Connect with us

Spread & Containment

“Doomed To Fail” – Top Immunologist Blasts Global COVID Response Driven By “False Propaganda”

"Doomed To Fail" – Top Immunologist Blasts Global COVID Response Driven By "False Propaganda"

Via Swiss Policy Research,

Professor Ehud Qimron, head of the Department of Microbiology and Immunology at Tel Aviv University and one of the leadi

Published

on

"Doomed To Fail" - Top Immunologist Blasts Global COVID Response Driven By "False Propaganda"

Via Swiss Policy Research,

Professor Ehud Qimron, head of the Department of Microbiology and Immunology at Tel Aviv University and one of the leading Israeli immunologists, has written an open letter sharply criticizing the Israeli – and indeed global – management of the coronavirus pandemic.

Professor Ehud Qimron (center) at Tel Aviv University (Haaretz)

Original letter in HebrewN12 News (January 6, 2022); translated by Google/SPR. See also: Professor Qimron’s prediction from August 2020: “History will judge the hysteria” (INN).

∗ ∗ ∗

Ministry of Health, it’s time to admit failure

In the end, the truth will always be revealed, and the truth about the coronavirus policy is beginning to be revealed. When the destructive concepts collapse one by one, there is nothing left but to tell the experts who led the management of the pandemic – we told you so.

Two years late, you finally realize that a respiratory virus cannot be defeated and that any such attempt is doomed to fail. You do not admit it, because you have admitted almost no mistake in the last two years, but in retrospect it is clear that you have failed miserably in almost all of your actions, and even the media is already having a hard time covering your shame.

You refused to admit that the infection comes in waves that fade by themselves, despite years of observations and scientific knowledge. You insisted on attributing every decline of a wave solely to your actions, and so through false propaganda “you overcame the plague.” And again you defeated it, and again and again and again.

You refused to admit that mass testing is ineffective, despite your own contingency plans explicitly stating so (“Pandemic Influenza Health System Preparedness Plan, 2007”, p. 26).

You refused to admit that recovery is more protective than a vaccine, despite previous knowledge and observations showing that non-recovered vaccinated people are more likely to be infected than recovered people. You refused to admit that the vaccinated are contagious despite the observations. Based on this, you hoped to achieve herd immunity by vaccination — and you failed in that as well.

You insisted on ignoring the fact that the disease is dozens of times more dangerous for risk groups and older adults, than for young people who are not in risk groups, despite the knowledge that came from China as early as 2020.

You refused to adopt the “Barrington Declaration”, signed by more than 60,000 scientists and medical professionals, or other common sense programs. You chose to ridicule, slander, distort and discredit them. Instead of the right programs and people, you have chosen professionals who lack relevant training for pandemic management (physicists as chief government advisers, veterinarians, security officers, media personnel, and so on).

You have not set up an effective system for reporting side effects from the vaccines and reports on side effects have even been deleted from your Facebook page. Doctors avoid linking side effects to the vaccine, lest you persecute them as you did to some of their colleagues. You have ignored many reports of changes in menstrual intensity and menstrual cycle times. You hid data that allows for objective and proper research (for example, you removed the data on passengers at Ben Gurion Airport). Instead, you chose to publish non-objective articles together with senior Pfizer executives on the effectiveness and safety of vaccines.

Irreversible damage to trust

However, from the heights of your hubris, you have also ignored the fact that in the end the truth will be revealed. And it begins to be revealed. The truth is that you have brought the public’s trust in you to an unprecedented low, and you have eroded your status as a source of authority. The truth is that you have burned hundreds of billions of shekels to no avail – for publishing intimidation, for ineffective tests, for destructive lockdowns and for disrupting the routine of life in the last two years.

You have destroyed the education of our children and their future. You made children feel guilty, scared, smoke, drink, get addicted, drop out, and quarrel, as school principals around the country attest. You have harmed livelihoods, the economy, human rights, mental health and physical health.

You slandered colleagues who did not surrender to you, you turned the people against each other, divided society and polarized the discourse. You branded, without any scientific basis, people who chose not to get vaccinated as enemies of the public and as spreaders of disease. You promote, in an unprecedented way, a draconian policy of discrimination, denial of rights and selection of people, including children, for their medical choice. A selection that lacks any epidemiological justification.

When you compare the destructive policies you are pursuing with the sane policies of some other countries — you can clearly see that the destruction you have caused has only added victims beyond the vulnerable to the virus. The economy you ruined, the unemployed you caused, and the children whose education you destroyed — they are the surplus victims as a result of your own actions only.

There is currently no medical emergency, but you have been cultivating such a condition for two years now because of lust for power, budgets and control. The only emergency now is that you still set policies and hold huge budgets for propaganda and psychological engineering instead of directing them to strengthen the health care system.

This emergency must stop!

Professor Udi Qimron, Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/12/2022 - 12:45

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Tesla’s Situation In Shanghai Is An “Epic Disaster” For Its June Quarter, Wedbush’s Dan Ives Says

Tesla’s Situation In Shanghai Is An "Epic Disaster" For Its June Quarter, Wedbush’s Dan Ives Says

As Elon Musk continues to publicly melt…

Published

on

Tesla's Situation In Shanghai Is An "Epic Disaster" For Its June Quarter, Wedbush's Dan Ives Says

As Elon Musk continues to publicly melt down on Twitter about his proposed buyout offer and the left's "dirty tricks" and political attacks that he is expecting, Tesla stock has been plunging.

The automaker's stock came under pressure weeks ago, ostensibly after some investors started to do the math behind Musk's proposed buyout offer of Twitter.

This morning, it's under pressure again thanks to a price target cut by Wedbush's Dan Ives, who has cited Shanghai's lockdowns as his reasoning. 

Ives called the situation in China "an epic disaster" for Tesla's coming June quarter and said he expects to see "modest delivery softness", according to a Bloomberg note out Thursday morning.

Ives also said he is expecting a "slower growth trajectory" in China into the second half of the year and called the headwinds out of Asia "hard to ignore".

He also commented that the ongoing Twitter drama "may be a distraction" for Musk at a time when his attention should be focused on dealing with Tesla's issues. 

Recall, we noted days ago that "no vehicles were sold in Shanghai last month" as a result of the lockdown, according to an auto-seller association in the city. 

We also noted that Tesla's plans to restart Shanghai to its pre-pandemic production levels had been pushed back another week. Citing an internal memo, Reuters wrote just three days ago that Tesla is still planning on just one shift for its plant this week and a daily output of about 1,200 units.

Tesla is aiming for 2,600 units per day by May 23. 

Additionally, it was reported Monday that Tesla would be recalling over 100,000 vehicles in China. 107,293 vehicles in China will be recalled "due to safety risks", according to the China People's Daily

The recall, which relates to a defect in the central touchscreen during fast charging, "involves Model 3 and Model Y vehicles produced in the country between Oct 19, 2021, and April 26, 2022," the report says. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/19/2022 - 08:26

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Joined up thinking needed for joined up data plans

Joined up data could transform the pharmaceutical industry and help create a healthier Europe for decades to come
The post Joined up thinking needed for…

Published

on

Joined up data could transform the pharmaceutical industry and help create a healthier Europe for decades to come – but the route to change is far from smooth sailing.

Without careful consideration and full stakeholder input, the EU’s plans for a connected data system could end up being counterproductive.

That’s the view of the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA), which has published a list of recommendations aimed at helping the sector get the most of out of the data it holds.

“If the European Health Data Space (EHDS) and the rules surrounding access to the data are not carefully thought through, with the involvement of all stakeholders, there could be unintended consequences that limit the utility of the data for developing innovative medicines,” said the organisation.

Huge potential

The EFPIA Recommendations on a Connected Data System in Europe, published at the end of April, welcomes the proposals, which are part of the European Strategy for Data, to create common data spaces.

Said the authors: “A connected health data ecosystem has the potential to empower more effective and efficient research and development of new treatments and diagnostics. It would also ensure better planning and delivery of patient-centred care through personalised medicine.

“This, combined with value-based healthcare, can result in better allocation of resources and more sustainable healthcare systems.”

The value of this approach, which places real-world data in the hands of the right people at the right time, was demonstrated in abundance over the last few years, they went on.

It was, they explained, stakeholders from across the healthcare ecosystem coming together to share insights, whether from clinic, research, or genomics, that changed the course of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Applying the same ethos to healthcare in general, then, could give the drug development sector all the information it needs to contribute to a fitter, healthier Europe.

“For the research-based industry, access to data is critical at every step. From accelerating drug discovery to understanding patients’ behaviours and the outcome of treatment, the availability of data is essential to testing hypotheses, identifying trends and assessing proposed treatments,” they said, adding that improved access to, and transmission of, health data could “transform the pharmaceutical industry”.

“A connected health data ecosystem has the potential to empower more effective and efficient research and development of new treatments and diagnostics. It would also ensure better planning and delivery of patient-centred care through personalised medicine.”

 

Significant challenges

While EHDS is a lofty ambition, bringing it to fruition will not be without its challenges, both practical and regulatory.

As the EFPIA paper points out, health data is currently held in a wide range of repositories, from clinical notes and electronic health records to insurance claims, patient registries, patient-reported outcomes records, and continuous patient monitoring data from apps and wearables.

Unlocking their value, then, requires a high level of interoperability between different IT systems, providers, data sources, and software, all based in different countries with different levels of infrastructure maturity.

“Healthcare system information must be better connected. This will allow stakeholders to use this data for optimising and improving health outcomes,” said the paper, adding that interoperability was a “critical enabler of the digital transformation of healthcare in Europe”.

Conflicting national laws could be another important barrier to data access and use. Varying interpretations of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), for example, present challenges for clinical development of innovative medicines, said the authors.

“Conflicting interpretations of Article 9 of the GDPR, and the additional limitations on processing of health and genomic data that member states have enacted under this article, cause significant delays in study start-up and patient enrolment.

“Some member states take the position that the only lawful basis for processing health data is when individuals have given their consent for its collection and use. Others… take the position that processing this health data, when necessary for scientific research, is lawful.”

EU Data Protection Supervisors, the paper recommends, must reach a common understanding of key GDPR terms if citizens are to enjoy the same rights across the EU.

Practical solutions

The EFPIA paper makes a number of recommendations on how the EU could embrace the full potential of the proposed EHDS.

First, it says that developing a shared understanding of the relevant requirements in digital health is essential, and calls for an EU-wide approach to how data is accessed, pooled, compared and used, while also protecting privacy.

In terms of possible solutions, it points to the use of Federated Data Networks (FDN), in which separate networks share mutual RWD resources.

“In an FDN, data is not moved from its host source, though hybrid models can exist with local and central data hosting. The research question or query moves to where the data is originally hosted, with results aggregated centrally or delivered to the researcher,” said the authors.

This, they went on, could unlock the power of data in primary or secondary care settings, in clinical care decision-making, and in research, whilst preserving the privacy of the RWD at a local level.

Common data models (CDM), which standardise the logical infrastructure of software systems to enable interoperability, are also required.

“CDM is essentially a construct, a means to an end to help organise RWD into a common structure, formats, and terminologies across diverse, heterogeneous, and multiple source datasets,” said the paper.

“It addresses a central need to be able to curate data for analysis on a contemporaneous and continuous basis (not on a per study basis) or for largescale, geographically diverse, network studies of multiple data sources.”

 Joined up approach to joined up data

Ultimately, building a usable EU-wide health data system requires input from all stakeholders, and decisions on FDNs and CDMs should be taken internationally, as a sector.

Because, as the EFPIA says, we all have one goal: using the power of data to improve the health of the citizens of Europe.

About the author

Amanda Barrell is a freelance health and medical education journalist, editor, and copywriter. She has worked on projects for pharma, charities and agencies, and has written extensively for patients, HCPs and the public.

The post Joined up thinking needed for joined up data plans appeared first on .

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Weekly investment update – The soft underbelly of hard inflation data

Warnings by the US and Chinese authorities have underscored the dilemma of conflicting inflation and growth data, with energy and tight labour markets…

Published

on

By

Warnings by the US and Chinese authorities have underscored the dilemma of conflicting inflation and growth data, with energy and tight labour markets pushing up producer and consumer prices amid creeping signs of softening growth. This has put global monetary policy, and markets in risky assets, in a bind.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell for the seventh consecutive week last week, while the benchmark US Treasury 10-year yield hovered around 3.0% (almost double the 1.6% of a year ago). Commodity prices came under selling pressure as risk aversion among investors mounted. Safe-haven flows pushed up the US dollar, driving its trade-weighted index to near two-decade highs (see Exhibit 1).

Policy warnings…

China fanned market worries early last week, with Premier Li Keqiang warning that the domestic jobs situation was getting ‘complicated and grave’. The country’s zero-Covid policy is taking a heavy toll on the local economy with negative spillover effects globally. While Shanghai’s lockdown may be wound down soon, other major cities (including Beijing) are facing renewed restrictions.

US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell issued a warning mid-week: The Fed could not guarantee a ‘soft landing’ as it looked to get runaway inflation back to its 2% target amid a tight US labour market. The US Senate nonetheless overwhelmingly confirmed Powell for a second term, signalling monetary policy continuity.

Earlier in the week, former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke warned about the risk of stagflation in an interview with The New York Times.

Aggravated by hard inflation data…

US consumer price inflation was 8.3% YoY in April, down slightly from 8.5% in March. However, core inflation (which excludes food and energy prices), rose on the month from 0.3% to 0.6%, a level still too high for the Fed’s comfort.

Services inflation was particularly strong, rising by 0.7% MoM in April, marking the biggest monthly gain since August 1990. Underscoring continued robust consumer demand, retail sales rose by 0.9% vs the prior month, though this marks the third month in a row that the growth rate has decelerated. 

The prospects for inflation to fall back to the Fed’s 2% target anytime soon may not be good: High wage growth – hourly earnings rose at around 5% YoY – could continue to fuel inflation in the near term. We note that services inflation tends to be much stickier than other index components.

From the Fed’s perspective, these price pressures could in turn drive inflation expectations higher.

The market perceives the latest inflation report as sealing a 50bp rate rise at the June and July meetings of Fed policymakers. It also boosts the chances of the Fed persisting in its aggressive tightening stance at later meetings. A key question is the extent to which – and when – higher interest rates will hit real incomes and crimp demand growth, slowing the economy overall. 

The high services inflation data also suggests labour market tightness would have to ease significantly to bring wage growth back to levels that are acceptable to the Fed. We believe something will have to give. If not, the Fed may have to tap harder on the brakes down the line.

The ECB continues to move closer towards a hawkish policy, with the market now expecting its asset purchasing programme (APP) to end in July, to be followed by a 25bp rate rise soon after. Underpinning the ECB’s policy tightening stance is strong inflation, which rose by 7.4% YoY in April (same as in March), and falling unemployment (the jobless rate hit a record low of 6.8% in March).

The war in Ukraine has added to the upside risks to inflation via food and energy price increases and supply bottlenecks. In addition to higher inflation, the ECB also appears to be concerned about the spillover effects from wage increases. An increasing number of policymakers has spoken out recently in favour of an initial rate rise as soon as July.

And creeping signs of slower growth

Indications of weakening growth momentum have appeared, most noticeably in the UK where GDP growth contracted unexpectedly by 0.1% MoM in March.

In the eurozone, industrial production shrank by 1.8% MoM in March and manufacturing output was down by 1.6%. The main culprit was disruption caused by the war in Ukraine. The weakness was concentrated in Germany, whose supply chains are more integrated with eastern Europe. Its car sector is missing components produced in Ukraine.

Even in the US, recent data showed signs of slowing growth. Jobless claims filings showed an increase in initial claims; the May Senior Loan Officer Opinion survey recorded a drop in demand for mortgages; the University of Michigan consumer sentiment May index hit its lowest level since the start of the pandemic; and the May Empire State Manufacturing survey plunged.

China also released weak data, with industrial output, fixed-asset investment and retail sales all showing year-on-year declines. The property market’s woes deepened, with new home sales and starts falling precipitously.

Investment implications

Mr. Bernanke’s warning of stagflation underscores the dilemma facing policymakers and financial markets: Inflation and growth data are sending conflicting signals. Parts of the US yield curve are inverted, pointing to some risk of an economic recession.

The slowdown concerns are linked to inflation forcing the Fed to tighten policy into restrictive territory and turning weaker growth into a contraction.

The situation is similar in the eurozone: inflation is at its highest ever and could lead the ECB to take stronger measures, exacerbating headwinds from weak Chinese activity and a Russia-induced energy supply shock.

Against the backdrop of the continuing Ukrainian conflict and prolonged supply-chain disruptions, we do not favour sovereign bonds and European equities at this point. We prefer commodities, Japanese and emerging market equities, including Chinese stocks.


Disclaimer

Please note that articles may contain technical language. For this reason, they may not be suitable for readers without professional investment experience.

Any views expressed here are those of the author as of the date of publication, are based on available information, and are subject to change without notice. Individual portfolio management teams may hold different views and may take different investment decisions for different clients. The views expressed in this podcast do not in any way constitute investment advice.

The value of investments and the income they generate may go down as well as up and it is possible that investors will not recover their initial outlay. Past performance is no guarantee for future returns.

Investing in emerging markets, or specialised or restricted sectors is likely to be subject to a higher-than-average volatility due to a high degree of concentration, greater uncertainty because less information is available, there is less liquidity or due to greater sensitivity to changes in market conditions (social, political and economic conditions). Some emerging markets offer less security than the majority of international developed markets. For this reason, services for portfolio transactions, liquidation and conservation on behalf of funds invested in emerging markets may carry greater risk.

Writen by Chi Lo. The post Weekly investment update – The soft underbelly of hard inflation data appeared first on Investors' Corner - The official blog of BNP Paribas Asset Management, the sustainable investor for a changing world.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending