, particular ways of life, or valued ecosystems, may never be fully valued in economic terms," they write.

In short, raising the SCC from what their research shows to be an outdated and unrealistically low figure of $51 per metric ton to a more realistic value of $185 per metric ton is just a first step, although an important one.

Thursday, April 28, 2022

Covid vaccines may have saved 2,000,000 American lives

 How effective are the Covid vaccines? Here's some new data:

A team of epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) and the California Department of Public health developed two different data-based models of the course of the Covid pandemic in California in the ten months after vaccines became available. They published their results in the April 22, 2022 edition of the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association.

Projected Covid deaths without vaccination
Projected Covid deaths without vaccination
(Image by Eric C. Schnieder, et al.)
   Details   DMCA

Their first model estimated that during the ten months prior to October 16, 2021, Covid vaccinations in California averted 1.52 million infections, 72,930 hospitalizations and 19,430 deaths.

The second model estimated that during those same ten months, vaccinations prevented 1.4 million Covid cases, 84,330 hospitalizations and 22,620 deaths.

The researchers limited themselves to pointing out that these results "can be generalized across the United States." We can take a stab at doing that if we assume that the vaccines averted cases, hospitalizations and deaths at roughly the same rate across the country as they did in California. By the end of the study period, 23,800,846 Californians were fully vaccinated. At that same time 188,902,483 Americans had been fully vaccinated, or 7.94 times the number in California alone.

Multiplying by that factor, the vaccines conservatively averted 11,116,000 Covid cases, 579,064 hospitalizations and 154,036 deaths in the US in the first 10 months of their availability.

On February 25 of this year I posted an OpEdNews article providing a count--based on the actual differences between week-by-week death rates among unvaccinated and vaccinated people--of how many American lives the Covid vaccines had saved to that date.

My estimate was that 545,000 Americans were still alive because they had gotten vaccinated. It's important to note that those only represented lives saved directly by the vaccines, not infections, hospitalizations or deaths averted among the contacts of people who stayed healthy because they were vaccinated.

Similarly, the UCSF researchers note that their estimates only count people whose lives were saved because they were vaccinated--direct lives saved. They point out that many more Covid infections, hospitalizations and deaths were doubtlessly averted among the contacts of vaccinated people. "The true numbers are definitely significantly higher," says lead author Sophia Tan, at UCSF.

To get a sense of how just how much higher, we have a new study by the Commonwealth Fund, a century-old private foundation that promotes effective and equitable health care in the US. They used a highly detailed model that, along with many other factors, accounts for contagion, hospitalization and deaths within people's contact networks. Their study provides estimates through March, 2022.

Those researchers estimate that Covid vaccinations have probably prevented more than 66 million infections, more than 17 million hospitalizations and more than 2 million deaths in the United States.

Given the high cost of health care in the US, we shouldn't be surprised that, according to the Commonwealth study, averting those millions of infections, hospitalizations and deaths saved some $900 billion--that's nearly one trillion dollars--in healthcare costs.

As of April 25, 2022, the US has suffered just under one million Covid deaths. If the 219 million Americans who are fully vaccinated had chosen not to, the number of US Covid deaths would have been much higher, perhaps approaching a shocking 3 million.

The Covid pandemic is at low ebb right now, but it has not disappeared. The vaccines are readily available and free. If you're among the one-third of Americans who have not yet gotten vaccinated, it's not too late to protect yourself and the people you are close to.

Saturday, March 12, 2022

Astronomers warn "There's no planet B"

Astronomers usually look to the stars and think about time in terms of billion of years, but recently thousands of them joined together to call for climate action now to preserve the habitability of our one and only Planet Earth.

Last July, under the aegis of Astronomers for Planet Earth, more than 2750 astronomers and astrophysicists from 87 countries signed an open letter focusing attention on and urging immediate and substantial steps to address our current climate crisis.


Earth from Space (Credit: NASA)

"Comprehensive scientific evidence clearly demonstrates that we are living in a climate emergency that calls for urgent action," they warn. If we fail to significantly and continuously reduce global carbon emissions "... we will face both a biodiversity crisis through mass extinctions, and a humanitarian crisis from increasingly inhospitable living conditions."

They add that "... at our current rate of emissions... we are failing to prevent this disaster."

The astronomers also point out that while there may be billions of potentially habitable planets in our galaxy, the Milky Way, not one is within our reach, and even if one were, we have no way to move Earth's 7.75 billion people to it. As one of the signatories, Travis Rector, at the University of Alaska Anchorage explains, "Unfortunately the term 'habitable zone' does not necessarily mean that a planet in this zone is habitable. It simply means that it could in principle have the right conditions for liquid water to be on its surface. It doesn't mean that there actually is water, or that there is life, or that we could actually live there. And even if we could, these exoplanets are so far away we couldn't possibly relocate to them. Mars at its closest is about four light minutes away from us. The nearest star is over four light years. Compare four minutes to four years and you'll get a sense of how much bigger that is. And we can't even yet get one human to Mars, much less all of humanity! It is clear that there truly is 'no Planet B'."

To lead by example, the signatories, who read like a Who's Who of researchers in the field, urge astronomers and their institutions to reduce their own carbon footprint, for example by minimizing the large amount of energy used in computation, and to make environmental sustainability an immediate and primary goal.

Beyond setting an example in their own field and institutions, the astronomers warn that similar steps to reduce carbon emissions and move towards sustainability are urgently needed worldwide. "The climate crisis reaches beyond country borders and individual communities," they point out.

Perhaps nobody has said this more eloquently than the late Carl Sagan, who wrote, "When you look at the Earth from space, it is striking. There are no national boundaries visible. They have been put there, like the equator and the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, by humans. The planet is real. The life on it is real, and the political separations that have placed the planet in danger are of human manufacture. They have not been handed down from Mount Sinai. All the beings on this little world are mutually dependent. It's like living in a lifeboat. We breathe the air that Russians have breathed, and Zambians and Tasmanians and people all over the planet. Whatever the causes that divide us, as I said before, it is clear that the Earth will be here a thousand or a million years from now. The question, they key question, the central question, in a certain sense the only question, is, will we?"

Who better to urge us to act now to preserve our only home, Earth, than those who study the stars?

Thursday, March 03, 2022

How many lives have the COVID vaccines saved?

 This really shouldn't be controversial.

In response to a worldwide pandemic, scientists built on decades of research in genetics and virology to design, create, test and deploy multiple COVID vaccines in record time. Three vaccines were approved for use in the US--Johnson and Johnson, Pfizer and ModernaTo date 214 million Americans--65%--are fully vaccinated and 93 million--28%--have gotten a booster. The vaccines and boosters are known to reduce COVID cases, severe illness, hospitalization and deaths.

The question is, how many deaths have the vaccines actually prevented--how many Americans are alive today who would be dead had they remained unvaccinated?

A doctor receiving a COVID vaccination

Credit: DOD

I know that many people's eyes glaze over when numbers are involved, and the next section includes a lot of numbers. For those with a numerical allergy, feel free to jump to the paragraph in bold that starts with "During the 39 weeks . . ."

The numbers:

To address the question of how many lives COVID vaccination has saved, I examined week-by-week US death rates by vaccination status between April 10, 2021 and January 1, 2022, and coordinated those with week-by-week numbers of Americans fully vaccinated.

During those 39 weeks the number of fully vaccinated Americans rose from 82.9 million to 207.4 million. As the pandemic waxed and waned, the weekly rates of COVID deaths among unvaccinated people ranged from 0.92 to 14.27 per 100,000 while the comparable rates for fully vaccinated people varied from 0.07 to 1.23 per 100,000.

The ratio of deaths per 100,000 comparing unvaccinated to vaccinated people ranged from 6.6 to 18 with an average of 11.85. That is, on average over those 39 weeks, unvaccinated Americans died from COVID at 11.85 the rate of their fully vaccinated peers.

The difference between the rate of deaths between unvaccinated and fully vaccinated people ranged from 0.85 deaths per 100,000 people during weeks when the pandemic was at a low ebb to 13.04 per 100,000 at its peak.

Knowing the number of vaccinated people in a given week and the death rate for unvaccinated people at that time, we can calculate the number of deaths that would have occurred among the vaccinated group if they had remained unvaccinated. We can calculate how many lives were saved by subtracting the actual number of deaths in the vaccinated group from the number of people in that group who would have died if unvaccinated.

Here's an example, using the week of December 18, 2021:

Number of fully vaccinated people: 205.3 million

Death rate among unvaccinated people: 92.5 per million

How many would have died at the unvaccinated rate: 205.3 x 92.5 = 18,990

Death rate among fully vaccinated: 8 per million

How many fully vaccinated people actually died: 205.3 x 8 = 1,642

Number of lives saved that week: 18,990 - 1642 = 17,348

We can then calculate that figure for each of the 39 weeks for which we have data and add them up. That gets us the answer to our question:

During the 39 weeks between April 10, 2021 and January 1, 2022, if nobody had been vaccinated we would have seen approximately 416,999 more deaths.

To put it differently, during those 39 weeks, COVID vaccinations saved approximately 417,000 American lives. That's an average of 10,692 lives saved per week, or 1527 per day.

If the COVID vaccines had not been available, the additional lives lost would have surpassed all American lives lost in World War II.

This conservative estimate of lives saved doesn't include those saved during the 20 weeks between the start of vaccinations in the US on December 14, 2020 and April 10, 2021, or the lives saved since January 1, 2022, or the additional lives saved among people who are fully vaccinated and boosted.

We can fill in those gaps at least in part. Researchers at the NIH and Rand Corporation used a modeling approach to estimate the number of lives saved by vaccines from December 14, 2020 through May 9, 2021. They arrived at a figure of 139,000 for that period. If we subtract the 10,436 deaths in the weeks where their figures overlap mine, we can add another 128,564 American lives saved by vaccines before April 10, 2021.

We don't have US COVID death rates by vaccination status after January 1, 2022, but we do have those numbers for two states, Texas and Washington. They show the same pattern, with unvaccinated people dying at between 7 and 18 times the rate of their fully vaccinated peers. It's safe to say that the number of lives saved by the COVID vaccines continues to grow.

So, even without counting the lives saved by vaccines so far in 2022, as a very conservative estimate COVID vaccinations have saved 417,000 + 128,500--more than 545,000 American lives.

What about the rest of the world?

Ten other countries report COVID deaths by vaccination status. You can find the details here. On average across those countries unvaccinated people died from COVID at 9.5 times the rate of vaccinated people, quite comparable to the 11.85 ratio seen in the U.S. over time. The average difference between the death rates per 100,000 for unvaccinated vs fully vaccinated people was actually greater than the comparable figure for the US. Thus it seems reasonable to use the lives saved in the U.S. to estimate lives saved worldwide.

This is supported by data from Europe. A study jointly published by WHO and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control estimates that between the beginning of vaccination in Europe in December, 2020 through November of 2021, vaccines saved nearly 470,000 lives just in those aged 60 and older.

The 214 million Americans who are fully vaccinated represent slightly less than one-twentieth of the number of fully vaccinated people worldwide, currently estimated at 4.355 billion. If we multiply 545,000 lives saved in the US by a factor of 20, we get an admittedly rough estimate of how many lives the vaccines have saved worldwide--10,900,000.

That's a lot of mothers and fathers, grandparents and grandchildren, husbands and wives, workers and homemakers, friends and lovers, regular people who are still alive because they chose to get vaccinated.

Perhaps we should be thanking Anthony Fauci and other public figures and leaders who have encouraged and advocated vaccination rather than calling them mass murderers who should be jailed or executed-- tropes that far too frequently appear on right-wing news sources and saturate social media.

 

Thursday, February 17, 2022

Worldwide data on covid vaccine effectivenss

More than a year into the massive worldwide vaccination rollout, people still voice a wide range of opinions--from confidence that the benefits of the shots far outweigh their risks to an often intensely held belief that they offer few or no benefits and are extremely dangerous. Claims like those are widely disseminated via social media, and almost certainly have contributed to the relatively low vaccination and booster rates in the US.

Readers interested in what's known about the risks of the vaccines from several large-scale studies can find reports herehere and here.



In terms of benefits, official sources in the US and many other countries consistently assure the public that the vaccines significantly reduce the risk of contracting covid, more strongly reduce the risk of serious illness and hospitalization, and even more dramatically reduce the risk of death from covid. With the passage of time following people's vaccinations, and especially during the omicron surge, authorities have noted that the protection from full vaccination (usually defined as two mRNA doses or one J&J injection) has declined while protection following a booster remains high.

People who view the vaccines as ineffective and/or dangerous often flatly discount data about vaccine effectiveness, particularly those coming from the US CDC. At times such views are backed by specific arguments, such as that counting people as unvaccinated for the two weeks that follow vaccination conflates those who are and aren't vaccinated and so renders the data meaningless. At other times the CDC data are completely dismissed on the assumption or belief that they are essentially made up as part of some kind of overriding plot.

To clarify these issues, it might be useful to look at comparable data from other countries. Those who view the vaccines as ineffective often take a stab at this by citing a number of countries that have both high vaccination rates and high case, hospitalization or death rates. Unfortunately, such lists usually turn out to be the product of "cherry-picking"--that is one can easily find an equal number of countries with high vaccination rates and low case counts, low vaccination rates and low case counts or low vaccination rates and high case counts. Or covid-vaccine critics point to a few times and places where case numbers or case rates have been more or less equal between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, while ignoring hospitalization and death rates, which consistently strongly favor vaccinated populations.

A more meaningful way that a number of countries use to assess vaccine effectiveness is simply to compare the rates of covid cases, hospitalizations or deaths per 100,000 people between unvaccinated and vaccinated cohorts, or between unvaccinated, vaccinated, and boosted subsets of their population.

In practice this turns out not to be a simple undertaking. Apart from the technical and organizational issues of gathering, collating and reporting on the underlying data, countries must decide on what categories to use and how to define them. For example, some countries count people as vaccinated as soon as they have received their first shot; others, including the US, count people as unvaccinated until two weeks after a first vaccination; while some count people as unvaccinated until three weeks after vaccination. Some countries provide more data (e.g. cases, hospitalizations and deaths by vaccination status over time) while some only provide data for one of those outcomes, or for specific age groups. In addition, the time periods for which data is available vary country by country.

While those differences may make it difficult to precisely equate the findings from various countries, we can certainly learn something from these additional, independent sources.

I've been able to find data on covid death rates by vaccination status for 11 countries plus the Spanish region of Catalonia. The numbers that follow represent the most recent data I could locate.

A good place to start is with Our World in Data. They provide graphs and numerical data of weekly death rates by vaccination status over time for three countries, Switzerland, the US and Chile, plus graphs and monthly data for England. The graphs are well worth viewing and studying.

1. Switzerland (includes Liechtenstein), population approximately 9 million:

Weekly covid deaths per 100,000 people, week ending January 22, 2022

Unvaccinated: 10.71

Fully vaccinated: 0.97

Fully vaccinated and boosted: 0.19

As of 1/22/2022, unvaccinated Swiss were 11 times more likely to die from covid than those who were fully vaccinated, and 56 times more likely to die from covid than their boosted peers.

Detailed category definitions can be found here.

2. United States, population approximately 331 million:

Weekly covid deaths per 100,000 people, week ending December 3, 2021

Unvaccinated: 9.74

Fully vaccinated: 0.71

Fully vaccinated and boosted: 0.10

Unvaccinated Americans were 14 times more likely to die from covid than those who were fully vaccinated, and 97 times more likely to die from covid than their boosted peers.

Detailed category definitions can be found here.

3. Chile, population approximately 19 million:

Weekly covid deaths per 100,000 people, week ending January 15, 2022

Not vaccinated or not fully vaccinated: 1.81

Fully vaccinated: 1.32

Fully vaccinated and boosted: 0.19

Chileans who were either not vaccinated or not fully vaccinated were 1.4 times more likely to die than those who were fully vaccinated, and 9.5 times more likely to die from covid than their boosted peers.

Detailed category definitions can be found here.

4. England, population approximately 57 million:

Monthly covid death rates per 100,000 people, month ending October 15, 2021

Unvaccinated: 23.8

Fully vaccinated: 5.20

English citizens who were not vaccinated were 4.6 times more likely to die than those who were fully vaccinated.

Detailed category definitions can be found here.

5. Malaysia, population approximately 33 million:

Weekly covid death rates per 100,000 people, week ending February 3, 2022

Unvaccinated: 5.4

Two doses: 0.5

Boosted: less than 0.1

Malaysians who were not vaccinated were 10.8 times more likely to die than those who were fully vaccinated, and more than 54 times more likely to die than those who were boosted.

Graph for the past six months and detailed category definitions can be found here.

6. Singapore, population approximately 6 million:

Daily covid deaths per 100,000 people, week ending January 27, 2022

Not vaccinated: 0.67

Fully vaccinated: 0.23

Boosted: 0.07

Residents of Singapore who were not vaccinated were 2.9 times more likely to die than those who were fully vaccinated, and 9.6 times more likely to die than those who were boosted.

Graphs and detailed category definitions can be found here.

7. France, population approximately 65 million:

Monthly covid deaths per 100,000 people, month ending December 1, 2021

Not vaccinated: 35.65

Partly vaccinated: 9.74

Fully vaccinated: 4.38

Residents of France who were not vaccinated were 3.7 times more likely to die than those who were partly vaccinated, and 8.1 times more likely to die than those who were fully vaccinated.

Graphs and detailed category definitions can be found here.

8. Italy, population approximately 60 million:

Monthly covid deaths per 100,000 people, month ending January 9, 2022

Not vaccinated: 78.6

Fully vaccinated: 9.5

Boosted: 3.2

Unvaccinated Italians were 8.3 times more likely to die than their fully vaccinated peers, and 24.6 times more likely to die than those who were fully vaccinated and boosted.

Detailed category definitions can be found here.

9. Canada, population approximately 38 million:

Cumulative covid deaths per 100,000 people, December 14, 2020 through January 22, 2022

Unvaccinated: 975

Not yet protected: 1530

Partly vaccinated: 1010

Fully vaccinated: 384

Unvaccinated Canadians were 2.54 times more likely to die than their fully vaccinated peers. Not-yet-protected Canadians were 3.98 times more likely to die than their fully vaccinated peers. Partly vaccinated Canadians were 2.63 times more likely to die than their fully vaccinated peers.

Detailed category definitions can be found here.

10. Catalonia, Spain, population approximately 8 million

Cumulative deaths per 100,000 people between December 23, 2021 and January 12, 2022

Ages 70 and above

Unvaccinated: 50

Fully vaccinated: 5

Unvaccinated Catalonians 70 years old or older were 10 times more likely to die than their fully vaccinated peers.

Ages 60 - 69

Unvaccinated: 15

Fully vaccinated: 5.5

Unvaccinated Catalonians in the 60 to 69 age group were 2.7 times more likely to die than their fully vaccinated peers.

More information can be found here and here.

11. Israel, population approximately 9 million:

Deaths per 100,000 people between August 10, 2021 and September 8, 2021

Under 60 years of age

Not vaccinated: 0.7

Fully vaccinated: 0.23

Boosted: 0.26

Unvaccinated Israelis under the age of 60 were 3 times more likely to die than their fully vaccinated peers, and 2.7 times more likely to die than those who were fully vaccinated and boosted.

60 years of age or older

Not vaccinated: 161.5

Vaccinated: 51.71

Boosted: 10.06

Unvaccinated Israelis 60 years old or older were 3.1 times more likely to die than their fully vaccinated peers, and 16 times more likely to die than those who were fully vaccinated and boosted.

More information can be found here and here.

A few take-aways:

Data detailing death rates by vaccination status were found for 11 countries or regions with a total population of 637 million people.

Despite different populations, methodologies, category definitions and time spans, the data consistently show that unvaccinated people are significantly more likely to die from covid than their vaccinated peers and are at at even higher risk when compared to fully vaccinated and boosted peers.

The risk ratios comparing covid death rates among unvaccinated vs. fully vaccinated people ranged from 1.4 (Chile) to 14 (US) with a median value of 4.6.

The risk ratios comparing covid death rates among unvaccinated vs. vaccinated and boosted people ranged from 9.5 (Chile) to 97 (US) with a median value of 16. In other words, in all countries providing statistics on covid deaths by vaccination status, unvaccinated people died at 9.5 times the rate or more than their vaccinated and boosted peers.

In short, the most recent available data from 11 countries representing 637 million people consistently demonstrate that fully vaccinated people are significantly less likely to die from covid than their unvaccinated peers, and fully vaccinated and boosted people are many times less likely to die from covid than their unvaccinated peers.

Those who reflexively discount covid data from the US CDC may need to cast a wider net in order to ignore the data from at least 10 other countries.

Saturday, February 12, 2022

Extremely promising spinal-injury treatment

 Every year in the US nearly 18,000 people suffer spinal cord injuries (SCIs) serious enough to cause partial or total paralysis, and approximately 300,000 Americans live with permanent disabilities because of SCIs. Now, new research appearing in the prestigious journal Nature Medicine offers the promise that some of those paralyzed men and women may be able to walk again.

Two previously paralyzed patients walk again

Credit: NeuroRestore/Jimmy Ravier/Nature Medicine

Building on decades of previous research, an international team with a panoply of specialized skills designed and fabricated a new, patient-specific electrical stimulator that they implant along the lower part of the spinal cord of paralyzed patients. After optimizing the implant's connectivity to the unique neuro-anatomy of each patient, computer-generated patterns of stimulation allow individuals to stand, walk, cycle or swim. Fine-tuning the system to the point that patients can take their first steps take less than a day.

So far the researchers have demonstrated this methodology with three previously paralyzed patients. All three have been able to stand, walk and perform other activities almost immediately, with support in the clinical setting. Further months of physical therapy, exercise and practice with the system allowed them to extend these newly regained skills into the community, independently.

Here's one of the patient's first-hand report:

"I had an accident in 2017 on a motobike. I saw a presentation on this project and I contacted them. After two years I enrolled. The surgery was in August of 2020. After 10 days of recovery, I started the rehabilitation. After one day I saw my legs moving--it was very emotional. That same day, I could walk without support. After 9 months of daily training, which I continue at home with the devices, I see improvement every day. I use it for walking or standing. Now I can do everything alone, with no problem. It's very good."

The researchers are actively continuing this project, aiming to further individualize the spinal-cord stimulator and refine and miniaturize the computer interface. Their goal is to allow patients to control the various programs for standing, walking, swimming, cycling, exercising, etc.--from a smartphone or tablet.

They hope to be able to make this currently experimental treatment more widely available within the next several years.

You can read a brief summary of the research here. (The full article is behind the Nature Medicine paywall.)


Thursday, February 03, 2022

We're going to have to change the calendar . . .

 . . . because plants in the UK are now flowering a full month earlier than before human-caused global heating.

You can find the details of the Cambridge study, which used records from 1793 to 2019 to track the flowering dates of 406 kinds of plants throughout the UK, here.

                                              Spring flowers are showing up a month too soon

Hmmm. Could it be that this climate change thing that we've been hearing about is real?

REA 2/3/22

Tuesday, February 01, 2022

The Happiness of Nations

The GDP is long past its use-by date as the best or only measure of how nations are doing, and supporting its endless growth as a central goal of governments worldwide looks increasingly futile.

 There's a growing movement to put measures of sustainability, health, happiness and well-being in its place, and to shape laws and policies to foster those goals rather than blindly following the GDP.

You can read my recent OpEdNews post about the happiest nations and how they got there at this URL

Happiness doesn't follow the GDP!

Credit: Raul AB

Saturday, January 08, 2022

Kool-Aid, Anyone?


A recent post on the news and opinion site OpEdNews depicted Anthony Fauci and "Big Pharma" as mass murderers whose crimes against humanity demand a Nuremberg-style international tribunal, and a hanging. "Let's see them swing," the author concluded.

Similar claims appear frequently on OpEdNews, are commonplace on Fox News, circulate widely on social media and are fodder for right-wing political campaigns. In September, Wyoming State Senator Anthony Bouchard called for Fauci to be tried and executed, writing, "After the prosecution, the chair, the gallows, or lethal injection?" In November, Jackson Lahmeyer, a candidate for the US Senate from Oklahoma, echoed the same charges, calling Fauci a mass murderer and "the greatest con man in the United States of America." Lahmeyer, a pastor, more humanely just called for Fauci to be imprisoned.

                          Millions of Americans have swallowed the anti-vaccine Kool-Aid

Credit: Earl McGhee


The list of charges against Fauci is a long one, but the current ones center on his involvement both in creating the SARS-CoV-19 virus and forcing dangerous, death-dealing vaccines on the public. In anti-vaccine circles, the deadliness of the "clot shots" and "death shots" is an established truth from which the need to try and execute Fauci follows naturally. However, from time to time seemingly factual claims are made to bolster the case. For example, the OpEdNews post cited above includes the following striking assertions along with links to their sources:

"Airline pilots are dropping dead at an unprecedented 1750% higher rate than normal after the jab."

"Soccer players and other athletes are collapsing at sixty times the normal rate after the vax from heart failure."

"There is a "higher death rate from the clot-shots than from the disease".

Over the course of the pandemic, I've spent more time than I would have liked visiting such sources and fact-checking similar claims. I'd like to present what I've learned about a few of these seemingly authoritative pronouncements and, more importantly, about how such claims are generated--the recipe, so to speak, for the Kool-Aid that millions of Americans seem to have swallowed.

Claim: "Airline pilots are dropping dead at an unprecedented 1750% higher rate than normal after the jab."

This shocking indictment of the Covid vaccines didn't appear only on OpEdNews. I googled "airline pilots dying 1750% covid vaccine" and found 13,100,000 hits.

The story seems to have started on the Hal Turner radio show on December 8, 2021. His source was a real publication, the Airline Pilot Magazine, published by the Airline Pilots Association International (ALPA), which represents 61,000 active and retired pilots. Like many trade magazines, they publish an annual in memoriam list of members who have passed away. This year the list included the names of 111 pilots who died in 2021, 6 who died in 2020 and 1 who died in 2019.

Turner, copied avidly by everyone who has re-posted and who continues to spread this story, assumed that those numbers meant that 111 pilots died in 2021, following--and therefore linked to--the roll-out of the vaccines, a stunning number when compared to 6 in 2020 and just one in 2019. Those 105 excess deaths in 2021 compared to 2020 were both unnecessary and cruel; as Turner commented, "Pilots were coerced into taking the Covid-19 shots under threat of losing their jobs."

The 1750% number was apparently derived by comparing the difference between the 2021 and 2020 deaths to the 2020 deaths: 105/6 = 17.5. That factor of 17.5 was then made even more dramatic by reporting it as a percentage: 17.5 x 100 = 1750%.

It must be bitterly disappointing to many anti-vaxxers to learn that what the numbers actually mean is that ALPA received timely notices of the deaths of 111 of their members who died in 2021, somewhat belated notices about 6 pilots who had died in 2020, and an even more belated notice about a pilot who had died in 2019. As common sense would suggest, roughly similar numbers of pilots die each year.

Here's what ALPA has to say (complete with a lovely aviation-related turn of phrase):

In every edition of Air Line Pilot magazine, we honor ALPA pilots - both active and retired - who have flown west. Based on verified information provided by their families, we reported the loss of more pilots in both 2019 and 2020 than in 2021 [my emphasis]. We report the losses in our magazine as we receive information from the families. The information in one magazine edition does not provide a complete report of the total losses for each of the listed years. We salute every member for their service and honor their memories."

To put it bluntly, this claim, still flying around the internet, isn't just inaccurate or misleading, it's the exact opposite of the truth.

To his credit, the author of the OpEdNews piece that repeated this claim deleted it after I brought the truth to his attention. Interestingly, however, he didn't give up on the possibility (or perhaps the hope) that something similar might be true, adding, "It remains to be seen how many pilots will die from the 'vaccines.'"

The next claim in that post is also popular on anti-vax sites: "Soccer players and other athletes are collapsing at sixty times the normal rate after the vax from heart failure." A google search came up with 5,860,000 citations.

According to Reuters, the first source for this kind of claim was an article on the website of the Israeli edition of Real Time News, which listed 108 "professional athletes, coaches, college and youth athletes" who have died since December 2020, and which attributed those deaths to the Covid vaccines.

Reuters fact checkers examined the list and found that it included American football players, archers, gymnasts, badminton players, ballet dancers, rugby, soccer, tennis, table tennis, baseball, cricket, ice and field hockey, handball, volleyball and basketball players, body builders, boxers, canoe racers, cyclists and weightlifters. The list ranged from young amateurs to retired professional athletes, and included ". . . four soccer coaches, . . ., one body building coach, one cricket teacher, one athletics trainer, a golf caddie, a marching band member and a doctor who died while out jogging."

Using the same approach of scouring news sources for athlete deaths, the story that the OpEdNews piece cited featured an even longer list published December 22 on the website of Global Research, a self-described anti-globalization organization. That story included brief news excerpts reporting on 187 athletes from a wide variety of sports worldwide who collapsed and/or died in 2021, followed by a separate list of another 180, again "from all over the world." 

Those two lists combined are the source of the article's headline, "367 Athlete Cardiac Arrests, Serious Issues, 209 Dead, After Covid Shot."

Although many of the news snippets don't mention vaccination, and although some of the events took place long after vaccination, this article, like the earlier one, assumes a causal link between the vaccines and these events, leading to an urgent conclusion: "We are dealing with a crimes [sic] against humanity on an unprecedented scale. The Killer vaccine must be withdrawn immediately."

Of course this seemingly large number of deaths among athletes is meaningful only if it is in fact abnormal and represents an actual increase from previous years. The article presents that as self-evident, leading with the comment: "It is definitely not normal for young athletes to suffer from cardiac arrests or to die while playing their sport, but this year it is happening." The authors challenged potential fact-checkers to comb news reports from past years for comparable events, writing, "Where are the fact-checkers? . . . They are nowhere to be found because this number of athlete deaths is abnormal and they know it."

It turns out that fact-checkers don't have to count up news reports of similar deaths in past years because there's a much simpler way to find out if 209 sudden deaths among athletes in a year is unusual or not.

Not surprisingly, scientists have known about and studied sudden deaths among athletes long before Covid and the Covid vaccines. A literature review from June, 2017, published in the NIH National Library of Medicine, found that the rate of sudden cardiac deaths (SCDs) among college athletes is around one death per 50,000 athlete-years, and among high school athletes, one per 50,000 to 80,000 athlete-years. A similar study of older athletes, published in 2016, found a comparable rate of one sudden death per 50,000 athlete-years.

As we saw, the authors of the athlete death lists did not limit themselves to young athletes or athletes in the US alone. They scoured news reports for sudden deaths among active and retired athletes, coaches, trainers and other sports figures from pretty much every sport worldwide. The first 25 names on the Global Research list include soccer players from Egypt, France, Ghana, Portugal and Spain, runners from Norway and Scotland, handball players from Croatia and Portugal, volleyball players from India, a basketball player from the Philippines, a rugby player from Australia, a boxer, a cricket player and a bodybuilder from the US and a darts player from the UK.

According to the NCAA, there are 8 million US high school athletes and an additional 495,000 college athletes. We would expect 110 sudden cardiac deaths just among those young US athletes every year. It's estimated that 25 percent of Americans - around 82 million -- are active in at least one sport. If we conservatively estimate that their risk of sudden death is similar to that of healthy young athletes, 1 in 80,000 per year, we would expect more than 1000 such deaths every year in the US alone.

It turns out that the world is a very big place and there are a lot of athletes out there, orders of magnitude more than most of us would have guessed. It's estimated that worldwide there are 500 million active volleyball players450 million basketball players300 million table tennis players240 million registered soccer players220 million badminton players65 million baseball players60 million cricket players19 million handball players, etc., etc., etc.

So if, as the authors of the article do, we cast our net worldwide, we're looking at more than 2 billion athletes. Let's be even more conservative and assume that just one out of every 100,000 of them dies suddenly in a given year. That means there are probably 20,000 such deaths every year, including, of course 2021.

In other words, far more athletes--quite likely 100 times more--die suddenly every year than the paltry few that the authors of their shocking story documented in 2021. defined as abnormal, and with such certainty blamed on the vaccines. Had the authors of the two stories that were the source of the "60 times the normal rate" headline really done their homework, they could have stretched their list of athlete deaths in 2021 into the tens of thousands. But it's clear that they could have done the same for 2020, 2019, and earlier years as well.

The bottom line is that the lists of deaths on which this claim is based, although of course tragic, are absolutely meaningless as evidence of the alleged dangers of the Covid vaccines.

Not every anti-vaccine claim is as transparently wrong as those involving pilots and athletes. The assertion in the recent OpEdNews piece that "There is a 'higher death rate from the clot-shots than from the disease,'" provides a link to an actual article in an actual scientific journal, Toxicology Reports. And it's true that the authors of that article did say what the OpEdNews writer claimed, although just for people 65 and older. They concluded, "A novel best-case scenario [their emphasis] cost-benefit analysis showed very conservatively [their emphasis] that there are five times the number of deaths attributable to each inoculation vs those attributable to COVID-19 in the most vulnerable 65+ demographic."

The paper is extremely long and convoluted, with many questionable assumptions and analyses. After reading and re-reading the piece, I found that the authors had made three crucial assumptions that allowed them to reach their remarkable conclusion. Those involved VAERS--the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, how to interpret its numbers, and a unique way of calculating what they called true COVID-19 deaths.

VAERS is a database jointly maintained by the CDC and the FDA. It solicits and receives reports from medical professionals and from the public about adverse events that occur after any kind of vaccination. As is clearly spelled out on the VAERS website, the system serves as "an early warning system that detects problems possibly related to vaccines." They point out that, since there is no unvaccinated control group to compare reported adverse effects to, "we can't use VAERS to calculate how often adverse effects occur," and "VAERS generally cannot determine if a vaccine was the cause of a reported adverse event." If the reported adverse events do suggest a problem, detailed case-by-case analysis and/or further, carefully designed and controlled research is needed to evaluate it, much as an early warning from NORAD must be carefully scrutinized before concluding that a nuclear attack is in progress.

You can get a sense of the challenge of sorting out deaths that might actually be caused by a vaccination from the following: 

In the US more than two million people 65 and older die every year, out of a senior population of more than 54 million. That means that the average risk of death for a senior during a full year is 3.7 % percent, and the average risk of death for a senior on any given day is just about one in 1000.  Almost all American seniors received at least one Covid shot in 2021, and many received two, That means that an average of 5500 seniors will die on the day they happen to get a Covid shot, and more than 38,000 will die during the week after getting a Covid shot, independently of any effects of the shot

Some fraction of those deaths will seem suspicious enough to be reported to VAERS either by medical professionals or members of the public. In the course of 2021, VAERS received just over 10,000 such reports, covering all age groups. But which, if any, or those deaths might actually have been caused by the vaccines can only be determined by case-by-case medical evaluation and/or further research.

Despite the clear warnings about how to interpret VAERS data, the authors of this paper count every adverse event associated with a Covid vaccination as definitely caused by the vaccination.

As if that assumption were not enough, they then use some elaborate rationalizations about under-reporting to determine that every death reported to VAERS following a Covid vaccination not only is a vaccine death, but actually represents just one percent of the actual deaths from the vaccines. This allows them to multiply each Covid-related death reported to VAERS by100 to determine what they consider the true number of vaccine-caused deaths.

That sleight-of-hand still didn't get them to all the way to the conclusion they apparently were determined to reach, so they repeated the same trick in reverse to estimate how many people have died from Covid. Based on a CDC statement that some 94% of people who are recorded as having died from Covid have one or more co-morbidities, the authors re-attribute 94% of recorded Covid deaths to those pre-existing conditions, leaving just 6% as "true" Covid deaths. That neat trick allowed them to divide the officially reported deaths from Covid by 16.67.

Not surprisingly, if you count every death reported to VAERS following a Covid vaccination as if it were definitely caused by the vaccination, and then multiply that number by 100, you can make the vaccines look very dangerous. If at the same time you take the deaths officially attributed to Covid and divide them by 16.67, you can make Covid look much less dangerous than it really is. 

Combining these two feats of legerdemain tilts the cost-benefit balance by a factor of 1667 in order to arrive at their "best-case," "very conservative" conclusion that the vaccines kill five times more seniors than die from Covid.

I sent a copy of this paper to an MD friend of mine, part of whose career involved reviewing the medical literature for papers whose findings might lead to a change in the practice guidelines of the large national HMO for which he worked. Here is his response:

"I couldn't force myself to get through the entire article, but there are red flags everywhere. Chief among them, this journal is open access and merely charges a fee for publication. One of the authors is the editor of the journal, and the associate editor was the peer reviewer. So many assumptions were biased that I found myself nauseated."

We could scrutinize even more dramatic anti-vaccine claims. For now, I'll just say that almost every time I've taken the time to look into any of the claims that are actually clear enough to be checked, I've found a similar pattern, an effective recipe for generating disinformation:

  1. Find or make up something, some cherry-picked factoid, a few numbers taken out of context, a pronouncement from a seemingly reputable source, or as we just saw, a "scientific" article, that provides just enough basis for a seemingly damning proof that the vaccines are deadly.

  2. Couch even the flimsiest claim as a catchy story and get it picked up and repeated by anti-vaccine websites, especially widely followed ones such as those run by RFK, Jr., Joseph Mercola, Robert Malone, etc.

  3. Just wait. There are plenty of those sites, and plenty of people who avidly and uncritically accept and share whatever appears on them as a slam-dunk confirmation of their beliefs.

That seems to be all it takes to create extremely effective anti-vaccine propaganda.

All of this might only be of academic interest, a case study of confirmation bias or mass delusions, except for the fact that 825,000 Americans have died from Covid, many of whom would still be alive if they had gotten vaccinated. And except for the fact that such charges have become the "factual" basis for an alternate reality, one in which Fauci is firmly believed to be a mass murderer and the "death shots" his weapon of choice. How many more Americans will die needlessly? How many passionate calls for Fauci to be executed will it take before someone takes it upon himself to see that "justice" is done?

Just as at Jonestown, this disinformation-laced Kool-Aid kills.