Connect with us

Institutional demand for crypto isn’t subsiding, but impact will be gradual

As another $2-trillion stimulus package looms in the U.S., institutions will continue to look at BTC as a hedge against inflation.
For example, just last week, when the currency was hovering around the $30,000 threshold, a whole host..

Published

on

As another $2-trillion stimulus package looms in the U.S., institutions will continue to look at BTC as a hedge against inflation.

For example, just last week, when the currency was hovering around the $30,000 threshold, a whole host of pundits was warning investors to brace for impact, suggesting that the premier crypto asset was on the verge of a correction and could once again dip to around the $20,000 region.

However, in just one day, Bitcoin was once again playing with the bulls, retesting the $38,500 limit, only to witness a selloff and eventually settle around the $33,500 region. While for most crypto veterans that might have been another day at the office, others branded the upsurge as “Elon’s Candle,” which relates to Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla, who included “Bitcoin” in his Twitter bio as well as sent out the following cryptic message “in retrospect, it was inevitable” to his 40 million-odd followers online.

Regardless of the cause, has the recent price volatility scared off institutional investors, or are they still looking to buy Bitcoin? But if they are, it is strange to see BTC continuing to hover between the $30,000–$40,000 range amid reports of big-name players lapping up sizable sums of Bitcoin. For example, on Jan. 22, when BTC dipped by 15%, MicroStrategy announced yet another BTC purchase deal, worth around $10 million.

On the subject, George Donnelly, CEO of Panmoni — a commerce system for Bitcoin Cash — told Cointelegraph that there is absolutely no doubt in anyone’s mind as to whether institutions are still looking to buy Bitcoin, saying:

“Grayscale is expanding to create some new DeFi trusts, and people are buying shares in MicroStrategy to get exposure to BTC. BTC may be stuck around 30K because retail interest seems slack. This bull market so far is not as noisy as the last one. Fewer people seem to be getting excited about it.”

Furthermore, he opined that a core reason as to why BTC is not able to break out is because the currency’s developers have “consciously limited network throughput for ideological reasons” and even attempted to divert use into its layer-two networks, thus reducing the ecosystem’s security. Even then, he does believe that in the coming three months, the currency “will top the $40K mark.”

Bitcoin hasn’t stalled but is merely adapting

With another $2-trillion stimulus package seemingly on its way thanks to the new United States President, Joe Biden, and the Federal Reserve, a lot of hype is once again being generated around crypto, especially as an increasing amount of people are beginning to understand the future implications of such uncontrolled money printing and how it can devalue the U.S. dollar to unprecedented levels.

Filipe Castro, co-founder of Utrust — a crypto-enabled e-commerce platform — told Cointelegraph that the continued expansion, or rather dilution, of the U.S. dollar money supply pool is going to sooner or later bring into perspective the effects of hidden inflation into the American economy, adding:

“While inflation has not been greatly felt by consumers in goods and services, it has manifested itself with the rise of dollar-denominated assets like stock market valuations, real estate, commodity and cryptocurrency. Many institutions have chosen not to hold onto cash as a safe haven but instead invested their capital accordingly.”

He further highlighted that institutions don’t typically directly trade in the market but instead purchase from a custodian intermediary, with the latter usually securing the necessary liquidity beforehand, thus minimizing immediate market influence upon the entry of large buyers.

What this means in layman’s terms is that a surge in demand is reflected asynchronously over time, and what’s more, it comes in large periodic variations instead of a swift outcome from the latest announcements. “It is likely thus that any future surges will take time to manifest and will do so in large and sharp swings,” he added.

Institutional interest isn’t going anywhere anytime soon

While one may be tempted to believe that mainstream interest in crypto may be finally dying out, it’s worth bearing in mind that institutional purchase cycles work very differently from the activity of individual traders and smaller institutions.

For example, Castro highlighted only a few institutions have actually taken an active position on Bitcoin, including some family offices. Not only that, it should be noted that approval procedures relating to new assets and risk assessments can usually take months or years to complete and represent a completely new investment paradigm for many traditional investors.

On the issue, Lennix Lai, director of financial markets for cryptocurrency exchange OKEx, pointed out to Cointelegraph that as the world’s global reserve currency, the U.S. dollar, becomes increasingly weaker, many institutions are turning to other assets such as BTC for its undeniable potential in regard to capital appreciation, saying:

“BTC remains a high-risk asset, and I believe that some institutional investors still have conservative clients with a wait-and-see attitude. If BTC can maintain its de-coupling from the stock market, and equities eventually flatline upon tapering asset purchases by the FED, we could see another wave of funds flowing into BTC.”

That being said, COVID-19 virus mutations, a slow rollout of vaccinations, global lockdowns and rising unemployment are adding to the ongoing economic uncertainty — something that has the potential to spill over into various financial markets, including crypto, as was previously seen over the course of the last 12 months.

Related: Risk it for the Bitcoin: Has BTC matured to be a safe investment play?

On the issue, Nischal Shetty, CEO of cryptocurrency exchange WazirX, reiterated that the reason why an increasing number of funds are continuing to explore Bitcoin is that it is turning into a legitimate hedge against inflation, the effects of which he believes are bound to be felt eventually as the global money pool continues to be diluted. He added: “As inflation increases, we believe that there will be more inflow of institutional investors buying into Bitcoin.”

Castro stated that institutional interest is only just beginning and that recent announcements should simply be viewed as a “wake-up call” for other players who haven’t yet been able to understand the proposition that has been put forth in front of them. “This is yet far from the widespread institutional [interest] that is to come. We are sure to see a higher ceiling if more and larger institutions diversify into BTC and other cryptocurrencies,” he added.

Is another breakout inevitable?

While on paper there may be a host of ways to analyze and attempt to predict the price of BTC, the fact of the matter is that it is pretty much impossible to guess the price action of an asset with any sort of certainty. However, there are a few indicators we can look at in order to glean its potential valuation.

For example, Lai pointed out that based on historical data related to BTC’s performance post-halvings, it could be close to breaking out to $50,000 soon and even surging as high as $100,000 by April 2021.

On the subject, Castro believes that there is still no accurate model to describe BTCs fundamental behavior, adding that the only framework that he actually considers when evaluating BTC is PlanB’s stock-to-flow model, which, if one is to believe, will see the premier cryptocurrency surge to anywhere between the $100,000–$288,000 region before the end of 2021.

Related: Believing, not seeing: Institutions still predict $100K Bitcoin price

Lastly, another reason why making such predictions is so tough in Shetty’s opinion is that with every jump in Bitcoin’s price, an increasing amount of selling pressure seems to be coming from long-term investors: “These are the investors who take long positions and want to dilute at certain historic price points. $40,000 seemed to have been that historic price point where a lot of old Bitcoin holders decided to liquidate.”

Bitcoin (BTC) is proving to be one of the biggest mysteries of the decade, and anyone who claims to know where the currency might be heading is most likely deluding themselves at this point. 

Read More

Continue Reading

International

US Spent More Than Double What It Collected In February, As 2024 Deficit Is Second Highest Ever… And Debt Explodes

US Spent More Than Double What It Collected In February, As 2024 Deficit Is Second Highest Ever… And Debt Explodes

Earlier today, CNBC’s…

Published

on

US Spent More Than Double What It Collected In February, As 2024 Deficit Is Second Highest Ever... And Debt Explodes

Earlier today, CNBC's Brian Sullivan took a horse dose of Red Pills when, about six months after our readers, he learned that the US is issuing $1 trillion in debt every 100 days, which prompted him to rage tweet, (or rageX, not sure what the proper term is here) the following:

We’ve added 60% to national debt since 2018. Germany - a country with major economic woes - added ‘just’ 32%.   

Maybe it will never matter.   Maybe MMT is real.   Maybe we just cancel or inflate it out. Maybe career real estate borrowers or career politicians aren’t the answer.

I have no idea.  Only time will tell.   But it’s going to be fascinating to watch it play out.

He is right: it will be fascinating, and the latest budget deficit data simply confirmed that the day of reckoning will come very soon, certainly sooner than the two years that One River's Eric Peters predicted this weekend for the coming "US debt sustainability crisis."

According to the US Treasury, in February, the US collected $271 billion in various tax receipts, and spent $567 billion, more than double what it collected.

The two charts below show the divergence in US tax receipts which have flatlined (on a trailing 6M basis) since the covid pandemic in 2020 (with occasional stimmy-driven surges)...

... and spending which is about 50% higher compared to where it was in 2020.

The end result is that in February, the budget deficit rose to $296.3 billion, up 12.9% from a year prior, and the second highest February deficit on record.

And the punchline: on a cumulative basis, the budget deficit in fiscal 2024 which began on October 1, 2023 is now $828 billion, the second largest cumulative deficit through February on record, surpassed only by the peak covid year of 2021.

But wait there's more: because in a world where the US is spending more than twice what it is collecting, the endgame is clear: debt collapse, and while it won't be tomorrow, or the week after, it is coming... and it's also why the US is now selling $1 trillion in debt every 100 days just to keep operating (and absorbing all those millions of illegal immigrants who will keep voting democrat to preserve the socialist system of the US, so beloved by the Soros clan).

And it gets even worse, because we are now in the ponzi finance stage of the Minsky cycle, with total interest on the debt annualizing well above $1 trillion, and rising every day

... having already surpassed total US defense spending and soon to surpass total health spending and, finally all social security spending, the largest spending category of all, which means that US debt will now rise exponentially higher until the inevitable moment when the US dollar loses its reserve status and it all comes crashing down.

We conclude with another observation by CNBC's Brian Sullivan, who quotes an email by a DC strategist...

.. which lays out the proposed Biden budget as follows:

The budget deficit will growth another $16 TRILLION over next 10 years. Thats *with* the proposed massive tax hikes.

Without them the deficit will grow $19 trillion.

That's why you will hear the "deficit is being reduced by $3 trillion" over the decade.

No family budget or business could exist with this kind of math.

Of course, in the long run, neither can the US... and since neither party will ever cut the spending which everyone by now is so addicted to, the best anyone can do is start planning for the endgame.

Tyler Durden Tue, 03/12/2024 - 18:40

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Buried Project Veritas Recording Shows Top Pfizer Scientists Suppressed Concerns Over COVID-19 Boosters, MRNA Tech

Buried Project Veritas Recording Shows Top Pfizer Scientists Suppressed Concerns Over COVID-19 Boosters, MRNA Tech

Submitted by Liam Cosgrove

Former…

Published

on

Buried Project Veritas Recording Shows Top Pfizer Scientists Suppressed Concerns Over COVID-19 Boosters, MRNA Tech

Submitted by Liam Cosgrove

Former Project Veritas & O’Keefe Media Group operative and Pfizer formulation analyst scientist Justin Leslie revealed previously unpublished recordings showing Pfizer’s top vaccine researchers discussing major concerns surrounding COVID-19 vaccines. Leslie delivered these recordings to Veritas in late 2021, but they were never published:

Featured in Leslie’s footage is Kanwal Gill, a principal scientist at Pfizer. Gill was weary of MRNA technology given its long research history yet lack of approved commercial products. She called the vaccines “sneaky,” suggesting latent side effects could emerge in time.

Gill goes on to illustrate how the vaccine formulation process was dramatically rushed under the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization and adds that profit incentives likely played a role:

"It’s going to affect my heart, and I’m going to die. And nobody’s talking about that."

Leslie recorded another colleague, Pfizer’s pharmaceutical formulation scientist Ramin Darvari, who raised the since-validated concern that repeat booster intake could damage the cardiovascular system:

None of these claims will be shocking to hear in 2024, but it is telling that high-level Pfizer researchers were discussing these topics in private while the company assured the public of “no serious safety concerns” upon the jab’s release:

Vaccine for Children is a Different Formulation

Leslie sent me a little-known FDA-Pfizer conference — a 7-hour Zoom meeting published in tandem with the approval of the vaccine for 5 – 11 year-olds — during which Pfizer’s vice presidents of vaccine research and development, Nicholas Warne and William Gruber, discussed a last-minute change to the vaccine’s “buffer” — from “PBS” to “Tris” — to improve its shelf life. For about 30 seconds of these 7 hours, Gruber acknowledged that the new formula was NOT the one used in clinical trials (emphasis mine):


“The studies were done using the same volume… but contained the PBS buffer. We obviously had extensive consultations with the FDA and it was determined that the clinical studies were not required because, again, the LNP and the MRNA are the same and the behavior — in terms of reactogenicity and efficacy — are expected to be the same.

According to Leslie, the tweaked “buffer” dramatically changed the temperature needed for storage: “Before they changed this last step of the formulation, the formula was to be kept at -80 degrees Celsius. After they changed the last step, we kept them at 2 to 8 degrees celsius,” Leslie told me.

The claims are backed up in the referenced video presentation:

I’m no vaccinologist but an 80-degree temperature delta — and a 5x shelf-life in a warmer climate — seems like a significant change that might warrant clinical trials before commercial release.

Despite this information technically being public, there has been virtually no media scrutiny or even coverage — and in fact, most were told the vaccine for children was the same formula but just a smaller dose — which is perhaps due to a combination of the information being buried within a 7-hour jargon-filled presentation and our media being totally dysfunctional.

Bohemian Grove?

Leslie’s 2-hour long documentary on his experience at both Pfizer and O’Keefe’s companies concludes on an interesting note: James O’Keefe attended an outing at the Bohemian Grove.

Leslie offers this photo of James’ Bohemian Grove “GATE” slip as evidence, left on his work desk atop a copy of his book, “American Muckraker”:

My thoughts on the Bohemian Grove: my good friend’s dad was its general manager for several decades. From what I have gathered through that connection, the Bohemian Grove is not some version of the Illuminati, at least not in the institutional sense.

Do powerful elites hangout there? Absolutely. Do they discuss their plans for the world while hanging out there? I’m sure it has happened. Do they have a weird ritual with a giant owl? Yep, Alex Jones showed that to the world.

My perspective is based on conversations with my friend and my belief that his father is not lying to him. I could be wrong and am open to evidence — like if boxer Ryan Garcia decides to produce evidence regarding his rape claims — and I do find it a bit strange the club would invite O’Keefe who is notorious for covertly filming, but Occam’s razor would lead me to believe the club is — as it was under my friend’s dad — run by boomer conservatives the extent of whose politics include disliking wokeness, immigration, and Biden (common subjects of O’Keefe’s work).

Therefore, I don’t find O’Keefe’s visit to the club indicative that he is some sort of Operation Mockingbird asset as Leslie tries to depict (however Mockingbird is a 100% legitimate conspiracy). I have also met James several times and even came close to joining OMG. While I disagreed with James on the significance of many of his stories — finding some to be overhyped and showy — I never doubted his conviction in them.

As for why Leslie’s story was squashed… all my sources told me it was to avoid jail time for Veritas executives.

Feel free to watch Leslie’s full documentary here and decide for yourself.

Fun fact — Justin Leslie was also the operative behind this mega-viral Project Veritas story where Pfizer’s director of R&D claimed the company was privately mutating COVID-19 behind closed doors:

Tyler Durden Tue, 03/12/2024 - 13:40

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Association of prenatal vitamins and metals with epigenetic aging at birth and in childhood

“[…] our findings support the hypothesis that the intrauterine environment, particularly essential and non-essential metals, affect epigenetic aging…

Published

on

“[…] our findings support the hypothesis that the intrauterine environment, particularly essential and non-essential metals, affect epigenetic aging biomarkers across the life course.”

Credit: 2024 Bozack et al.

“[…] our findings support the hypothesis that the intrauterine environment, particularly essential and non-essential metals, affect epigenetic aging biomarkers across the life course.”

BUFFALO, NY- March 12, 2024 – A new research paper was published in Aging (listed by MEDLINE/PubMed as “Aging (Albany NY)” and “Aging-US” by Web of Science) Volume 16, Issue 4, entitled, “Associations of prenatal one-carbon metabolism nutrients and metals with epigenetic aging biomarkers at birth and in childhood in a US cohort.”

Epigenetic gestational age acceleration (EGAA) at birth and epigenetic age acceleration (EAA) in childhood may be biomarkers of the intrauterine environment. In this new study, researchers Anne K. Bozack, Sheryl L. Rifas-Shiman, Andrea A. Baccarelli, Robert O. Wright, Diane R. Gold, Emily Oken, Marie-France Hivert, and Andres Cardenas from Stanford University School of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Columbia University, and Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai investigated the extent to which first-trimester folate, B12, 5 essential and 7 non-essential metals in maternal circulation are associated with EGAA and EAA in early life. 

“[…] we hypothesized that OCM [one-carbon metabolism] nutrients and essential metals would be positively associated with EGAA and non-essential metals would be negatively associated with EGAA. We also investigated nonlinear associations and associations with mixtures of micronutrients and metals.”

Bohlin EGAA and Horvath pan-tissue and skin and blood EAA were calculated using DNA methylation measured in cord blood (N=351) and mid-childhood blood (N=326; median age = 7.7 years) in the Project Viva pre-birth cohort. A one standard deviation increase in individual essential metals (copper, manganese, and zinc) was associated with 0.94-1.2 weeks lower Horvath EAA at birth, and patterns of exposures identified by exploratory factor analysis suggested that a common source of essential metals was associated with Horvath EAA. The researchers also observed evidence of nonlinear associations of zinc with Bohlin EGAA, magnesium and lead with Horvath EAA, and cesium with skin and blood EAA at birth. Overall, associations at birth did not persist in mid-childhood; however, arsenic was associated with greater EAA at birth and in childhood. 

“Prenatal metals, including essential metals and arsenic, are associated with epigenetic aging in early life, which might be associated with future health.”

 

Read the full paper: DOI: https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.205602 

Corresponding Author: Andres Cardenas

Corresponding Email: andres.cardenas@stanford.edu 

Keywords: epigenetic age acceleration, metals, folate, B12, prenatal exposures

Click here to sign up for free Altmetric alerts about this article.

 

About Aging:

Launched in 2009, Aging publishes papers of general interest and biological significance in all fields of aging research and age-related diseases, including cancer—and now, with a special focus on COVID-19 vulnerability as an age-dependent syndrome. Topics in Aging go beyond traditional gerontology, including, but not limited to, cellular and molecular biology, human age-related diseases, pathology in model organisms, signal transduction pathways (e.g., p53, sirtuins, and PI-3K/AKT/mTOR, among others), and approaches to modulating these signaling pathways.

Please visit our website at www.Aging-US.com​​ and connect with us:

  • Facebook
  • X, formerly Twitter
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
  • Reddit
  • Pinterest
  • Spotify, and available wherever you listen to podcasts

 

Click here to subscribe to Aging publication updates.

For media inquiries, please contact media@impactjournals.com.

 

Aging (Aging-US) Journal Office

6666 E. Quaker Str., Suite 1B

Orchard Park, NY 14127

Phone: 1-800-922-0957, option 1

###


Read More

Continue Reading

Trending