did you consider checking the facts before buying into such hysterical claims?
this is LA department of health services hospital census. it's essentially identical to the levels from last year.
the media have had a severe tendency to overstate these issues. https://t.co/ktTPIbKcdQ
Overwhelmed LA hospitals brace for new wave as staff move gurneys into gift shops with a patient dying every 10 MINUTES. https://t.co/CW19DYzCn9
— John FitzGerald (@TheTweetOfJohn) December 27, 2020
keep in mind that 90-100% ICU capacity is normal this time of year and that all ICU's must be able to flex to 120% (by federal law) and most can hit 150%.
they were not worried. and they were correct.
https://t.co/fk3ox76Eri
it's sort of interesting:
— el gato malo (@boriquagato) June 26, 2020
everyone is freaking out about texas hospitals except for the people who actually run texas hospitals.
this pretty much tells you everything you need to know about the panic patrol and their relationship to facts.https://t.co/4H4ocDFoCs
this seems to imply a drop in staffed beds which, contrary to the narrative is not from "exhaustion" but rather from people being laid off or staying home because kids are not in school.
all seem to be reporting that business is deader than disco.
this seems dissonant with the idea that there are just no staff available to man beds especially with so much of the US <70%.
76% of beds full. 85% ICU.
it's not like LA is not connected to things.
they do this in every state when their seasonality comes and no one has been overwhelmed yet. not one state.
https://t.co/tW2nC5d19C
it's disappointing to see that we are back in the "media scare stories about hospitals" stage.
— el gato malo (@boriquagato) December 7, 2020
the good news is that, just like last time, this is simply not the case.
they either have no idea what they are saying or are seeking to mislead.
let's look.https://t.co/eWyj2txAh6
javits was never used. neither was the hospital ship.
they likely got hit harder by this flu in 2018.
perspective matters.
let's keep some.
https://t.co/t9GGMQL8pt
More from el gato malo
global health policy in 2020 has centered around NPI's (non-pharmaceutical interventions) like distancing, masks, school closures
these have been sold as a way to stop infection as though this were science.
this was never true and that fact was known and knowable.
let's look.
above is the plot of social restriction and NPI vs total death per million. there is 0 R2. this means that the variables play no role in explaining one another.
we can see this same relationship between NPI and all cause deaths.
this is devastating to the case for NPI.
clearly, correlation is not proof of causality, but a total lack of correlation IS proof that there was no material causality.
barring massive and implausible coincidence, it's essentially impossible to cause something and not correlate to it, especially 51 times.
this would seem to pose some very serious questions for those claiming that lockdowns work, those basing policy upon them, and those claiming this is the side of science.
there is no science here nor any data. this is the febrile imaginings of discredited modelers.
this has been clear and obvious from all over the world since the beginning and had been proven so clearly by may that it's hard to imagine anyone who is actually conversant with the data still believing in these responses.
everyone got the same R
these have been sold as a way to stop infection as though this were science.
this was never true and that fact was known and knowable.
let's look.
above is the plot of social restriction and NPI vs total death per million. there is 0 R2. this means that the variables play no role in explaining one another.
we can see this same relationship between NPI and all cause deaths.
this is devastating to the case for NPI.
clearly, correlation is not proof of causality, but a total lack of correlation IS proof that there was no material causality.
barring massive and implausible coincidence, it's essentially impossible to cause something and not correlate to it, especially 51 times.
this would seem to pose some very serious questions for those claiming that lockdowns work, those basing policy upon them, and those claiming this is the side of science.
there is no science here nor any data. this is the febrile imaginings of discredited modelers.
this has been clear and obvious from all over the world since the beginning and had been proven so clearly by may that it's hard to imagine anyone who is actually conversant with the data still believing in these responses.
everyone got the same R
this methodology is a little complex, so let me explain what i did.
— el gato malo (@boriquagato) May 30, 2020
a few EU countries provide real day of death data. this lets us plot meaningful curves to show rate of disease change.
what struck me is how similar all the curves were.
everyone got the same shape. pic.twitter.com/bN0hILzoSl
google censorship of great barrington declaration: update.
this morning, there was no link to it in a direct google search.
now, there is.
could this be because certain internet felines noticed this and @chiproytx and @tedcruz helped call them out on this?
we may never know.
but i'd like to think so.
the google page is still a mess. it's still mostly fringe publication hit pieces and conspiracy theories.
when "mother jones" is your top media result for a science search, well, that says it all, doesn't it?
yikes.
i mean, why would we trust THESE people instead of a reporter at one of the most partisan rags on earth? oh, wait..
they are not being censored for being wrong. they're being censored for being right and being credible
they're censored because the other side cannot rebut them
and that is simply not a thing we can or should tolerate, especially not in a search engine.
so remember this. look for it in the future. demand primary sources.
use other search engines.
bing seems to be seeking to inform, not to inflame and mislead.
if you missed it, the original thread was here:
(and yes, lots of people duplicated my finding this morning)
i'd be curious to see what they are all seeing
this morning, there was no link to it in a direct google search.
now, there is.
could this be because certain internet felines noticed this and @chiproytx and @tedcruz helped call them out on this?
we may never know.
but i'd like to think so.
the google page is still a mess. it's still mostly fringe publication hit pieces and conspiracy theories.
when "mother jones" is your top media result for a science search, well, that says it all, doesn't it?
yikes.
i mean, why would we trust THESE people instead of a reporter at one of the most partisan rags on earth? oh, wait..
they are not being censored for being wrong. they're being censored for being right and being credible
they're censored because the other side cannot rebut them
and that is simply not a thing we can or should tolerate, especially not in a search engine.
so remember this. look for it in the future. demand primary sources.
use other search engines.
bing seems to be seeking to inform, not to inflame and mislead.
if you missed it, the original thread was here:
(and yes, lots of people duplicated my finding this morning)
i'd be curious to see what they are all seeing
from the "make orwell fiction again" files:
— el gato malo (@boriquagato) October 10, 2020
google has memory holed the great barrington declaration
not only have they wiped it from the top results, they have salted it with false claims about "climate denial"
it's pure, simple propaganda
here's bing (who plays it straight) pic.twitter.com/kTdhH8zXia
from the "make orwell fiction again" files:
google has memory holed the great barrington declaration
not only have they wiped it from the top results, they have salted it with false claims about "climate denial"
it's pure, simple propaganda
here's bing (who plays it straight)
simple, right? here's the declaration, here's the wiki page.
you can see the authors, kulldorf, gupta, bhattacharya's names and know this this was written by medical professors at harvard, stanford, and oxford.
there's no slant, not editorializing, it's primary source info.
now let's have a look at google.
pretty different looking results, huh? not only do they not lead with the declaration itself or its authors, they lead with dishonest hit pieces.
they try to tie it to climate denial and fake science.
um, no. this is "fake search."
the google results for "great barrington declaration" are simply not search results at all.
it's a propagandistic hit piece ducking the science, ignoring the credentials of the authors, failing to show the declaration, and spinning it as some kind of fringe cabal of "deniers."
it's staggeringly blatant once you see it, but will anyone?
or will they be fooled by this because it's subtle and you think google is a search engine, not a radicalized editorial column.
and it's now EVERYWHERE.
reddit will not allow users to see
google has memory holed the great barrington declaration
not only have they wiped it from the top results, they have salted it with false claims about "climate denial"
it's pure, simple propaganda
here's bing (who plays it straight)
simple, right? here's the declaration, here's the wiki page.
you can see the authors, kulldorf, gupta, bhattacharya's names and know this this was written by medical professors at harvard, stanford, and oxford.
there's no slant, not editorializing, it's primary source info.
now let's have a look at google.
pretty different looking results, huh? not only do they not lead with the declaration itself or its authors, they lead with dishonest hit pieces.
they try to tie it to climate denial and fake science.
um, no. this is "fake search."
the google results for "great barrington declaration" are simply not search results at all.
it's a propagandistic hit piece ducking the science, ignoring the credentials of the authors, failing to show the declaration, and spinning it as some kind of fringe cabal of "deniers."
it's staggeringly blatant once you see it, but will anyone?
or will they be fooled by this because it's subtle and you think google is a search engine, not a radicalized editorial column.
and it's now EVERYWHERE.
reddit will not allow users to see
OMG \U0001f62f
— Ivor Cummins (@FatEmperor) October 10, 2020
- reddit has censored discussion of The Great Barrington Declaration
- and Google has removed it from their search engine results (can only see articles about it now, as they cannot censor those
1984 is here?
Sign up here: https://t.co/lBaMxnQD1xhttps://t.co/1decFrnoCs
for those looking for a compendium of mask studies this set from swiss policy research looks useful and has some good links and discussion.
also attaching 2 past debunkings of widely disseminated US studies that health officials have attempted to
first, the kansas study spread by CDC and so many "twitterdocs" and politicians.
it's a master class in cherry picking and misusing data through truncation.
the data proving it was false was widely available at the time it was
also the mass general study, a classic of the "sun-dance" variant: use no control group and then presume that any action undertaken was the result of some thing you did.
ignore the fact that the whole rest of (unmasked) massachusetts got the same
the fact that CDC has been spreading studies like these and using them alongside flimsy lab bench experiments with no clinical outcomes or even real world measurement speaks poorly of both CDC & the evidence for masks
the good studies do not support use
and lab bench droplet projection studies are meaningless.
it's one tiny aspect of a large system and may actually be counterproductive if masks are nebulizing droplets and making virus more aerosol in spread and more deeply
also attaching 2 past debunkings of widely disseminated US studies that health officials have attempted to
first, the kansas study spread by CDC and so many "twitterdocs" and politicians.
it's a master class in cherry picking and misusing data through truncation.
the data proving it was false was widely available at the time it was
CDC claims that masks stopped the spread of covid in kansas by comparing masked and non-masked counties.
— el gato malo (@boriquagato) November 23, 2020
counterpoint: this was a cherry pick in terms of date and seasonality.
they ended the "study" aug 23.
then, covid season hit and the masks look to have made no difference. https://t.co/LgyjqPodOC pic.twitter.com/P2cfuZRtDs
also the mass general study, a classic of the "sun-dance" variant: use no control group and then presume that any action undertaken was the result of some thing you did.
ignore the fact that the whole rest of (unmasked) massachusetts got the same
this is from the study that CDC head robert redfield showcased the other night to "prove masks work"
— el gato malo (@boriquagato) July 28, 2020
it it the epidemiological equivalent of doing a sun dance at 5.30 AM and claiming you made that ball of fire in the sky appear
it's assumptive, lacks a control, & proves nothing pic.twitter.com/yTdBa7UFit
the fact that CDC has been spreading studies like these and using them alongside flimsy lab bench experiments with no clinical outcomes or even real world measurement speaks poorly of both CDC & the evidence for masks
the good studies do not support use
back in the halcyon days of 2019, before the great politicization of epidemiology turned up into down and down into sideways, the WHO performed a survey of randomized, controlled trials on masks
— el gato malo (@boriquagato) September 28, 2020
1100 citations were winnowed to the 10 best for review.
masks looked ineffective. pic.twitter.com/A04MVVmXhu
and lab bench droplet projection studies are meaningless.
it's one tiny aspect of a large system and may actually be counterproductive if masks are nebulizing droplets and making virus more aerosol in spread and more deeply
this is a fascinating thread on possible physical properties of masks, viral spread, & infectivity
— el gato malo (@boriquagato) October 24, 2020
in essence, even if a mask stops large droplets, the force of expulsion may nebulize them into aerosols
so, it's possible that aerosol spread of cov is caused/accentuated by masks https://t.co/FiHfMU3NKD
the US runs its covid testing at 40Ct.
this is 1024X the amplification level of this cutoff for finding live virus that is in any way clinically relevant.
but please, tell me again how demanding more such testing is "science" and not "flooding the data w/ meaningless positives"
this is 1024X the amplification level of this cutoff for finding live virus that is in any way clinically relevant.
but please, tell me again how demanding more such testing is "science" and not "flooding the data w/ meaningless positives"
A systematic review published 12/3/20 by the Oxford U Ctr for Evidence-Based Med has confirmed that C19 rtPCR testing patient sample cycle thresholds (Cts) >30 (mean from 6-studies) are associated with NEGATIVE viral cultures, i.e., are non-infectious https://t.co/t79dSHnHgn
— Andrew Bostom (@andrewbostom) December 6, 2020
More from Health
Now you know I love to sh-t in Harvard. But I also like accuracy. So I decided to go look at Harvard’s catalog to see its lack of military history that this article describes (they only teach history of pets it claims) and what I found shocked me! Shocked me! A thread: 1/
First off, Harvard students literally have multiple sections of military history that they can take listed. (It appears these ones are taught at MIT, so they might have to walk down the street for these) but... 2/
Say they want to stay on campus...they can only take numerous classes on war and diplomacy...3/
They have an entire class on Yalta. That’s right. An entire class on Yalta. 4/
But wait! There is more! They can take the British Empire, The Fall of the Roman Empire for those wanting traditional topics... 5/
\u201cMilitary history\u201d is only in decline if you\u2014like the author & experts in this obnoxious piece\u2014see the subject as a narrowly defined, white dude-oriented, guns & bayonets approach. The field is 1000% better off w/today\u2019s diversity of topics & historians. https://t.co/dUf3OWyVpQ
— Jonathan S. Jones (@_jonathansjones) February 1, 2021
First off, Harvard students literally have multiple sections of military history that they can take listed. (It appears these ones are taught at MIT, so they might have to walk down the street for these) but... 2/
Say they want to stay on campus...they can only take numerous classes on war and diplomacy...3/
They have an entire class on Yalta. That’s right. An entire class on Yalta. 4/
But wait! There is more! They can take the British Empire, The Fall of the Roman Empire for those wanting traditional topics... 5/
You May Also Like
One of the most successful stock trader with special focus on cash stocks and who has a very creative mind to look out for opportunities in dark times
Covering one of the most unique set ups: Extended moves & Reversal plays
Time for a 🧵 to learn the above from @iManasArora
What qualifies for an extended move?
30-40% move in just 5-6 days is one example of extended move
How Manas used this info to book
Post that the plight of the
Example 2: Booking profits when the stock is extended from 10WMA
10WMA =
Another hack to identify extended move in a stock:
Too many green days!
Read
Covering one of the most unique set ups: Extended moves & Reversal plays
Time for a 🧵 to learn the above from @iManasArora
What qualifies for an extended move?
30-40% move in just 5-6 days is one example of extended move
How Manas used this info to book
The stock exploded & went up as much as 63% from my price.
— Manas Arora (@iManasArora) June 22, 2020
Closed my position entirely today!#BroTip pic.twitter.com/CRbQh3kvMM
Post that the plight of the
What an extended (away from averages) move looks like!!
— Manas Arora (@iManasArora) June 24, 2020
If you don't learn to sell into strength, be ready to give away the majority of your gains.#GLENMARK pic.twitter.com/5DsRTUaGO2
Example 2: Booking profits when the stock is extended from 10WMA
10WMA =
#HIKAL
— Manas Arora (@iManasArora) July 2, 2021
Closed remaining at 560
Reason: It is 40+% from 10wma. Super extended
Total revenue: 11R * 0.25 (size) = 2.75% on portfolio
Trade closed pic.twitter.com/YDDvhz8swT
Another hack to identify extended move in a stock:
Too many green days!
Read
When you see 15 green weeks in a row, that's the end of the move. *Extended*
— Manas Arora (@iManasArora) August 26, 2019
Simple price action analysis.#Seamecltd https://t.co/gR9xzgeb9K
