Connect with us

Futures Rally Fizzles After Volley Of Disappointing Earnings And Economic News

Futures Rally Fizzles After Volley Of Disappointing Earnings And Economic News

US futures were flat (bouncing off session lows), and a rally…

Published

on

Futures Rally Fizzles After Volley Of Disappointing Earnings And Economic News

US futures were flat (bouncing off session lows), and a rally in tech stocks reversed after three days of gains as recessionary PMI data out of Europe and disappointing results from COF, CRSR, SAM, SIVB, STX and others raised concerns about sliding corporate profits amid slowing economic growth. Contracts on the Nasdaq 100 were down 0.5% as 7:30am in New York, while S&P futures ticked 0.3% lower, but are on pace to close the week more than 3% higher after solid rallies in the past two days.

Europe's Stoxx 600 Index added 0.5%, poised for a weekly advance as investors shrugged off worries about the economic outlook prompted by the worst Euro Area PMI data which dropped to a 17-month low in July, dipping beneath the level that signals a contraction, and confirming Europe has entered a recession. The downturn was driven by worsening output among manufacturers and a near-stalling of service-sector growth. Economists had expected a mild expansion.

Despite the dismal European economic data, global stocks remain on course for their best week in a month, paring this year’s equity market rout to about 18% amid speculation that the world is headed for a recession which will force central banks to end their tightening earlier than expected. Earnings have been a mixed bag so far in Q2, with the scandal-plagued Twitter due to report results later.

“Q2 earnings were seemingly not as bad as feared,” Mizuho International Plc strategists Peter McCallum and Evelyne Gomez-Liechti wrote in a note to clients. “That said, tech giants announced spending cuts and a hiring slowdown. Consumer firms lowered this year’s guidance.”

In premarket trading, Snap shares plunged 28% as the company reported missed its already slashed guidance and removed guidance, roiled partly by a major slowdown in ad spending. Other social media-linked stocks, including Facebook-owner Meta Platforms, Google-parent Alphabet and Twitter, also fell. Meanwhile, Seagate Technology shares are down 13% in premarket trading, after the computer hardware and storage company issued a weak forecast for the current period. Intuitive Surgical shares plunged 12% in US premarket trading after the company’s second-quarter profit and revenue both missed the average analyst estimate. At least four analysts cut their PTs on the surgical systems maker, noting the capital concerns and macro headwinds that weighed on the performance. Verizon slumped more than 2% after the company slashed its FY adj EPS range from $5.40-$5.55 to $5.10-$5.25.It wasn't all bad news: American Express jumped after reporting that spending on its network soared, leading the firm to raise its forecast for full-year revenue.

“The Snap results came as a warning for other Big Tech names that rely on ad revenue,” said Ipek Ozkardeskaya, senior analyst at Swissquote. “The results could reverse appetite for at least a couple of them, including Google and Meta before the closing bell.” 

These technology heavyweights, which led the rally in US stocks following the pandemic-driven slump in early 2020, have been among the biggest decliners this year as the Federal Reserve began an aggressive cycle of interest rate increases. The tech sector has been particularly vulnerable as higher rates mean a bigger discount for the present value of future profits, hurting growth shares with the highest valuations. With the Fed expected to announce another hike at its meeting next week, focus has been on the second-quarter earnings season for clues on how companies are holding up amid surging inflation and a possible looming recession.

In Europe, the Euro Stoxx 50 rose 0.5%. IBEX outperforms peers, adding 0.6%, FTSE 100 is flat but underperforms peers. Travel, real estate and utilities are the strongest performing Stoxx 600 sectors. Here are some of the biggest European movers today:

  • Uniper shares were volatile after Germany confirmed the rescue package for the utility. The shares pared earlier gains of as much as 11% to briefly turn negative. Majority-owner Fortum rose as much as 13%.
  • Delivery Hero shares surge as much as 21%, the most since December 2019, after lifting full-year adjusted Ebitda margin target.
  • Beazley shares jump as much as 13% to the highest in more than two years after an upgrade to profit guidance driven by cyber insurance.
  • Sinch shares jump as much as 15% following a volatile run for the cloud messaging platform firm, with Handelsbanken saying its recent results contained few positive surprises but that there are good operational signs.
  • Stora Enso shares fall as much as 9.8%, the most since May, after a quarterly update analysts say looks somewhat soft, with a miss on earnings for the Finnish packaging and forestry group.
  • Lonza shares fall as much as 3.4% after it reported 1H results. While noting the Swiss company is a “structural long- term growth story,” the lack of an upgrade to 2022 outlook may leave some disappointed, Jefferies says.
  • Aston Martin shares fall as much as 13%, paring the gains of the past week, as Jefferies says the announced boost to the company’s capital structure leaves open questions, with the stock likely to remain “volatile” in coming weeks.
  • Temenos shares drop as much as 7.7%. 2Q results missed estimates and analysts anticipate investors may be skeptical that the software firm will be able to hits its confirmed FY guidance.
  • Electrolux Professional shares fall as much as 6.5%, after component shortages eroded the appliance manufacturer’s margins in the second quarter.

Earlier in the session, Asian stocks headed for the biggest weekly gain in four months as renewed optimism in Chinese technology shares helped offset downbeat sentiment triggered by a disappointing earnings report by Snap Inc. The MSCI Asia Pacific Index was poised for a slight gain Friday, maintaining a weekly rally of more than 3%. Shares in Hong Kong edged higher, with a gauge tracking China’s technology sector posting a three-day gain, while Japanese stocks also gained.  Investors are looking anew at China’s tech sector after Beijing wrapped up a year-long probe into ride-hailing giant Didi Global Inc., which was fined $1.2 billion. Sentiment has improved as US chipmaker stocks staged a stunning rebound on evidence that supply-chain issues are easing and demand is growing. 

Asian stocks are up less than 1% so far this month after slumping almost 7% in June, the market’s worst month in over two years, as traders pared expectations of aggressive monetary tightening by the US Federal Reserve and as the dollar softened. “Recession risks have definitely risen in the developed markets, but one of the bright spots that we’re seeing is really in places like Asia ex-Japan, where a lot of economies are still continuing to reopen pretty strongly,” Clara Cheong, global market strategist at JPMorgan Asset Management, told Bloomberg TV. Expectations China will rebound in the second half should “help to bolster Chinese equity markets and the broader Asia ex-Japan region,” Cheong said.

Japanese equities erased earlier losses as investors assessed US earnings results amid economic uncertainty.  The Topix index rose 0.3% to 1,955.97 as of the market close in Tokyo, while the Nikkei 225 advanced 0.4% to 27,914.66. Keyence Corp. contributed the most to the Topix’s gain, increasing 3%. Out of 2,170 shares in the index, 1,147 rose and 865 fell, while 158 were unchanged. “Strong US markets were a supporting factor for Japanese stocks today,” said Masahiro Ichikawa, chief market strategist at Mitsui DS Asset Management

Key stock gauges in India completed their best weekly performance since early-February 2021 as foreign funds turned buyers. The S&P BSE Sensex rose 0.7% to 56,072.23 in Mumbai, taking its weekly gain to 4.3%. The NSE Nifty 50 Index also rose 0.7% Friday. Nine of the 19 sectoral indexes compiled by BSE Ltd. advanced, led by a gauge of lenders. Foreigners net-bought more than $1 billion of local stocks this week through July 20, after 15 straight weeks of net selling. Read: After $30 Billion Exodus, Global Money Trickles Back Into India The decline in crude oil prices and rebound in foreign inflows helped the Sensex to close above 56,000, Amol Athawale, vice president at Kotak Securities, wrote in a note.  “The fear of aggressive rate hikes by both the US Fed and RBI seems to be moderating, which is giving investors some room to lap up stocks of companies with good fundamentals,” Athawale said.  In earnings, Reliance Industries Ltd., India’s biggest company by market value, is scheduled to announce results later Friday. Infosys, Kotak Mahindra Bank and ICICI Bank are due to report their results over the weekend.

In FX, the euro turned lower, pushing the Bloomberg Dollar Index to only its second daily advance this week after flash PMI data in France, Germany and the euro zone as a whole disappointed. The euro dropped as much as 1% to $1.0130.  UK readings were in line with expectations. CAD and CHF are the strongest performers in G-10 FX, EUR and DKK underperform.

In rates, Treasuries were richer across the curve, following wider rally seen in bunds after flash PMI data in France, Germany and the eurozone as a whole disappointed and entered contraction territory. US yields richer by up to 6.5bp across 5-year sector, tightening the 2s5s30s fly byb 6.5bp on the day, adding to Thursday’s belly-led gains. US 10-year yields around 2.82%, richer by 5.5bp on the day with bunds outperforming by ~10bp in the sector. Three-month dollar Libor -1.67bp at 2.76629%. IG dollar issuance slate empty so far; Thursday saw a quiet session for issuance, following a rush of deals seen at the start of the week.

European bonds also rallied, led by the short-end, with 2-year German bond yields falling as much as 25 basis points to 0.42%, its biggest plunge since 2008 on expectations a recession is now unevitable; money markets traders no longer fully price in a 50-basis-point ECB hike in September. Peripheral spreads are mixed to Germany; Italy tightens, Spain and Portugal widen.

In commodities, crude futures dropped 2% erasing an earlier gain after the catastrophic european economic data. Most base metals trade in the green; LME aluminum rises 1.5%, outperforming peers. LME tin lags, dropping 0.9% Spot gold is little changed at $1,718/oz

Bitcoin remains bid and has eclipsed the USD 23.5k mark at best, though this was brief and it has since waned marginally.

Looking to the day ahead, and the main data highlight will be the global flash PMIs for July. Otherwise, we’ll hear from the ECB’s Villeroy. Earnings releases include Verizon Communications, NextEra Energy, American Express and Twitter.

Market Snapshot

  • S&P 500 futures down 0.3% to 3,987.25
  • STOXX Europe 600 up 0.3% to 425.79
  • MXAP up 0.2% to 159.10
  • MXAPJ little changed at 521.40
  • Nikkei up 0.4% to 27,914.66
  • Topix up 0.3% to 1,955.97
  • Hang Seng Index up 0.2% to 20,609.14
  • Shanghai Composite little changed at 3,269.97
  • Sensex up 0.7% to 56,083.03
  • Australia S&P/ASX 200 little changed at 6,791.50
  • Kospi down 0.7% to 2,393.14
  • German 10Y yield little changed at 1.07%
  • Euro down 0.7% to $1.0157
  • Gold spot up 0.0% to $1,719.20
  • U.S. Dollar Index up 0.21% to 107.14

Top Overnight News from Bloomberg

  • Private-sector activity in the euro area unexpectedly shrank for the first time since the pandemic lockdowns of early 2021, adding to signs that a recession might be on the horizon. A survey of purchasing managers by S&P Global dropped to a 17- month low in July, dipping beneath the level that signals contraction.
  • US social-media giants shed nearly $47 billion in market value in extended trading Thursday, as disappointing revenue from Snap Inc. raised concerns about the outlook for online advertising.
  • Former President Donald Trump ignored pleas to call off the mob storming the US Capitol and remained publicly silent as he watched the violence unfold on television from his personal dining room off the Oval Office, according to evidence and testimony to the committee investigating last year’s insurrection.
  • US equity futures fell Friday and Asian stocks wavered after disappointment over technology earnings stoked worries about the economic outlook and took some of the shine off this week’s global equity rebound.

A more detailed look at global markets courtesy of Newsquawk

Asia-Pac stocks were mostly higher after the gains in the US but with upside capped by lingering growth concerns. ASX 200 was rangebound near the 6,800 level after PMI data slowed but remained in expansion territory. Nikkei 225 was kept afloat after the recent dovish affirmations from the BoJ and Governor Kuroda but with gains limited amid the COVID situation and with Core Inflation rising by its fastest pace in 7 years. Hang Seng and Shanghai Comp. were mixed amid earnings releases and with suggestions that President Biden could temporarily reduce China tariffs in response to supply chain disruptions and rising inflation.

Top Asian News

  • US Democrat Rep. Ami Bera said President Biden could opt for a "temporary reduction" of Trump-era tariffs on China in response to supply chain disruptions and rising inflation, according to Nikkei.
  • Hong Kong Faces First Prime Rate Hike Since 2018 on Hawkish Fed
  • South Korea Restores Military Drills Once Reduced to Help Trump
  • China Says Japan ‘Shall Pay’ If It Handles Fukushima Water Wrong
  • Russia Rises With China in Latest Japan Threat Assessment
  • UK Politicians Voice Concern Over HSBC China Communist Committee
  • Inflation to Drive RBI’s Rate Action Rather Than Rupee, DBS Says

European bourses are resilient despite Flash PMIs for June moving into contractionary territory, with the regions upside perhaps derived from potential less-hawkish ECB implications.  Stateside, futures are subdued but have been fairly contained after late Wall St. action and ahead of further key earnings. Sectors are mostly in the green and feature upside in Real Estate and Travel while Banks, Resources and Autos lag.

Top European News

  • Euro-Zone Activity Is Suddenly Shrinking in Ominous Growth Sign
  • Crude Fluctuates Amid Soft European Economic Data
  • UK Businesses Say Economic Growth Slowed to a Crawl in July
  • Delivery Hero Cuts Order Forecast for 2022 With Growth Slowing
  • Russia Rises With China in Latest Japan Threat Assessment

FX

  • Euro reverses further from post-ECB hike peaks after dire EZ PMIs, including sub-50 manufacturing headlines - EUR/USD down to circa 1.0130 and only finding support ahead of 10 DMA.
  • Pound down in sympathy, but holding up better around 1.1950 vs Greenback as UK retail sales come in above forecast along with preliminary PMIs.
  • Aussie hampered by slowdown in PMIs and hefty option expiries at the 0.6900 strike.
  • Yen and Franc cushioned by soft yields to an extent and DXY fading into 107.500, USD/JPY middle of 137.95-02 range and USD/CHF nearer base of 0.9706-0.9658 band.
  • Loonie retains 1.2800 handle as oil settles down somewhat in the run up to Canadian consumption data.

Fixed Income

  • Bonds extend already extensive recovery rallies from post-ECB hike lows.
  • Bunds up to 154.32 from 149.69 at worst yesterday, Gilts to 117.43 from 114.20 and 10 year T-note at 119-24 compared to 117-14+.
  • Curves bull steepen as poor EZ PMIs prompt further rollback of tightening expectations.
  • BTPs latch on to the bid after early Italian political wobble as 10 year benchmark rebounds from 120.85 to 123.241, at best.

Commodities

  • Crude benchmarks have given up initial gains following the release of Flash PMIs which point to a Q3 QQ EZ GDP contraction; prior to this, contracts were firmer.
  • TotalEnergies (TTE FP) commits to a large-scale fuel price reduction programme until end-2022 for all service stations in France. September 1st - November 1st: EUR 0.20/litre reduction vs global market quotation prices; November 1st - December 1st: EUR 0.10/litre reduction vs global market quotation prices.
  • UN spokesperson expects the signature of the grains agreement between Russia and Ukraine to take place today at 14:30BST/09:30EDT.
  • Spot gold continues to inch higher above the USD 1700/oz mark and has risen as high as USD 1725/oz thus far.

ECB

  • ECB SPF (Q3). HICP Inflation: 2022 7.3% (prev. 6.0%; ECB June 6.8%,) 2023 3.6% (prev. 2.4%; ECB June 2.1%), 2024 2.1% (prev. 1.9%; ECB June 2.1%), Longer-term/2027 2.2% (prev. 2026 2.1%). Click here for more detail.
  • ECB's de Cos says the most important aspect of the anti-fragmentation tool is its creation.
  • ECB's Kazimir says the September rate hike could be 25bps or 50bps, via Bloomberg; it will take a while to get inflation to desired levels, wishes to never use TPI but "we will see".
  • ECB's Villeroy says, if necessary, we will be as determined in activating TPI as we have been in creating it, no pre-defined limits to purchases.
  • Bundesbank says Germany faces slower growth and new spike in inflation; expects inflation to remain high in the coming months and spike in September once govt subsidies on fuel and rail tickets expire on Aug 31st.

US Event Calendar

  • 09:45: July S&P Global US Composite PMI, est. 52.4, prior 52.3
  • 09:45: July S&P Global US Services PMI, est. 52.7, prior 52.7
  • 09:45: July S&P Global US Manufacturing PM, est. 52.0, prior 52.7

DB's Jim Reid concludes the overnight wrap

I'm off to my colleague Henry's wedding tomorrow. He was in charge of the EMR yesterday and mentioned his upcoming nuptials. A number of people didn't read properly that the EMR was coming from his email address yesterday and congratulated me on getting married instead. I'm afraid I don't have much time for bigamy at the moment.

Markets were as volatile yesterday as my wife would be if I told her I was getting married tomorrow as they grappled with the first ECB rate hike in over a decade, the resignation of Italian PM Draghi and fresh elections set for September, a market disappointment by the ECB anti-fragmentation tool, the resumption of gas flows through the Nord Stream pipeline, a US President who has Covid, poor Snap earnings and last but not least signs of softening in the US labour market. That accumulation of downside risks saw a huge rally in US rates but was not enough to knock risk markets off their stride, with the S&P 500 (+0.99%) and Europe’s STOXX 600 (+0.44%) both gaining ground after a back and forth day. Futures are down as well on the after hours Snap results. Sovereign bonds actually initially sold off in reaction to the ECB, but worries about Italy and fears of a global recession eventually dominated to send core sovereign yields mostly lower on the day, especially in the US, just as other cyclical assets like oil prices fell back as well.

Running through all that, we’ll start with the ECB which our Europe economics team wraps up in full here. They begun their hiking cycle with a 50bp hike for all three of their main interest rates, which leaves the deposit facility rate at 0%, and the main refinancing rate at 0.5%. There are a number of lessons we can take from this, but a key one is that forward guidance appears to be dead, as this went against the ECB’s explicit comments from their June meeting, when they indicated they intended to commence with a 25bps move. And in their statement this time around, they said that the Governing Council would “make a transition to a meeting-by-meeting approach to interest rate decisions.” Bear in mind that it was only at the start of this week that the possibility of a 50bps hike began to be taken seriously following a number of media reports, so we could have to get increasingly used to a world in which central bank decisions remain in doubt up to just a few days before, which is unlike what we’ve been used to in recent years, when markets have been strongly guided towards specific outcomes way before the meetings themselves. Our Europe economists expect at least another 100bps of hikes in the near term and maintain their call for a 2% terminal rate, even if it is delayed until 2024 over a two-stage hiking cycle that has to pause because of a recession.

As well as the decision to hike, the ECB also announced their new Transmission Protection Instrument (TPI), which they said could be “activated to counter unwarranted, disorderly market dynamics that pose a serious threat to the transmission of monetary policy across the euro area.” Notably for markets, they further said that “The scale of TPI purchases depends on the severity of the risks facing policy transmission. Purchases are not restricted ex ante.” So an indication that purchases can be unlimited. There were some conditions applied to the TPI, including that the country is complying with the EU fiscal framework and is not subject to an excessive deficit procedure. But the ECB clearly see this as enabling them to go further as they hike, and openly drew a link in saying that “the reinforced support provided by the TPI” was something that enabled them “to take a larger first step on its policy rate normalisation path than signalled” in June.

Overall the market didn't seem to like the complexity of the TPI vehicle but perhaps the main issue was that it made its debut on the same day as Draghi officially resigned and triggered fresh elections on September 25th. The ECB can't help but hang over the election campaign now.

The initial reaction to the ECB’s decision (pre-press conference and US data) was a sharp sell-off among European sovereign bonds, with yields on 10yr bunds up by +11.7bps shortly after the decision came through. However, they then entirely pared back that increase to end the day -3.7bps lower. That came as markets moved to price an even more aggressive hiking cycle, with +144bps worth of further hikes at the remaining 3 meetings this year, so just shy of pricing continued 50bp hikes at the remaining meetings this year.

However, even as the ECB unveiled their new instrument, Italian spreads continued to widen against the backdrop of continued political turmoil in the country, with the gap between 10yr Italian yields over bunds up by +18.0bps to 230bps. That came as Prime Minister Draghi delivered his resignation to President Mattarella yesterday morning, with the latter subsequently dissolving parliament. Draghi will remain in office in a caretaker capacity until Italy stages early elections on September 25, with the center-right bloc currently leading the polls.

In more positive news yesterday, partial gas supplies resumed through the Nord Stream pipeline as its scheduled maintenance came to an end. The line is still only running at 40% of capacity so we shouldn’t get ahead of ourselves, but clearly this is much better than the complete shut-off that some had feared in recent days. The big question is what will happen as we move towards the colder months in Europe, with major efforts underway to build up gas storage and reduce demand ahead of then. Our German economists reacted to the news with another gas supply monitor (link here). The 40% supply is clearly far from secured going forward with fresh turbine servicing rows looking possible next week and beyond. One interesting conclusion from the note was that if 40% flowed up until the end of September and then a complete shutdown followed through the winter, Germany would likely run out of gas at some point in April assuming a normal amount of that gas was exported. Given that the government wouldn't likely let storage go below 10%, such a scenario would likely involve rationing.

Anyway with a very very big week for Europe now past its peak, the next big focal point for markets comes with the Fed’s next decision on Wednesday. Sadly there wasn’t much in the way of good news on the US economy ahead of that, as the weekly initial jobless claims pointed to a softening labour market, although to be fair that's part of the reason for rate hikes. For the week through July 16, they came in at an 8-month high of 251k, and this wasn’t just a one-off, with the smoother 4-week moving average now at a 7-week high of 240.5k. In addition, the Philadelphia Fed’s business outlook for July fell to -12.3 (vs. 0.8 expected), which is its lowest level since May 2020. Tim and Henry on my team have been putting out a weekly “recession watch” monitor that shows how recent data and broader developments push us closer to or farther away from imminent recession. Yesterday’s edition is here.

Yesterday’s run of more gloomy data releases meant that investors became more pessimistic on the ability of the Fed to keep hiking rates much above neutral and yields on 10yr Treasuries came down by -15.2bps over the day, closing at 2.87%, in what was largely a parallel shift on the 2s10s yield curve which wound up little changed. This morning in Asia, 10yr yields have edged +1.87 bps higher as I type. Even with the worsening growth outlook, however, our US economists have just put out a piece arguing that the Fed cannot reverse course and start cutting rates next year unless inflation materially slows, unemployment moves above 6%, and the Fed reaction function starts to take labour slack into consideration contrary to their recent one-track focus on inflation. See the full piece here.

In the current environment, bad news has been good news for equities, as the market anticipates that the Fed will have to ease off the gas sooner rather than later. Yesterday that translated to a +0.99% gain in the S&P, led by tech and mega-cap firms who’s valuations are particularly sensitive to the Fed. This drove the NASDAQ +1.36% higher and the FANG+ Index +2.33% higher. To drive the point home, since growth fears first sent jitters through markets in mid-June, driving a re-pricing lower of Fed terminal rates, the NASDAQ has rallied +13.28% from its YTD lows while FANG+ has increased +15.69% from just above its YTD lows. The tech and mega-cap groupings were likely aided by Tesla’s earnings (up +9.78%) which came out the night before. Indeed, it was a rather strong day for S&P 500 earnings across the board, with 23 companies reporting during trading and 19 beating analyst earnings estimates. After hours though, Snap saw shares sink more than -20% after advertisers left the platform, and there were further reports that tech giants Alphabet and Microsoft were planning on slowing or freezing hiring, so we’ll see if some of that positive tech sentiment reverses today. So far contracts on the S&P 500 (-0.40%) and NASDAQ 100 (-0.77%) are notably lower. Twitter continues the tech earnings today.

Equities in Asian markets are still generally trading in positive territory this morning but the scale of this reflects the after hours set back. The Nikkei (+0.24%) is recovering from initial losses with the Hang Seng (+0.21%), Shanghai Composite (+0.28%) and the CSI (+0.25%) also slightly higher in early trade. Elsewhere, the Kospi (-0.37%) is weak with the new conservative government's plan to cut corporate taxes having a limited impact on sentiment as the move is subject to approval from the opposition-controlled parliament.

Early this morning, data showed that Japan’s headline inflation edged down to +2.4% y/y in June (v/s +2.5% in May) but Core-CPI inflation advanced to +2.2% in June from +2.1% in May, both in line with consensus estimates but remaining above the BOJ’s 2% target. Separately, Japan’s July factory activity growth slowed to a 10-month low as the Jibun Bank Flash Manufacturing PMI slipped to 52.2 in July from the previous month’s final reading of 52.7 as output and new orders contracted. At the same time, services also expanded at a slower rate as the flash PMI weakened to 51.2 in July from June's final 54.0, suggesting a more subdued demand at home as a weaker yen increased import costs.

To the day ahead now, and the main data highlight will be the global flash PMIs for July. Otherwise, we’ll hear from the ECB’s Villeroy. Earnings releases include Verizon Communications, NextEra Energy, American Express and Twitter.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/22/2022 - 07:59

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Plan will put everyone in England within 15 minutes of green space – but what matters is justice not distance

The UK government wants every household in England to be within 15 minutes walk of a park, woodland or water.

Published

on

GIOIA PHOTO / shutterstock

How long does it take you to walk to your nearest park, woodland, lake or river? If it takes more than 15 minutes, according to the UK government’s new environmental improvement plan for England, something needs to be done about it. It says 38% people in England don’t have a green or blue space within a 15-minute walk of their home.

The plan promises a “new and ambitious commitment to work across government and beyond” to provide access to local green and blue spaces. It recognises the importance of connecting with nature, and that time spent outdoors is good for physical and mental health.

That’s a message researchers have been underlining for years, as a recent evidence review shows, and it has been amplified by COVID-19, which showed the importance of local green and blue spaces for wellbeing.

But the plan’s laudable ambitions overlook the ways our experiences of the outdoors are shaped by privileges of wealth and health.

If you live in a disadvantaged area, your local green space may be further away from your home, or you might have to share it with more people. As the campaign group Fields in Trust pointed out in a 2022 report, this is a question of justice.

However, there’s more to justice than the amount of space you have to share with others, or how long it takes you to get there. It’s also about how you feel and what you can do when you get there.

My own research highlights some key questions we need to ask if we’re to protect and improve our green spaces for future generations. Questions such as “Do I feel welcome here?” “Does this space meet my needs?” or “Do I get a say in how it is looked after?” highlight the fact that access is a matter of equality and democracy.

Some green spaces are greener than others

There are three key aspects of green and blue spaces that should be considered, and invested in, if the environmental improvement plan is to be more than wishful thinking.

People playing football
Some green spaces aren’t for everyone. 1000 Words / shutterstock

First, not all green and blue spaces are the same or provide the same benefits. The qualities of a football pitch are very different from those provided by a woodland walk along a stream.

Lumping them all together as “green and blue spaces” overlooks the need for a variety of spaces within easy reach to meet local people’s needs for physical and mental wellbeing.

Second, not all spaces are equally well looked after. Spaces that are fly-tipped or associated with antisocial activities can feel intimidating, especially after dark.

Green and blue spaces in disadvantaged areas need more care, and that requires time and money. As Public Health England noted, access to good quality green spaces is worse in more disadvantaged areas.

Third, simply being in a space won’t necessarily bring you all the benefits a space can offer. For people suffering from anxiety or depression, for example, more structured activities might be more helpful.

This could include time spent on rivers or allotments as part of the government’s pilot plan to tackle mental ill health by prescribing time in nature.

Be like Birmingham

In Birmingham, the local authority isn’t content with trumpeting the merits of its 600 parks. Instead, the city has developed a city of nature plan (I was part of a team that evaluated it).

At the heart of its approach is the idea of environmental justice, which it defines as “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, colour, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies”.

Map of city highlighting parks
Birmingham’s 600 parks and open spaces are shared between 1.1 million residents of the city proper. Intrepix / shutterstock

To apply environmental justice to the city’s green spaces, Birmingham Council has assessed each of its 69 electoral ward in terms of access to green space of two hectares (about three football pitches) or more within 1,000 metres, as well as flood risk, urban heat island effects, health inequalities and deprivation.

Through this work, it has identified 13 of its 69 wards which are most in need of investment to reach a new “fair parks standard”. These mainly central areas have less accessible green space, are more at risk of flooding and urban heating, and are more deprived.

Starting with a pilot programme in Bordesley & Highgate Ward (setting for the BBC series Peaky Blinders), the plan is then to invest in a further five priority areas in central and east Birmingham: Balsall Heath West, Nechells, Gravelly Hill, Pype Hayes and Castle Vale.

This is the kind of approach that could guide investment in many other cities. It links funding with equalities and brings together climate change, public health and community issues. It shows that quality and equity can’t just be boiled down to the distance between your home and the nearest park.

The challenge now is to learn from Birmingham’s pioneering approach and apply similar principles elsewhere. At its best, this work can be used to highlight the challenges not only of applying resources equitably, but of ensuring the resources are there in the first place, an issue the environmental impact plan rather predictably glosses over.

Julian Dobson and colleagues were funded by the National Trust and National Lottery Heritage Fund to evaluate the Future Parks Accelerator programme. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

UN Initiative Targets And Doxxes Doctors And Nurses Who Don’t Follow COVID-19 Narrative

UN Initiative Targets And Doxxes Doctors And Nurses Who Don’t Follow COVID-19 Narrative

Authored by Katie Spence via The Epoch Times (emphasis…

Published

on

UN Initiative Targets And Doxxes Doctors And Nurses Who Don't Follow COVID-19 Narrative

Authored by Katie Spence via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Nicole Sirotek is a registered nurse in Nevada with over a decade of experience working in some of the harshest conditions. When a hurricane devastated Puerto Rico, Sirotek and the organization she founded, American Frontline Nurses (AFLN), were there and gave out over 500 pounds of medical equipment and supplies.

National flags in front of the United Nations headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. A group started as part of the United Nations Verified initiative has targeted nurses and doctors who don't follow the official narrative on COVID-19. (Fabrice Coffrini/AFP)

She hasn’t hesitated to be the first in when an emergency hits and medical professionals are needed. She’s lost count of the number of times she’s woken up on a cot in the middle of nowhere, boots still strapped to her feet, and ready to go.

But in tears during an interview with The Epoch Times, she detailed her ordeal with harassment and doxing over the past year and how she’s contemplated suicide due to crippling anxiety and depression.

It took such a toll on my mental health. I wasn’t sleeping and wasn’t eating,” Sirotek said.

To regain her mental health, she decided to step back from the group she started. But even that decision brought pain.

I said after I left New York, I’d do everything that I can to make sure it didn’t happen again,” Sirotek said, recalling the death she witnessed when she volunteered in New York as a nurse at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. “I mean, for me to step back and take a break just makes me feel like I failed!”

A mobile station in New York on Dec. 29, 2021. (Richard Moore/The Epoch Times)

Sirotek is the victim of ongoing harassment. She’s received pictures of her children posed in slaughterhouses and hanging from a noose, drive-by photos of her house, and letters with white powder that exploded upon opening.

The Nevada State Board of Nursing was inundated with calls for Sirotek’s professional demise and flooded with anonymous complaints.

These complaints trace back to Team Halo, a social media influencer campaign formed as part of the United Nations Verified initiative and the Vaccine Confidence Project.

In response, Sirotek filed a police report. Her lawyer sent a cease-and-desist letter. The Epoch Times reviewed the documents.

The reply from the cease-and-desist letter? The client was acting within his First Amendment rights.

The Harassment Begins

In February 2022, Sirotek, as the face of AFLN, a patient advocacy network that boasts 22,000 nurses, appeared before Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and testified about the harm patients were experiencing when they sought treatment for COVID-19.

She said she didn’t witness patients dying from the novel virus when she volunteered to work the front lines in New York at the start of the pandemic.

Instead, in her opinion, as a medical professional with multiple master’s degrees, patients were dying from “negligence” and “medical malfeasance.

Sirotek detailed the withholding by higher-ups of steroids and Ibuprofen and the prescribing of remdesivir. Additionally, there was zero willingness to consider possible early intervention treatments like ivermectin.

As the pandemic continued, such practices only escalated, Sirotek said.

Sirotek’s testimony resulted in cheers, widespread attention, and a target on her back.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) (C) speaks during a panel discussion titled COVID-19: A Second Opinion in Washington DC Jan. 24, 2022. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

[The harassment] all started the day we got back from DC,” Sirotek said.

At first, the attacks started with the typical “you’re transphobic, you’re anti-LGBTQ. I mean, they even called me racist,” Sirotek, who is Hispanic, recalled.

And as more patients sought AFLN’s help, the attacks increased in frequency and force.

At first, Sirotek said the attacks appeared to come from random people. But as the attacks continued, the terms “Project Halo,” “Team Halo,” and “#TeamHalo” continually cropped up. Especially on TikTok and from two accounts, “@jesss2019” and “@thatsassynp.”

“[@thatsassynp] just kept on saying how I was spreading misinformation, [that] ivermectin doesn’t work,” Sirotek said. “He kept targeting the Nevada State Board of Nursing because I was on the Practice Act Committee, and he did not feel like that was acceptable.”

Craig Perry, a lawyer representing nurses, including Sirotek, before the Nevada State Board of Nursing, confirmed Sirotek’s account. The executive director of the Nevada State Board of Nursing, Cathy Dinauer, declined to provide details on complaints or investigations, stating to The Epoch Times via email that they are “confidential.”

Sirotek said the complaints overwhelmed her ability to defend her nursing license.

“Untimely, they were filing so many complaints against me that [the Nevada State Board of Nursing] had to start filtering them as to what was applicable and not applicable. And [the complaints] just buried my nursing license to the point that we couldn’t even defend it,” Sirotek said.

Attacks Transition to Threats

Whenever Sirotek, or AFLN, tried to set up a community outreach webinar, hateful comments flooded their videos.

Julia McCabe, a registered nurse and the director of advocacy services for AFLN, told The Epoch Times that initially, they tried kicking the trolls out of the outreach videos. But they couldn’t keep up with the overwhelming numbers and had to shut the videos down, usually after only 10 minutes, she said.

To address the swarms, as McCabe labeled them, AFLN started charging an entrance fee for their webinars. But, McCabe said, they’d send out an email with a free access code to all of their subscribers before the webinar started. It helped, but not enough. The swarms kept coming. And the attacks escalated.

On June 5, 2022, @thatsassynp posted a video on TikTok calling for a “serious public uprising,” because the Nevada State Board of Nursing and other regulatory agencies weren’t disciplining nurses for spreading “disinformation.”

It became one of many such videos in the ensuing days. In the comments of one, he stated, “Also, stay tuned as [@jesss2019] will be addressing this as well. We are teaming up (as per usual) to raise awareness and demand action on this issue.” @jesss2019 responded, “Yes!!!! We will get this taken care of.”

Jess and Tyler Kuhk of @thatsassynp have “teamed up” on several occasions, targeting healthcare workers who question the COVID-19 narrative. Team Halo doesn’t officially list Kuhk on its site, but Kuhk posts with the #teamhalo.

In another video, he states, “If you’re new to this series, PLEASE watch the videos in my playlist ‘Nevada board of nursing.’ This started in Feb of this year.” His video has almost 35,000 “loves.”

On June 7, 2022, @jesss2019 posted a video on TikTok accusing Sirotek of spreading misinformation. It included a link to @thatsassynp, and his complaints about Sirotek to the Nevada State Board of Nursing and calls to remove her from the Practice Act Committee. She implored TikTok to boost the message. It, too, became one of many videos attacking Sirotek.

Specifically, @jesss2019 and @thatsassynp took issue with videos and posts from Sirotek, and AFLN, advocating for ivermectin and highlighting possible issues with remdesivir and the COVID-19 vaccines.

@jess2019 removed all of the above videos after The Epoch Times sought comment. The Epoch Times retains copies.

Sirotek says she received the first death threat against herself and her children around the same time, in June 2022.

“They cut off the pictures of my children’s faces from our family photos, where we take them every year on our front porch—we’ve got 11 years of those photos—and they cut them out and put them on the bodies of those little boys that have been sexually abused. And that’s what would get sent to my house. And I gave the police that,” Sirotek said.

In response to a request for comment from The Epoch Times, Sen. Johnson defended Sirotek.

“The COVID Cartel continues to frighten and silence those who tell the truth and challenge their failed response to COVID,” Johnson said. “It is simply wrong for Ms. Sirotek to be smeared and attacked like so many others who have had the courage and compassion to successfully treat COVID patients.”

As the threats continued and escalated, Sirotek also asked Perry to send a cease-and-desist letter to Tyler Kuhk on Aug. 1, 2022.

Kuhk, a nurse practitioner, is the person posting on TikTok under the pseudonym @thatsassynp.

The TikTok logo is pictured outside the company’s U.S. head office in Culver City, California, on Sept. 15, 2020. (Mike Blake/Reuters)

The letter sent to Kuhk alleges that on at least 10 different occasions, @thatsassynp encouraged a “public uprising” against Sirotek. It also details that his videos attacking Sirotek garnered over 400,000 views.

In response, McLetchie Law, a “boutique law firm serving prominent and emerging … media entities” responded to Perry by stating in a letter dated Aug. 16, 2022, “Both Nevada law and the First Amendment provide robust protections for our client’s (and others’) rights to criticize Ms. Sirotek’s dangerous views and practices—and to advocate for her removal from the Nursing Practice Advisory Committee of the Nevada State Board of Nursing.”

It also warned that any attempt to deter Kuhk from his chosen path would “backfire” and could result in a “negative financial impact.” Neither Kuhk nor McLetchie Law responded to The Epoch Times’ request for comment.

Unable to confirm the real name behind the TikTok account @jesss2019, and thus, unable to send her a legal letter, Sirotek posted some of the threats she’d received on Facebook, pleading for @jesss2019 to cease targeting her, and recognize the possible real-world harm.

In desperation, Sirotek asked Perry to file a legal name change, which he did on Sep. 15, 2022, hoping that would thwart people’s ability to look up Sirotek’s information. Perry told The Epoch Times, “Usually, when you do a name change, it’s a public record. But under extenuating circumstances, you can have that sealed.”

In Sirotek’s case, the court recognized the threat to her and her family’s safety, waived the publication requirement, granted the change, and sealed her record on Oct. 4, 2022.

Sirotek, at the behest of Perry, filed a police report detailing the harassment on Oct. 17, 2022.

In December 2022, @jesss2019 posted a video to TikTok doxing Sirotek by revealing her name change. The Epoch Times sought comment from @jesss2019 but has not received a response. After the request for comment, the user removed the video.

Team Halo and Social Media

On Dec. 17, 2020, Theo Bertram, a director at TikTok; Iain Bundred, the head of public policy at YouTube; and Rebecca Stimson, the UK head of public policy for Facebook, appeared before the UK’s House of Commons to explain what their social media sites were doing to combat “anti-vaccination disinformation.”

All three stated their companies employed a “two-pronged approach.” Specifically, “tackle disinformation and promote trusted content.”

Bundred stated that from the beginning of the year to November 2020, YouTube had removed 750,000 videos that promoted “Covid disinformation.”

The logos of Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and Snapchat on mobile devices in a combination of 2017–2022 photos. (AP Photo)

Stimson stated that between March and October 2020, “12 million pieces of content were removed from [Facebook],” and it had labeled 167 million pieces with a warning.

Bertram stated that for the first six months of 2020, TikTok removed 1,500 accounts for “Covid violation” and had recently increased that activity. “In the last two months, we took action against 1,380 accounts, so you can see the level of action is increasing,” Bertram said.

“In October, we began work with Team Halo,” Bertram added. “I do not know if you are familiar with Team Halo. It is run by the Vaccine Confidence Project at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and is about getting reliable, trusted scientists and doctors on to social media to spread trusted information.”

Team Halo’s Origins

On Sep. 20, 2022, Melissa Fleming, the under-secretary-general for global communications at the United Nations, appeared at the World Economic Forum to discuss how the United Nations was “Tackling Disinformation” regarding “health guidance” as well as the “safety and efficacy of the vaccine” for COVID-19.

A key strategy that we had was to deploy influencers,” Fleming stated. “Influencers who were really keen, who had huge followings, but really keen to help carry messages that were going to serve their communities.”

Fleming also explained that the United Nations knew its messaging wouldn’t resonate as well as influencers, so they developed Team Halo.

“We had another trusted messenger project, which was called Team Halo, where we trained scientists around the world, and some doctors, on TikTok. We had TikTok working with us,” Fleming said. “It was a layered deployment of ideas and tactics.”

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Wed, 02/01/2023 - 23:25

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Why Is There A COVID Vaccine Mandate For Students?

Why Is There A COVID Vaccine Mandate For Students?

Authored by Margaret Anna Alice via ‘Through The Looking Glass’ Substack,

Letter to the…

Published

on

Why Is There A COVID Vaccine Mandate For Students?

Authored by Margaret Anna Alice via 'Through The Looking Glass' Substack,

Letter to the Stanford Daily: Why Is There a COVID Vaccine Mandate for Students?

“Not to know is bad. Not to wish to know is worse.”

—African proverb

I can’t figure out why Stanford is mandating the COVID vaccine for students.

  1. Is it to protect students from the virus, hospitalization, or death?

  2. Is it to protect them from other students?

  3. Is it to protect the Stanford community members from the students? 

If it’s to protect the students from catching COVID, that doesn’t make sense because the CDC says it “no longer differentiate[s] based on a person’s vaccination status because breakthrough infections occur.”

The CDC also acknowledges natural immunity, noting that “persons who have had COVID-19 but are not vaccinated have some degree of protection against severe illness from their previous infection.”

It appears Stanford didn’t get the memo because Maxwell Meyer—a double-jabbed, COVID-recovered alum who was nearly prohibited from graduating for choosing not to get boosted—was informed by an administrator that the booster mandate is “not predicated on history of infection or physical location.”

Despite living 2,000 miles away from campus and not being enrolled in coursework for his final term, Maxwell was told Stanford was “uniformly enforc[ing]” the mandate “regardless of student location.” Does that sound like a rational policy?

Fortunately, a different administrator intervened and granted Maxwell an exemption, but few Stanford students are so lucky. Almost everyone else simply follows the rules without realizing they’ve volunteered for vaccine roulette.

Cleveland Clinic study of the bivalent vaccines involving 51,011 participants found the risk of getting COVID-19 increased “with the number of vaccine doses previously received”—much to the authors’ surprise.

They were stumped as to why “those who chose not to follow the CDC’s recommendations on remaining updated with COVID-19 vaccination” had a lower risk of catching COVID than “those who received a larger number of prior vaccine doses.”

So if the vaccines don’t keep you from getting COVID, maybe they at least protect you from hospitalization?

That doesn’t wash, either, because according to data from the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET)hospitalization rates for 18–64-year-olds have increased 11 percent since the vaccine rollout. Worse, kids under 18 have suffered a shocking 74 percent spike in hospitalizations.

An observational study conducted at Germany’s University Hospital Wuerzburg found:

“The rate of adverse reactions for the second booster dose was significantly higher among participants receiving the bivalent 84.6% (95% CI 70.3%–92.8%; 33/39) compared to the monovalent 51.4% (95% CI 35.9–66.6%; 19/37) vaccine (p=0.0028). Also, there was a trend towards an increased rate of inability to work and intake of PRN medication following bivalent vaccination.”

A new paper published in Science titled Class Switch Towards Non-Inflammatory, Spike-Specific IgG4 Antibodies after Repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination even has Eric Topol concerned:

If you don’t know what that means, Dr. Syed Haider spells it out in this tweet. He explains that the shots “train your immune system to ignore the allergen by repeated exposure,” the end result being that “Your immune system is shifted to see the virus as a harmless allergen” and the “virus runs amok.”

Viral immunologist and computational virologist Dr. Jessica Rose breaks down the serious implications—including cancerfatal fibrosis, and organ destruction—of these findings.

Well, then does the vaccine at least prevent people from dying of COVID?

Nope. According to the Washington Post, “Vaccinated people now make up a majority of COVID deaths.”

At Senator Ron Johnson’s December 7, 2022, roundtable discussion on COVID-19 Vaccines, former number-one–ranked Wall Street insurance analyst Josh Stirling reported that, according to UK government data:

“The people in the UK who took the vaccine have a 26% higher mortality rate. The people who are under the age of 50 who took the vaccine now have a 49% higher mortality rate.”

Obtained by a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to KBV (the association representing physicians who receive insurance in Germany), “the most important dataset of the pandemic” shows fatalities starting to spike in 2021.

Data analyst Tom Lausen assessed the ICD-10 disease codes in this dataset, and the findings are startling. His presentation includes the following chart documenting fatalities per quarter from 2016 to 2022:

This parallels the skyrocketing fatality rates seen in VAERS:

The vaccinated are more likely to contract, become hospitalized from, and die of COVID. If the vaccine fails on all of those counts, does it at least prevent its transmission to other students and community members?

The obvious answer is no since we already know it doesn’t prevent you from getting COVID, but this CDC study drives the point home, showing that during a COVID outbreak in Barnstable County, Massachusetts, “three quarters (346; 74%) of cases occurred in fully vaccinated persons.”

Maybe Stanford can tell us why they feel the mandate is necessary. Their booster requirement reads:

Why does Stanford have a student booster shot requirement? Our booster requirement is intended to support sustained immunity against COVID-19 and is consistent with the advice of county and federal public health leaders. Booster shots enhance immunity, providing additional protection to individuals and reducing the possibility of being hospitalized for COVID. In addition, booster shots prevent infection in many individuals, thereby slowing the spread of the virus. A heavily boosted campus community reduces the possibility of widespread disruptions that could impact the student experience, especially in terms of in-person classes and activities and congregate housing.”

The claim that “booster shots enhance immunity” links to a January 2022 New York Times article. It seems Stanford has failed to keep up with the science because the very source they cite as authoritative is now reporting, “The newer variants, called BQ.1 and BQ.1.1, are spreading quickly, and boosters seem to do little to prevent infections with these viruses.”

Speaking of not keeping up, that same article says the new bivalent boosters target “the original version of the coronavirus and the Omicron variants circulating earlier this year, BA.4 and BA.5.”

It then goes on to quote Head of Beth Israel Deaconess’s Center for Virology & Vaccine Research Dan Barouch, who says, “It’s not likely that any of the vaccines or boosters, no matter how many you get, will provide substantial and sustained protection against acquisition of infection.”

In other words, Stanford’s rationale for requiring the boosters is obsolete according to the authority they cite in their justification.

If Stanford is genuinely concerned about “reduc[ing] the possibility of widespread disruptions that could impact the student experience,” then it should not only stop mandating the vaccine but advise against it.

Some nations have suspended or recommended against COVID shots for younger populations due to the considerable risks of adverse events such as pulmonary embolism and myocarditis—from Denmark (under 50) to Norway (under 45) to Australia (under 50) to the United Kingdom (seasonal boosters for under 50).

The Danish Health Authority explains why people under 50 are “not to be re-vaccinated”:

“People aged under 50 are generally not at particularly higher risk of becoming severely ill from covid-19. In addition, younger people aged under 50 are well protected against becoming severely ill from covid-19, as a very large number of them have already been vaccinated and have previously been infected with covid-19, and there is consequently good immunity among this part of the population.”

Here’s what a Norwegian physician and health official had to say:

“Especially the youngest should consider potential side effects against the benefits of taking this dose.”
—Ingrid Bjerring, Chief Doctor at Lier Municipality

“We did not find sufficient evidence to recommend that this part of the population [younger age bracket] should take a new dose now.… Each vaccine comes with the risk for side effects. Is it then responsible to offer this, when we know that the individual health benefit of a booster likely is low?”
—Are Stuwitz Berg, Department Director at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health

new Nordic cohort study of 8.9 million participants supports these concerns, finding a nearly nine-fold increase in myocarditis among males aged 12–39 within 28 days of receiving the Moderna COVID-19 booster over those who stopped after two doses.

This mirrors my own findings that myocarditis rates are up 10 times among the vaccinated according to a public healthcare worker survey.

Coauthored by MIT professor and risk management expert Retsef Levi, the Nature article Increased Emergency Cardiovascular Events Among Under-40 Population in Israel During Vaccine Rollout and Third COVID-19 Wave reveals a 25 percent increase in cardiac emergency calls for 16–39-year-olds from January to May 2021 as compared with the previous two years.

The paper cites a study by Israel’s Ministry of Health that “assesses the risk of myocarditis after receiving the 2nd vaccine dose to be between 1 in 3000 to 1 in 6000 in men of age 16–24 and 1 in 120,000 in men under 30.”

Thai study published in Tropical Medicine and Infectious Disease found cardiovascular manifestations in 29.24 percent of the adolescent cohort—including myopericarditis and tachycardia.

Even Dr. Leana Wen, formerly an aggressive promoter of the COVID vaccine, admitted in a recent Washington Post op-ed:

“[W]e need to be upfront that nearly every intervention has some risk, and the coronavirus vaccine is no different. The most significant risk is myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle, which is most common in young men. The CDC cites a rate of 39 myocarditis cases per 1 million second doses given in males 18 to 24. Some studies found a much higher rate; a large Canadian database reported that among men ages 18 to 29 who received the second dose of the Moderna vaccine, the rate of myocarditis was 22 for every 100,000 doses.”

All over the world, prominent physicians, scientists, politicians, and professors are asking pointed questions about illogical mandates; the safety and efficacy of the vaccines; and the dangers posed by the mRNA technology, spike protein, and lipid nanoparticles—including in the UKJapanAustraliaEurope, and the US.

Formerly pro-vaxx cardiologists such as Dr. Aseem MalhotraDr. Dean Patterson, and Dr. Ross Walker are all saying the COVID vaccines should be immediately stopped due to the significant increase in cardiac diseasesadverse events, and excess mortality observed since their rollout, noting that, “until proven otherwise, these vaccines are not safe.”

President of the International Society for Vascular Surgery Serif Sultan and Consultant Surgeon Ahmad Malik are also demanding that we #StopTheShotsNow.

And now, perhaps most notably, Dr. John Campbell has performed a 180-degree turn on his previous position and is saying it is time to pause the mass vaccination program “due to the risks associated with the vaccines”:

Rasmussen poll published on December 7, 2022, found 7 percent of vaccinated respondents have suffered major side effects—a percentage that echoes the 7.7 percent of V-Safe users who sought medical care as well as my own polling data.

Add the 34 percent who reported experiencing minor side effects, and you have nearly 72 million adults who’ve been hit with side effects from the vaccine.

Rasmussen Head Pollster Mark Mitchell explains:

“With 7% having a major side effect, that means over 12 million adults in the US have experienced a self-described major side effect that they attribute to the COVID-19 vaccine. That’s over 11 times the reported COVID death numbers. And also note that anyone who may have died from the vaccine obviously can’t tell us that in the poll.”

According to British Medical Journal Senior Editor Dr. Peter Doshi, Pfizer’s and Moderna’s own trial data found 1 in 800 vaccinated people experienced serious adverse events:

“The Pfizer and Moderna trials are both showing a clear signal of increased risk of serious adverse events among the vaccinated.…

“The trial data are indicating that we’re seeing about an elevated risk of these serious adverse events of around 1 in 800 people vaccinated.… That is much, much more common than what you see for other vaccines, where the reported rates are in the range of 1 or 2 per million vaccinees. In these trials, we’re seeing 1 in every 800. And this is a rate that in past years has had vaccines taken off the market.…

“We’re talking about randomized trials … which are widely considered the highest-quality evidence, and we’re talking about the trials that were submitted by Pfizer and Moderna that supported the regulators’ authorization.”

And this is the same Pfizer data the FDA tried to keep hidden from the public for 75 years.

Nothing to see here … except 1,223 deaths, 158,000 adverse events, and 1,291 side effects reported in the first 90 days according to the 5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports—and those numbers are likely underreported by a factor of at least 10 (my conservative calculations show an underreporting factor (URF) of 41 for VAERS).

Stanford is asking students to risk a 1 in 800 chance of serious adverse events—meaning the kind of events that can land you in the hospitaldisable you, and kill you. And for what?

Anyone who knows how to perform a cost-benefit analysis can see this is all cost and zero benefit.

Stanford’s own Dr. John Ioannidis—professor of medicine, epidemiology & population health, statistics, and biomedical data science—demonstrated that college students are at a near-zero risk of dying from COVID-19 in his “Age-Stratified Infection Fatality Rate of COVID-19 in the Non-Elderly Population.”

One of the six most-cited scientists in the world, Ioannidis found the median IFR was 0.0003 percent for those under 20 and 0.002 percent for twenty-somethings, concluding the fatalities “are lower than pre-pandemic years when only the younger age strata are considered” and that “the IFR in non-elderly individuals was much lower than previously thought.”

And yet Ioannidis’s employer is mandating an experimental product with extensively documented risks of severe harm.

What if a Stanford student dies and the coroner determines it was caused by the vaccine? That happened with George Watts Jr., a 24-year-old college student whose cause of death Chief Deputy Coroner Timothy Cahill Jr. attributed to “COVID-19 vaccine-related myocarditis.” Cahill says, “The vaccine caused the heart to go into failure.”

Notorious for mandating a booster not yet tested on humans (just like Stanford), Ontario’s Western University dropped its mandate on November 29, 2022, stating:

“We are revoking our vaccination policy and will no longer require students, employees, and visitors to be vaccinated to come to campus.”

That was the same day this article reported that 21-year-old Western University student and TikTok influencer Megha Thakur “suddenly and unexpectedly passed away” on November 24.

The timing is interesting, don’t you think? I’m sure it’s just a coincidence—even though this Clinical Research in Cardiology paper determined vaccine-induced myocardial inflammation was the cause of death in “five persons who have died unexpectedly within seven days following anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination.” In that analysis, the authors “establish the histological phenotype of lethal vaccination-associated myocarditis.”

Coincidences notwithstanding, Stanford may want to revoke the mandate before anything like that happens to one of its students … if it hasn’t already.

And if that’s not incentive enough, Stanford should consider the legal ramifications of mandating an experimental product. As this JAMA article warns:

“Mandating COVID-19 vaccines under an EUA is legally and ethically problematic. The act authorizing the FDA to issue EUAs requires the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to specify whether individuals may refuse the vaccine and the consequences for refusal. Vaccine mandates are unjustified because an EUA requires less safety and efficacy data than full Biologics License Application (BLA) approval.”

Dr. Naomi Wolf delivered an impassioned speech to her alma mater, Yale, in which she called their booster mandate “a serious crime. It is deeply illegal. Certainly, it violates Title IX.” She explains:

“Title IX commits the university to not discriminate on the basis of sex or gender in getting an equal education.… I oversee a project in which 3,500 experts review the Pfizer documents released under court order by a lawsuit. In that document, there is catastrophic harm to women! And especially to young women! And especially to their reproductive health.… 72% of those with adverse events in the Pfizer documents are women!”

Other universities are currently facing lawsuits for mandating the COVID vaccine in violation of state laws, including one against Ohio University, University of Cincinnati, Bowling Green State University, and Miami University of Ohio.

Let’s recap.

Abundant evidence proves the vaccines FAIL to:

  • stop transmission

  • prevent contraction of COVID

  • lower hospitalization rates

  • reduce mortality

By the same token, this evidence shows the vaccines are ASSOCIATED with:

  • heightened transmission levels

  • greater chances of catching COVID

  • increased hospitalization rates

  • higher excess mortality

  • disproportionate injuries to women

Why is Stanford mandating these unsafe and ineffective products, again?

If logic, peer-reviewed studies, and legal concerns such as the violation of Title IX don’t convince Stanford to rescind the mandate, then what about its stated ethical commitment to upholding its Code of Conduct?

BMJ’s Journal of Medical Ethics recently published COVID-19 Vaccine Boosters for Young Adults: A Risk Benefit Assessment and Ethical Analysis of Mandate Policies at Universities. In this paper, eminent researchers from Harvard, Oxford, Johns Hopkins, and UC San Francisco (among other institutions) present five reasons university mandates are unethical.

They argue that the vaccines:

“(1) are not based on an updated (Omicron era) stratified risk-benefit assessment for this age group; (2) may result in a net harm to healthy young adults; (3) are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission; (4) violate the reciprocity principle because serious vaccine-related harms are not reliably compensated due to gaps in vaccine injury schemes; and (5) may result in wider social harms.” (emphases mine here and below)

They calculate that:

To prevent one COVID-19 hospitalisation over a 6-month period, we estimate that 31,207–42,836 young adults aged 18–29 years must receive a third mRNA vaccine.”

The authors conclude that:

“university COVID-19 vaccine mandates are likely to cause net expected harms to young healthy adults—for each hospitalisation averted we estimate approximately 18.5 SAEs and 1,430–4,626 disruptions of daily activities.… these severe infringements of individual liberty and human rights are ethically unjustifiable.”

This builds on a previously published BMJ Global Health article by some of the same authors titled, “The Unintended Consequences of COVID-19 Vaccine Policy: Why Mandates, Passports, and Restrictions May Cause More Harm Than Good.”

In this paper, the authors contend that COVID-19 vaccine mandates “have unintended harmful consequences and may not be ethical, scientifically justified, and effective” and “may prove to be both counterproductive and damaging to public health.”

Over the course of history, countless products once thought to be safe—from DDT to cigarettes to thalidomide for pregnant women to Vioxx—were eventually discovered to be dangerous and even lethal. Responsible governments, agencies, and companies pull those products from the market when the scientific data proves harm—and institutions that care about their community members certainly don’t mandate those products when evidence of risk becomes obvious, as is the case now for the experimental COVID vaccines.

Mahatma Gandhi once stated:

“An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it. Truth stands, even if there be no public support. It is self-sustained.”

The truth is clear to anyone who’s willing to look.

Will Stanford stop following the propaganda and start following the science—the real science and not the politicized science?

Will it stand up for the lives and health of its students—or will it wait until tragedy strikes another George Watts Jr. or Megha Thakur?

This is a historic opportunity for Stanford to prove its allegiance to people, scientific data, and critical thought over pharmaceutical donors, political pressures, and conformist thinking.

The stakes could not be higher.

*  *  *

For 16.4 cents/day (annual) or 19.7 cents/day (monthly), you can help Margaret fight tyranny while enjoying access to premium content like Memes by Themes“rolling” interviewspodcastsBehind the Scenes, and other bonus content:

Tyler Durden Wed, 02/01/2023 - 21:25

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending