Tag Archives: Models

Covid Vaccines Have Saved Millions of Lives…in Models, by Manfred Horst

Models are representations of hypotheses, or best guesses. They “prove” nothing, and to use them to guide policy is insane. From Manfred Horst at brownstone.org:

models absurd

As more and more questions are being asked by more and more scientists, health professionals and journalists, the narrative of “safe and effective” Covid-19 vaccines is crumbling by the day, and scientific truth is slowly beginning to impose itself.

The simple scientific truth is that these vaccines are clinically useless, but not entirely harmless (no medical intervention is).

It is not surprising that all those who promoted them are now desperately trying to cling on to their story. How? Well, let’s publish some models, as we have done since the inception of the whole Covid propaganda and hysteria. Who needs hard clinical data?

Another modeling study, comparable in its basic assumptions, algorithms and results to the one published in The Lancet a few weeks ago, is now claiming that the Covid vaccines have saved millions of people from death and hospitalization. This time it is in the US alone that – over roughly a two-year period (December 2020 to November 2022) – 3.2 million people would have died and 18.5 million would have needed in-patient treatment, had it not been for the Covid jabs.

Given that the annual death rate in the US was around 3.4 million in both 2020 and 2021, the model pretends to demonstrate that total mortality would have risen by around 50 percent without the vaccines. Five million people would have died in both 2021 and 2022, 2 million would have been counted as “Corona-deaths” (a rise of more than 500 percent compared to the “pandemic year” 2020), and Covid-19 would thus have become the absolutely predominant cause of death in the United States of America.

Continue reading→

our covid model says “X saves lives”, by el gato malo

How approved “Science” works, and how the mainstream media purveys it. From el gato malo at boriquagato.substack.com:

passing off a model as evidence is tantamount to lying

it’s honestly both jarring and disheartening that even at this stage of the game the same shabby tricks keep getting trotted out to try to make the abject failures of covid vaccines appear to be victories.

they have slanted data, rigged studies, used mice to stand for people and biomarkers to stand for clinical efficacy. truly, the whole panoply of prevarication has been deployed to try to cover for the basic fact that these products barely worked when they were launched, likely only ever had positive risk reward in extremely high risk people, and given their leaky/non-sterilizing nature were always going to rapidly drive viral escape and viral advantaging as hoskins effect/OAS set in.

this not only inverted efficacy but likely has large negative societal effects overall. i doubt you could make a case for these “vaccines” in even the highest of high risk categories anymore. they’re pretty much all negative net value on risk/reward for pretty much everyone.

and this would seem to be why they are no longer even trying. why seek data when you can simply conjure efficacy by going back to that most egregious of fabulism follies: completely making stuff up?

Continue reading→

The Modelers Thought of Everything Except Reality, by the American Institute for Economic Research staff

Models, at their best, are simplifications of reality that even the best modelers admit don’t fully capture reality. At their worst, models aren’t even in the same time zone as reality. From the AIER staff at aier.org:

The Modelers Thought of Everything Except Reality

As a site focused on economics, AIER would rather have stayed away from commentary on diseases and their mitigation. In normal times, we would have.

The archives of AIER dating back to 1933 show that we had no comments on the polio epidemic (1948-1951), the Asian Flu (1957-59), the Hong Kong flu (1968-69), the Avian bird flu (2006), or the Swine flu pandemic of 2009, which was a strain most like 1918 and therefore, one might suppose, would have caused panic but did not.

We had nothing to say because disease mitigation is a job for medical professionals, not economists and certainly not politicians.

The problem is that this time, the disease mitigators (some of them, the ones in power and with the ear of politicians) didn’t stay out of economics. Indeed, their plans for mitigation trampled all over commerce, life, and the freedoms that are necessary to make it function. For a few months in 2020, the presumptuous model-building disease mitigators became central planners, overriding the wisdom of not only medical professionals but also economists, philosophers, political scientists, historians, and everyone else including legislatures and voters.

Continue reading→