BC SOCIETY
Saved by @CodyyyGardner

Postcard From Luxembourg: normality is restored prior to vaccination.
I’ve repeatedly said that “test, test, test” is madness, if the tests are unregulated. Why?
‘Because pandemic’, NO PCR mass testing has a declared operational false positive rate.

So we don’t know the oFPR of PCR mass testing in U.K. This is conducted in a small number of private labs, set up at pace in summer, anticipating a ‘2nd wave’ (itself a dubious prediction from the Imperial team who’ve been wrong every time before). You’d assume these “Lighthouse
...Labs are surely regulated, inspected, accredited etc. They’re doing the most impactful medical diagnostic testing which has ever happened in history. But no. None of these are true. ‘Because pandemic’. Now, I don’t know the oFPR either. But we’re paying for it. It is NOT ZERO.
However, the authorities take every positive result as a “confirmed case” (though there’s nothing confirmed). There is no open protocol you can examine & debate. None of the results are available for understanding, thinking & interpretation. Wouldn’t it be important to learn...
...how the distribution of cycle threshold for positives varies through a run of tens of thousands of samples? Or through time? Or across geography? There is no routine evaluation of the characteristics of the test, even though we know the oFPR of complex systems is subject to...
...variability due to multiple intrinsic factors that have nothing to do with the PCR part of the chain of custody of the sample.
With very high numbers of tests per day, even low oFPR can make a major contribution to the apparent number of “cases”. It’s not correct to assume...
...that a value for oFPR obtained previously & elsewhere with a test conducted by others under completely different circumstances applies here. It’s easy, cheap & fast to measure it. That it’s never done tells me that the normal rules of good scientific practise have been put...
...to one side.
It’s worth stepping back & asking “if mass testing is untrustworthy & unregulated, why are we doing ever more of it?”
It’s a good question.
Why we ever started down this road is another. Recall what humans have done for millennia when trying to assess if a...
...person represents a potential respiratory illness threat? We look closely at one another, looking for symptoms that warn us “this person could make us ill”. In the absence of such symptoms, no special precautions are needed. But in 2020, for the first time in history, we...
...were told we could have respiratory disease without symptoms & that we could infect others despite having no symptoms. This so-called “asymptomatic transmission” actually isn’t important. The whole story was concocted from flimsy evidence: 6 individual ‘case reports’ & no...
...more than 7 individuals! In the entire world! This is ‘evidence’? When the most famous example turned out to be fraudulent yet the case report wasn’t withdrawn? (a person was said to have infected many others, yet had no symptom. It turned out they did have symptoms & had...
...taken medicines as best they could to suppress their symptoms so they could continue their work).
Armed now with the novel concept of “asymptomatic transmission” & funded mightily by the taxpayer, private labs went full steam ahead on mass testing. Remember, we’ve no idea...
...what the oFPR is. It matters hugely. Most people don’t appreciate that the importance of a FPR cannot be assessed just by knowing it. If I was to suggest it was, for example, 2%, you might think that means, approximately, that 98% of the results are OK. But it doesn’t mean...
...that at all, and it’s probably a weakness in the definitions. Because what we really want to know is “what is the false diagnosis rate? How often is a positive result incorrect?” and the oFPR does not tell you that, not on its own. We also need to know the prevalence of the...
...thing we’re trying to measure. And it’s rather chicken & egg, if we use the sample measuring instrument to do that! Imagine the prevalence was also 2%. Now with an oFPR of 2%, the number of ‘cases’ is right only half the time. Even this doesn’t sound too bad, does it?
There’s still a raging pandemic on, right? Well, hold on. What if the oFPR is a little higher? What if the real prevalence is a little lower? It really doesn’t take very much, once the oFPR is bigger than the prevalence for the false diagnosis rate to skyrocket.
Bluntly, I...
...that particular Euro cent has dropped with decision makers in Luxembourg & they’ve tapered the mass testing. That is all it takes, if an undeclared oFPR & prevalence part company enough, then mass testing becomes the illness, not the virus. You can & should still “test, test..
...test”. But focus efforts only on those with symptoms. Never test blindly in the general population. Blazing away with a mass testing system where it’s literally impossible to take a guess at the false diagnosis rate is highly irresponsible. Even the scientists in those labs...
...know this, because is “diagnostic testing for beginners”. It’s not controversial. It’s not ‘denialism’. I want to know true prevalence as much as anyone. I’m telling you as an experienced lab scientist that you cannot guess at FDR based on the information available. But it’s..
...not zero. It has a value & it will vary, so you also need to know its range. We don’t know that, either. Not only is the FDR not zero & is unknown, but it’s entirely possible that it’s high. Certainly possible that it’s high enough to change how you’d see the whole situation.
So today’s plea (again) is to demand from those running the labs & to anyone in authority: do these simple, low cost & quick experiments. If you won’t, it’s not possible to ascribe good motives to what you’re doing & profiting hugely from. Maybe there’s someone working in one...
...of those labs who has uncertainties about what they’re part of & the impact of untrustworthy data on society? If this is you, please do something.
Everyone else, please know that until proper validation is done on the PCR mass testing system, the daily number of “cases”...
...that you’re being told about & even the number of those dying a “Covid death” are both completely meaningless. They might be correct, though I very much doubt it. There’s extraordinarily clear evidence emerging of large scale misattribution of covid19 deaths in the public...
...record. Hold on: if that’s true (& it it is) doesn’t it mean that the false diagnosis rate could be very high? Doesn’t it mean that it MUST be high? Why, yes & yes. It means exactly that.
Once that penny drops, you surely appreciate what it means? That none of the data can...
...be trusted. Even officialdom cannot know you what extent the official record fairly reflects or hugely deviates from the reality.
If I’m right - and I believe I am by all logical means - then as the daily numbers aren’t reliable, they’re no longer measuring properly a...
...natural phenomenon but something to do with the characteristics of the testing system. And if that’s true...what is happening won’t fade away naturally, not even if the vaccines do what is hoped.
So be more Luxembourgish today. Think whether you’re content with our testing.

More from Yardley Yeadon

Yardley Yeadon
Yardley Yeadon
@MichaelYeadon3
I urge all followers who have read my criticisms of PCR mass testing in U.K. to carefully read Mr Fordham’s carefully worded letter. Note that the innovation minister in the Lords, Lord Bethel, already admitted that the PCR system doesn’t have the equivalent of an MOT. https://t.co/zXzeDMKCBb


Without this information it’s impossible to interpret any result. If the oFPR is 4%, for example, and if the true prevalence is 0.3% (it’s probably less), then for every 10,000 tests, 400 positives would be false & 30 positives would be genuine. So 93% of positives are false.

As Mr Fordham points out, almost all policies pivot on PCR mass testing. Hancock previously admitted on talkRADIO to Julia Hartley-Brewer in late summer that the FPR was “just under 1%”. That was a flat lie (possibly inadvertent but he’s never corrected the record). The reason...

...we are sure Hancock told a lie is that they have never known the FPR. Those including Hancock who believe that the oFPR can be estimated by inspection of the lowest positivity ever recorded, while logical, is completely wrong. Changes in personnel, throughout, testing...

...architecture & the like can radically alter the oFPR. Since Hancock’s remark in late summer, PCR mass testing has moved into the Lighthouse Labs & this creates a new & urgent need to continually assess oFPR. I’ve good reason to believe it’s now VERY much higher now that the...
SOCIETY
Yardley Yeadon
Yardley Yeadon
@MichaelYeadon3
@DesmondSwayne Sir Desmond is right. SAGE makes mathematical predictions based on flawed models.
I chose to stick my neck out almost 4mo ago here:
https://t.co/b0rT5Lq9HI
I experienced much anxiety doing this, aware that, if I was badly wrong here, I would be destroyed as a contributor.

That said, I thought the immunology so clear that I made three, specific & testable predictions which should apply if I was right.
Please examine them, on the right, under the pie chart:


In particular, I predicted that the epidemic would not reignite in London. Obviously, we have many “cases” but I urge people to disregard these & instead to look at excess deaths, on the principle that a severe (occasionally lethal) respiratory virus would show itself this way.

Here is a chart showing the trend of deaths in London alone over recent years. A prominent peak of deaths is evident as the virus swept through in spring. Also visible the August heatwave. But there are no excess deaths now.
I submit this is a striking example of herd immunity.


I’m still waiting for SAGE or indeed anyone to provide an alternative explanation for the sharp nature of the spring excess deaths peak which doesn’t involve herd immunity or otherwise removing from the pool those vulnerable to lethal outcomes (same result). Given this sharp...
MATHS
Advertisement
Yardley Yeadon
Yardley Yeadon
@MichaelYeadon3
https://t.co/xvP6tVlIaE
Quite a surprise. Ferguson isn’t qualified to comment on such things. He lacks understanding of basic biological concepts, partly explaining why his predictions are often so extreme.


That said, I’ll take him as an ally. It’s clear we’re already at herd immunity. How can I be sure? London had a huge peak of excess deaths in spring. The timing of peak deaths showed clearly that the pandemic was self-limiting. Recall much debate about whether the interval...

...between lockdown & peak deaths was long enough for lockdown to have been the cause of reducing deaths? The answer was “no”. But it was close & I can understand people thinking “well, it’s close, so perhaps it was lockdown that did it?”, thereby establishing a foundational...

...myth favoured by those who genuinely believe lockdown saves lives (it clearly doesn’t).
I’ll get to London & here immunity. But those wavering about the evidence about lockdown in spring really will benefit from cogitating on this graph.


In blue are the 30 trusts with the earliest date of peak deaths in spring. In red, the 30 with the latest peak deaths. For me, this is proof that national lockdown, which began Mar 23, played no role whatsoever in turning the pandemic. You’ll see some areas had peak daily...
SCIENCE
Yardley Yeadon
Yardley Yeadon
@MichaelYeadon3
@ukiswitheu I invite people to run the thought experiment: “what if the ‘cases’ data is inaccurate?”
Ignore ‘cases’, look instead only at excess deaths (per M Levitt’s tweet). Does that look characteristic of an epidemic? It’s completely diff from spring or any winter flu outbreak.
London:


Can anyone explain why there is no ‘2nd wave’ of excess deaths in London, without invoking herd immunity?
It’s not lockdown. See NW England:
This is the largest #SecondaryRipple (which I predicted).


https://t.co/b0rT5Lq9HI
Now check the 3 predictions I made months ago. They’ve all happened. Compare predictions from SAGE’s statements: they’re all wrong.
Even neutrals at this point might ask themselves “if he’s been right on all predictions, maybe he’s correct now?”


I’ve been saying since the Lighthouse Labs got up & running that I’m deeply sceptical about the trustworthiness of their ‘cases’ data. I showed how, at low virus prevalence, the PCR mass testing data was throwing out potentially 90% positives being

https://t.co/t4qQN4rH0u
I got ‘fact checked’ a LOT over that statement. This paper just published, about precisely that time period I speculated about. Turns out that high-80s% of Dr Healy’s positives by PCR were FALSE. This alone is sufficient in my view to throw severe doubt...
FOR LATER READ
Yardley Yeadon
Yardley Yeadon
@MichaelYeadon3
In a number of Sunday papers:
Scientific advisers said it was “hard to see” when the restrictions would end as new variants continued to emerge, delivering a potentially devastating blow to the travel industry. The prime minister said that after progress with vaccinations...

...”what we don’t want to see is all that work undone by the arrival of a new variant that is vaccine-busting”.
The idea is planted in people’s mind that this virus is mutating in such a way as to evade prior immunity. This is completely unfounded, certainly as regards immunity..

...gained naturally, after repelling the virus (which well around 99.9% of the population do, fewer, obviously in the very elderly & already ill, more in those younger & well). It’s important to appreciate that upon infection, the human immune system cuts up an infectious...

...agent into short pieces. Each of these short pieces of protein are presented to other cells in the immune system, like an identity parade. Our cells have a truly astonishing range of abilities to recognise different protein structures, and there will be some which recognise...

...each of the pieces of the invader. The cells which recognise a piece are instructed to multiply selectively so that, after a few days to a couple of weeks, our bodies contain large numbers of virus piece specific cells. These have a range of functions. Some make antibodies...
SCIENCE

More from Society

Miss C
Miss C
@Credible_Intel
1. Most people are aware of the fail doxes posted by Jamilla Moor on @Snakeeater36 and myself. I'm going to go into the details (in layman terms) of exactly how a specific group of duhnonymous idiots came up with these fail doxes & I'll prove that they're wrong.

2. @Snakeeater36 posted this screenshot on his TL. He had exposed the page source code on tweet which included an image. Anyone can do this in Chrome by opening a tweet, clicking on the image, then right click on any open space on the screen, select "inspect", then "network".

3. In fact I did the same by pulling up a different tweet and image. You'll see the IP highlighted in yellow and the region Dallas TX. It's not my IP. It belongs to Akamai which is identified. Why is that important.......


4. Well Akamai is a Content Delivery Network also known as a CDN. A CDN, is a geographically distributed network of proxy servers (make note of the term "proxy" servers) and their data centers. More later on why this is important relative to the fail doxes.

5. CDNs allow companies like Twitter to provide better performance in uploading content, like images, by distributing the service spatially relative to end users. Rather than pushing content directly (left), Twitter uses CDN networks (right) to push/pull images from end users.
SOCIETY
Garfield but Anti-Fascist
Garfield but Anti-Fasc...
@AntifaGarfield
Tomorrow, January 6th, MAGA chuds, Proud Boys, and white supremacists are planned to descend on Washington D.C. to contest the election. Among them will be NSC-131, a New England based neo-Nazi organization. Let's welcome them by saying hi to one of their members, Eddie Stuart!


Edward Stuart, from Chester, New Hampshire, has been a member of Nationalist Social Club (NSC) since the very beginning and is a staple participant in their actions. He is known in NSC chats as "Carl Jung" and is well connected in the New England Nazi scene.
2/


NSC-131 is a neo-Nazi group that was started in Massachusetts in early 2020 by Chris Hood. You can learn more about NSC and it's members in these threads:


Eddie describes his ideology as "Esoteric Hitlerism" which is an occult form of Nazism that literally worships Adolf Hitler as a god, or, specifically, as an incarnation of the Hindu God Vishnu. Here is Ed holding the RigVeda with some of his occult Nazi pals. Interesting Ed!
4/


Much of this ideological insight was gained from Eddie's Twitter, where he originally used his "Carl Jung" persona and reposts explicit neo-fascist content and racist memes. In one edited picture, Eddie can be seen at an NSC event in late June 2020 holding a Nazi Sonnenrad flag
5
SOCIETY
Advertisement
Caroline - Real Feminists XX \U0001f1ff\U0001f1e6
Caroline - Real Femini...
@radicalhag
I think the UK trans debate has teased out the sticking points for feminists, and it might be useful to lay them out given that the battle in the US, with a very different legislative environment, is just starting.

The GRA of 2004 gave trans people the ability to change legal sex via a GRC, but only if they had a psychiatric diagnosis of dysphoria and only after having lived in role for 2 years. The spousal veto gave spouses a chance to annul or obtain a favourable divorce.

While this ultimately created the loophole in women's rights that we've been fighting against in the last few years, it catered for a tiny number of dysphoric transsexuals and so did not have an enormous impact.

Discussions with trans friends and allies make it clear that, although surgery wasn't a requirement for a GRC, the diagnostic procedures were expected to trap and exclude males who did not want surgery, thereby preventing fetishists and opportunists from exploiting a GRC.

The Equality Act of 2010 defined the various protected characteristics, including both sex and 'gender reassignment', and provided for sex-based exemptions, under the auspices of which it is legal to exclude trans people from some single-sex spaces and services.
SOCIETY
Polyamorous Tantric Sex Guru
Polyamorous Tantric Se...
@BethLynch2020
"this is not a third world country.."


"this is not a third world country.."


"this is not a third world country..."


"this is not a third world country.."


"this is not a third world country.."
SOCIETY
@AdamSmithWorks
@AdamSmithWorks
@adamsmithworks
It's been a whole day since we tweeted Part 2 of this chapter, so let us remind you: #AdamSmith just said that the colonies got nothing that helped them succeed from the mother country. (IV.vii.c) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets

So these two opening sentences are pretty heckin’ sarcastic:
Now we've seen the great advantages the colonies got (they got nothing!) (IV.vii.c.1)
So what have been the great advantages to Europe! (IV.vii.c.2)

Seems like there’s a...tone there. #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets


Europeans buy goods from America, and Americans buy European goods as well. Even countries that don’t trade directly with America have benefited. (IV.vii.c.3–8) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets

The mother countries restrict colonial trade (esp the exclusive right to buy from or sell to their colonies). That's a dead weight on the increase of the wealth of nations. Everything is more expensive, everyone enjoys less of it. (IV.vii.c.9) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets

Maybe European countries get added security? In ancient times, empires expected military support and revenue from their colonies, and they got it.
18thC colonies? Not so much. (IV.vii.c.11–13) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
SOCIETY

You May Also Like

Brian Cates
Brian Cates
@drawandstrike
Trump is gonna let the Mueller investigation end all on it's own. It's obvious. All the hysteria of the past 2 weeks about his supposed impending firing of Mueller was a distraction. He was never going to fire Mueller and he's not going to


Mueller's officially end his investigation all on his own and he's gonna say he found no evidence of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election.

Democrats & DNC Media are going to LITERALLY have nothing coherent to say in response to that.

Mueller's team was 100% partisan.

That's why it's brilliant. NOBODY will be able to claim this team of partisan Democrats didn't go the EXTRA 20 MILES looking for ANY evidence they could find of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election

They looked high.

They looked low.

They looked underneath every rock, behind every tree, into every bush.

And they found...NOTHING.

Those saying Mueller will file obstruction charges against Trump: laughable.

What documents did Trump tell the Mueller team it couldn't have? What witnesses were withheld and never interviewed?

THERE WEREN'T ANY.

Mueller got full 100% cooperation as the record will show.
POLITICS
Anu Satheesh \U0001f1ee\U0001f1f3
Anu Satheesh 🇮🇳...
@AnuSatheesh5
Neyyattinkara Krishna Kshetram
#Thiruvananthapuram
#KeralaTemples 🚩

Neyyattinkara Krishna Kshetram is considered as the Guruvayur of Trivandrum. Thrikkayyil Venna (butter) is main offering to Neyyattinkara Unnikannan. Kshetram is supposed to be built by Marthanda Varma.


Sthala Puranam says that, Anizham Thirunal Marthanda Varma was surrounded by his enemies, Ettuveettil Pillamar, while he was near the place where Temple is situated now. The king prayed to Padmanabhaswamy to protect him.  At that time, a small boy was seen there and he


advised the king to hide himself inside the hollow trunk of a jack fruit tree. The king was surprised to find a small boy in the forest, but agreed to the advice
Thus he was saved from the attack. When the enemies left, king tried to know about the boy, but he couldn't.


He believed that it was krishna himself who saved his life. A temple was built here, which is the present Neyyattinkara Krishna Kshetram. The jack fruit tree where  the king hid himself is now known as Ammachi Plavu. Ashtami Rohini, Vishu are very famous here

Hare Krishna
🙏🕉🙏
ALL
Advertisement
Quinn Cummings
Quinn Cummings
@quinncy
Gather round, Gentle Readers. It is time I tell the story of the worst decision I ever made in an office. Some of you have heard this. Some have not. Whatever you do in your office today, this week, the rest of this year, you can console yourself by recalling this tale.

A long time ago, I was a talent agent. I worked for a woman named Susan Smith, who had her own small boutique agency. She was known for three things:

1. She had fantastic taste in clients. If there is someone you admire, odds are good that at some point, she was their agent,

2. She could negotiate a deal like few who have ever trod the earth. Casting would give her all the money they had budgeted for that part, plus a little more, plus promising to get her dog Barnaby groomed. She was magnificent to watch.

3. She was insane.

I'm sure you're thinking, "Quinn, it's the entertainment industry, they are all insane." Yes, many are. So consider this; if you told someone you worked for Susan, people who worked for insane people would look and you and whisper, "I hear she's insane."
LIFE
Aditya Todmal
Aditya Todmal
@AdityaTodmal
MASTER THREAD on Short Strangles.

Curated the best tweets from the best traders who are exceptional at managing strangles.

• Positional Strangles
• Intraday Strangles
• Position Sizing
• How to do Adjustments
• Plenty of Examples
• When to avoid
• Exit Criteria

How to sell Strangles in weekly expiry as explained by boss himself. @Mitesh_Engr

• When to sell
• How to do Adjustments
• Exit


Beautiful explanation on positional option selling by @Mitesh_Engr
Sir on how to sell low premium strangles yourself without paying anyone. This is a free mini course in


1st Live example of managing a strangle by Mitesh Sir. @Mitesh_Engr

• Sold Strangles 20% cap used
• Added 20% cap more when in profit
• Booked profitable leg and rolled up
• Kept rolling up profitable leg
• Booked loss in calls
• Sold only


2nd example by @Mitesh_Engr Sir on converting a directional trade into strangles. Option Sellers can use this for consistent profit.

• Identified a reversal and sold puts

• Puts decayed a lot

• When achieved 2% profit through puts then sold
OPTIONSLEARNINGS , ALL , OPTIONS STRATEGY
Shalini Singh Sengar
Shalini Singh Sengar
@Maverickmusafir
(An extract from Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw, Soldiering with Dignity)

The man eventually destined to be free India's first Field Marshal was born on 3rd April 1914 at Amritsar. How did a Parsi couple settle for the holy city of the Sikhs? I once asked him and was told that in+


1899, his father recently qualified as a doctor and just married, could make no professional headway in Bombay, and was advised to try his luck at Lahore in the Punjab. With his young wife, he set off by train for Lahore. The long dusty and hot journey took five days and by the+


end of it, his young wife, who had never left the comforts and civilization of Bombay, was in hysterics and cried to go back. Poor Dr Manekshaw did all he could to comfort her, but as the train steamed into Amritsar, with her first sight of the Sikhs the young bride screamed her+

lungs out and refused to go any further. So they left the train at Amritsar, and there they stayed for forty-five years.

The Manekshaws had six children, four boys and two girls, and Sam was the fifth child. Sam had his schooling at Nainital's Sherwood College.+

After completing his schooling, he should have gone to England to pursue higher studies; this was the promise made to him by his father but, fortunately for the Indian Army, Dr Manekshaw felt that this particular son was far too young to be on his own in a foreign country, even+
HISTORY