Connect with us

Small Caps Are Rising. Biotech Stocks Can’t Be Far Behind!

Small Caps Are Rising. Biotech Stocks Can’t Be Far Behind!

Published

on

  • While much attention is being riveted on the S&P 500 new all-time high eclipsing the January one, small caps accomplished that in May.
  • Small caps are in their next leg up as they record new all-time highs, once again leading the broader indexes.
  • Biotech stocks, dominated by small and midcaps, have been closely tracking small cap index performance.
  • As of Sep 1, the Russell 2000 was up +14%, and the Nasdaq Biotech Index up +15%. The Graycell Small Cap was up +48%, & the Prudent Biotech Portfolio up +75% for the same period.
  • Waiting for a Correction is hurting the portfolio performance for many investors including smart money. Stocks are now once again demonstrating upward momentum.

 

Market Pulse

 

PrudentBiotech.com ~ State of the Stock Market

The S&P 500 has finally emerged from its 7-month consolidation as it weaves its way back to chalking all-time highs. While that is an event worth acknowledging, it may not as breathless a milestone when one realizes that the small cap Russell 2000 index led the market and achieved that milestone in May, followed by a similar achievement by the Nasdaq Composite in June.

However, what may be an even more meaningful milestone is that small caps are once again leading the broader market to all-time highs, and we are now in a position to have all three major indexes - S&P 500, Nasdaq, and Russell 2000 - recording new highs concurrently. Such an event doesn't harbor an imminent Correction but instead is more suggestive of further gains.

Predicting Market Corrections

The exercise of predicting market corrections, pullbacks of 10% or more, is, for the most part, a highly difficult and often times a futile and costly exercise. Many Corrections provide poor visibility and occur so fast and sharp that investors are well into the midst of one in a matter of days, before realizing what they're encountering. Relatively speaking, it may be a less onerous task to predict bear markets than to predict Corrections.

Recently, the bull market entered its longest cycle ever as it crossed 3452 days, eclipsing the previous record set from October 1990 to March 2000. Although, perhaps, the earlier record may have been much longer.

GraycellAdvisors.com ~ Bull Market Length

A bull doesn't die of old age. Longevity by itself doesn't halt a bull market, although it continues to raise the probability that a mature economic expansion is closer to the end. Eventually, it's the declining state of economic affairs or a systemic shock, which are the death knell for a bull market.

What has been the hallmark of this expansion is that 3,450 days later, there is no prominent excess or significant frothiness in the market. A simple metric, the price-to-earnings ratio, of 17x forward 12-month earnings for S&P 500 companies, is near the 5-year average of 16.3x, as per Factset, and not at a telltale level betraying a euphoric state of affairs.

In fact, a healthy dose of investor skepticism and concern exist as investors fret about overvaluation and the end of the bull market. Typically, in such situations, with the economy remaining robust, the markets continue to climb the proverbial wall-of-worries. And the wall-of-worries will only rise higher now that we have achieved the mantle of the longest bull market. The US is the only major economy that is showing robust economic growth, in contrast to Eurozone, China, Japan, and emerging markets as a group. As the divergence persists, it will continue to attract further liquidity into the US stock market.

GraycellAdvisors.com ~ Stock Market Wall Of Worries

Investor skepticism is evident in the fact that not all investors are participating in the mega bull market. Some are left on the sidelines this year as they continue to wait for the next Correction. Between mid-March and July, investors withdrew nearly $40 billion from equity funds, while investing nearly $80 billion in the perceived safety of bond funds, as per Bespoke Investment Group. Well, bonds are a safe haven in a crisis, but they may not prove to be as safe and desirable an investment in a growth market, where inflation is perking up.

Many others have simply not participated as a result of the vicious financial crisis of 2007-08 seared into their memories. Individuals who used to be for the most part middle-class investors have sat out, anchored to the memories of the Great Recession. This has resulted in a growing concentration of wealth amongst the top households in the country. According to research conducted by Edward Wolff, an economics professor at New York University, the share of the American households invested in the stock market is still well below the levels prevailing before the financial crisis in 2007. At the same time, Wolff estimates, share-ownership concentration has increased with 10% of households owning 84% of the value of shares in 2016, up from 81% in 2007. The concentration has only increased further, after the strong market rise in 2017, to nearly 90%.

Even the smart money, as professional money managers and hedge funds are referred to, has been caught flat-footed this year. As per a Bloomberg analysis of the Hedge Fund Research Data, an index tracking the performance of such funds has fallen in 5 of the last 6 weeks, wiping out the gains for the year. The net leverage ratio, a measure of risk appetite among hedge funds, has fallen to the lowest level this year.

Why?

For hedge funds have been waiting for that elusive Correction as well and were net-short as they reduced the long position. Smart money may still be right eventually and a Correction will occur. But the poor recent performance shows the difficulty of predicting and timing Corrections even for smart money.

 

PrudentBiotech.com ~ Hedge Fund Performance 2018

There are a number of market unknowns like the trade tensions with China and EU, the North Korean crisis, the teetering Turkish economy, the emerging market turmoil, the Mueller investigation, etc. But these are, what can be referred to in former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's terminology, the "known unknowns," and have existed for some time. As long as the economy remains robust and the monetary policy cautious, the stock market will continue to operate in a favorable environment.

A focus on determining the beginning of a bear market, which in itself is hard enough to predict and dramatically erodes investment wealth, can be a more fruitful and meaningful exercise, than anticipating the next whimsical correction, which is a mere dip in an overarching Bull market.

Small Caps Charge Ahead

Even though there is a mist of uneasiness and a never-ending fear of a pullback, the stock market continues to show a propensity to move higher. A lot of things have to be right when small caps are leading - the economy, the interest rates, the earnings, and a risk-on environment.

For long-term investors, small cap has been an investment class of choice due to its consistent record of outperformance over time.

 

GraycellAdvisors.com ~ Small Cap vs Large Caps

Near 100 Years Of History - Growth Of $1 By 36,900 times ~ Source: Morningstar, Ibbotson

Size or market cap is an important factor affecting total returns. Over the period shown above, small caps have performed over 5x better than the next class, the large-cap stocks.

The persistence outperformance of small caps over an extended period of time is also prevalent over relatively shorter timeframes, like the 20-year period with two punishing economic recessions.

 

GraycellAdvisors.com ~ Small Cap Performance Over 20 Years - 1998 to 2017

20 Year Performance - 1998 to 2017 ~ Source: Morningstar, Ibbotson

The performance of small caps this year has been propelled by a variety of reasons, primary among them being the underlying strength of the economy. A strong domestic economy assists all US corporates, but more so the smaller caps which have a higher concentration of domestic revenues.

PrudentBiotech.com ~ 2018 Small Cap Performance

In an environment of stellar earnings growth, strong consumer and business confidence, and a supportive monetary policy, it is natural for financial risk-appetite to grow and finds opportunities where the probability of returns are higher.

Can Biotechs Stocks Be Far Behind?

A favorable environment for risk is assisting small cap stocks to rise to record highs. In such an environment, biotechs stocks can't be far behind. Small caps and biotech stocks have demonstrated a high correlation due to their speculative and high-risk nature.

GraycellAdvisors.com ~ Small Cap Stocks Vs Biotech Stocks performance

With the smallcap Russell 2000 index breaking new ground, it is just a matter of time before the S&P Biotech Select Index (XBI) records its own new all-time high. The larger cap weighted Nasdaq Biotechnology Index (IBB) will also be recording 52-week highs, though it still has to move another 12% to eclipse the all-time high set in July 2015. Even the broader pharmaceutical industry has been performing quite well with major stocks like Pfizer (PFE), Merck (MRK), and Eli Lilly (LLY) recording new highs. One would believe this will bode well for further biotech M&A activity.

PrudentBiotech.com ~ Biotech Stock Performance - Indexes and Prudent Biotech Portfolio

Biotech Performance

However, there are some unique concerns which affect the biopharma sector. Rising drug prices remain a nagging issue, and even though recent efforts, like the blueprint American Patients First, have been industry benign, the issue is bound to resurface strongly during the political rhetoric leading up to the November elections.

Thus far, major pharmaceuticals like Pfizer, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMY), Johnson and Johnson (JNJ), and Novartis (NVS), amongst others, have committed to not raising prices till year-end, while still maintaining guidance. Also, there were no major formulary exclusions by the three major pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) Express Scripts (ESRX), CVS Health (CVS), and OptumRx of UnitedHealth Group (UHS), which has improved the sentiment on the pharma sector.

But the pressure on drug prices is there and will persist.

The Health and Human Services Secretary, Alex Azar, has been pushing for bigger rebates and leaning heavily on middlemen PBMs to lower the drug prices. In the meantime, the States are raising the pressure on pharmaceutical companies, making them disclose and justify the price increases. Thus far in 2018, there have been 24 states that have passed bills to curb prescription drug price increases, as per the National Academy for State Health Policy. A growing number of states for the first time are trying to regulate the middlemen PBMs, requiring them to disclose the rebates and price concessions they receive from drug companies.

PrudentBiotech.com ~ Drug Prices

In all likelihood, the possibility of a significant policy change, even from a change in control of Congress, is limited, unless the President decides to work with the Democrats and sign such legislation. In case there is no change in control of either chamber of Congress, it can be considered a net positive as it extends the status quo. Nonetheless, the drug pricing environment for biopharma will remain tense and can adversely affect sentiment during the fourth quarter.

Greater Dispersion in Returns

There is a growing dispersion in stock returns as the group of losers is just as wide as the group of winners. The rising tide lifts all boat approach is working less effectively this year as the market is shifting toward stock-picking. The importance of being in the right stocks has assumed greater importance as the dispersion or spread in equity returns has widened to levels not seen since the start of the bull market.

This year the top 24 performing industries in the S&P 500 have outperformed the worst by nearly 49%, according to Bloomberg. Such a high dispersion or gap in performance was last seen in 2009. The market is becoming quite selective.

PrudentBiotech.com ~ Biotech Gene Editing

Conclusion

The market is a tricky beast, and it's not easy to predict short-term turning points. As the Summer winds down and investors return in September, they will be encountering legitimate concerns. Some of these include the sustainability of second-half profit growth as the impact from a tax boost fades, and the sustainability of GDP growth beyond 3%, amongst others. With indexes at all-time highs, one can find reasons to expect volatility or a short-term pullback near-term. We had discussed the second-half outlook in greater detail in an earlier article, What Now After Double-Digit Gains.

Investors have seen the benefit of staying the course for much of the year and the underlying market strength is hard to question. It may be prudent to continue positioning the portfolio based on market evidence.

The Prudent Biotech Portfolio had gained +75% and the Graycell Small Cap gained +48% as of Sep 1, and we believe a tilt towards small and midcap stocks remains an attractive investment opportunity. There are many promising small cap stocks as well as biotech stocks across the market cap spectrum that have been doing well and a few of them include, Ligand Pharmaceuticals (LGND), Biogen (BIIB), Vertex Pharmaceuticals (VRTX), Regenxbio (RGNX), Sarepta Therapeutics (SRPT), Reata Pharma (RETA), Verastem (VSTM), Endocyte (ECYT), Heron Therapeutics (HRTX), Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals (ARWR), Affymed (AFMD), Endo International (ENDP), Intercept Pharmaceuticals (ICPT), Mirati Therapeutics (MRTX), Viking Therapeutics (VKTX), Acceleron Pharma (XLRN), Neurocrine Biosciences (NBIX), Immunomedics (IMMU), Tandem Diabetes (TNDM), Renewable Energy (REGI), Natera (NTRA), Turtle Beach (HEAR), Funko (FNKO), Mallinckrodt (MNK), Invitae (NVTA), and TransEnterix (TRXC).

The article was first published on Seeking Alpha.

The post Small Caps Are Rising. Biotech Stocks Can’t Be Far Behind! appeared first on Prudent Biotech.

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Harvard Medical School Professor Was Fired Over Not Getting COVID Vaccine

Harvard Medical School Professor Was Fired Over Not Getting COVID Vaccine

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A…

Published

on

Harvard Medical School Professor Was Fired Over Not Getting COVID Vaccine

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A Harvard Medical School professor who refused to get a COVID-19 vaccine has been terminated, according to documents reviewed by The Epoch Times.

Martin Kulldorff, epidemiologist and statistician, at his home in Ashford, Conn., on Feb. 11, 2022. (Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times)

Martin Kulldorff, an epidemiologist, was fired by Mass General Brigham in November 2021 over noncompliance with the hospital’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate after his requests for exemptions from the mandate were denied, according to one document. Mr. Kulldorff was also placed on leave by Harvard Medical School (HMS) because his appointment as professor of medicine there “depends upon” holding a position at the hospital, another document stated.

Mr. Kulldorff asked HMS in late 2023 how he could return to his position and was told he was being fired.

You would need to hold an eligible appointment with a Harvard-affiliated institution for your HMS academic appointment to continue,” Dr. Grace Huang, dean for faculty affairs, told the epidemiologist and biostatistician.

She said the lack of an appointment, combined with college rules that cap leaves of absence at two years, meant he was being terminated.

Mr. Kulldorff disclosed the firing for the first time this month.

“While I can’t comment on the specifics due to employment confidentiality protections that preclude us from doing so, I can confirm that his employment agreement was terminated November 10, 2021,” a spokesperson for Brigham and Women’s Hospital told The Epoch Times via email.

Mass General Brigham granted just 234 exemption requests out of 2,402 received, according to court filings in an ongoing case that alleges discrimination.

The hospital said previously, “We received a number of exemption requests, and each request was carefully considered by a knowledgeable team of reviewers.

A lot of other people received exemptions, but I did not,” Mr. Kulldorff told The Epoch Times.

Mr. Kulldorff was originally hired by HMS but switched departments in 2015 to work at the Department of Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, which is part of Mass General Brigham and affiliated with HMS.

Harvard Medical School has affiliation agreements with several Boston hospitals which it neither owns nor operationally controls,” an HMS spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email. “Hospital-based faculty, such as Mr. Kulldorff, are employed by one of the affiliates, not by HMS, and require an active hospital appointment to maintain an academic appointment at Harvard Medical School.”

HMS confirmed that some faculty, who are tenured or on the tenure track, do not require hospital appointments.

Natural Immunity

Before the COVID-19 vaccines became available, Mr. Kulldorff contracted COVID-19. He was hospitalized but eventually recovered.

That gave him a form of protection known as natural immunity. According to a number of studies, including papers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, natural immunity is better than the protection bestowed by vaccines.

Other studies have found that people with natural immunity face a higher risk of problems after vaccination.

Mr. Kulldorff expressed his concerns about receiving a vaccine in his request for a medical exemption, pointing out a lack of data for vaccinating people who suffer from the same issue he does.

I already had superior infection-acquired immunity; and it was risky to vaccinate me without proper efficacy and safety studies on patients with my type of immune deficiency,” Mr. Kulldorff wrote in an essay.

In his request for a religious exemption, he highlighted an Israel study that was among the first to compare protection after infection to protection after vaccination. Researchers found that the vaccinated had less protection than the naturally immune.

“Having had COVID disease, I have stronger longer lasting immunity than those vaccinated (Gazit et al). Lacking scientific rationale, vaccine mandates are religious dogma, and I request a religious exemption from COVID vaccination,” he wrote.

Both requests were denied.

Mr. Kulldorff is still unvaccinated.

“I had COVID. I had it badly. So I have infection-acquired immunity. So I don’t need the vaccine,” he told The Epoch Times.

Dissenting Voice

Mr. Kulldorff has been a prominent dissenting voice during the COVID-19 pandemic, countering messaging from the government and many doctors that the COVID-19 vaccines were needed, regardless of prior infection.

He spoke out in an op-ed in April 2021, for instance, against requiring people to provide proof of vaccination to attend shows, go to school, and visit restaurants.

The idea that everybody needs to be vaccinated is as scientifically baseless as the idea that nobody does. Covid vaccines are essential for older, high-risk people and their caretakers and advisable for many others. But those who’ve been infected are already immune,” he wrote at the time.

Mr. Kulldorff later co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration, which called for focused protection of people at high risk while removing restrictions for younger, healthy people.

Harsh restrictions such as school closures “will cause irreparable damage” if not lifted, the declaration stated.

The declaration drew criticism from Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Dr. Rochelle Walensky, who became the head of the CDC, among others.

In a competing document, Dr. Walensky and others said that “relying upon immunity from natural infections for COVID-19 is flawed” and that “uncontrolled transmission in younger people risks significant morbidity(3) and mortality across the whole population.”

“Those who are pushing these vaccine mandates and vaccine passports—vaccine fanatics, I would call them—to me they have done much more damage during this one year than the anti-vaxxers have done in two decades,” Mr. Kulldorff later said in an EpochTV interview. “I would even say that these vaccine fanatics, they are the biggest anti-vaxxers that we have right now. They’re doing so much more damage to vaccine confidence than anybody else.

Surveys indicate that people have less trust now in the CDC and other health institutions than before the pandemic, and data from the CDC and elsewhere show that fewer people are receiving the new COVID-19 vaccines and other shots.

Support

The disclosure that Mr. Kulldorff was fired drew criticism of Harvard and support for Mr. Kulldorff.

The termination “is a massive and incomprehensible injustice,” Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, an ethics expert who was fired from the University of California–Irvine School of Medicine for not getting a COVID-19 vaccine because he had natural immunity, said on X.

The academy is full of people who declined vaccines—mostly with dubious exemptions—and yet Harvard fires the one professor who happens to speak out against government policies.” Dr. Vinay Prasad, an epidemiologist at the University of California–San Francisco, wrote in a blog post. “It looks like Harvard has weaponized its policies and selectively enforces them.”

A petition to reinstate Mr. Kulldorff has garnered more than 1,800 signatures.

Some other doctors said the decision to let Mr. Kulldorff go was correct.

“Actions have consequence,” Dr. Alastair McAlpine, a Canadian doctor, wrote on X. He said Mr. Kulldorff had “publicly undermine[d] public health.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/16/2024 - 21:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Correcting the Washington Post’s 11 Charts That Are Supposed to Tell Us How the Economy Changed Since Covid

The Washington Post made some serious errors or omissions in its 11 charts that are supposed to tell us how Covid changed the economy. Wages Starting with…

Published

on

The Washington Post made some serious errors or omissions in its 11 charts that are supposed to tell us how Covid changed the economy.

Wages

Starting with its second chart, the article gives us an index of average weekly wages since 2019. The index shows a big jump in 2020, which then falls off in 2021 and 2022, before rising again in 2023.

It tells readers:

“Many Americans got large pay increases after the pandemic, when employers were having to one-up each other to find and keep workers. For a while, those wage gains were wiped out by decade-high inflation: Workers were getting larger paychecks, but it wasn’t enough to keep up with rising prices.”

That actually is not what its chart shows. The big rise in average weekly wages at the start of the pandemic was not the result of workers getting pay increases, it was the result of low-paid workers in sectors like hotels and restaurants losing their jobs.

The number of people employed in the low-paying leisure and hospitality sector fell by more than 8 million at the start of the pandemic. Even at the start of 2021 it was still down by over 4 million.

Laying off low-paid workers raises average wages in the same way that getting the short people to leave raises the average height of the people in the room. The Washington Post might try to tell us that the remaining people grew taller, but that is not what happened.

The other problem with this chart is that it is giving us weekly wages. The length of the average workweek jumped at the start of the pandemic as employers decided to work the workers they had longer hours rather than hire more workers. In January of 2021 the average workweek was 34.9 hours, compared to 34.4 hours in 2019 and 34.3 hours in February.

This increase in hours, by itself, would raise weekly pay by 2.0 percent. As hours returned to normal in 2022, this measure would misleadingly imply that wages were falling.

It is also worth noting that the fastest wage gains since the pandemic have been at the bottom end of the wage distribution and the Black/white wage gap has fallen to its lowest level on record.

Saving Rates

The third chart shows the saving rate since 2019. It shows a big spike at the start of the pandemic, as people stopped spending on things like restaurants and travel and they got pandemic checks from the government. It then falls sharply in 2022 and is lower in the most recent quarters than in 2019.

The piece tells readers:

“But as the world reopened — and people resumed spending on dining out, travel, concerts and other things that were previously off-limits — savings rates have leveled off. Americans are also increasingly dip into rainy-day funds to pay more for necessities, including groceries, housing, education and health care. In fact, Americans are now generally saving less of their incomes than they were before the pandemic.

This is an incomplete picture due to a somewhat technical issue. As I explained in a blogpost a few months ago, there is an unusually large gap between GDP as measured on the output side and GDP measured on the income side. In principle, these two numbers should be the same, but they never come out exactly equal.

In recent quarters, the gap has been 2.5 percent of GDP. This is extraordinarily large, but it also is unusual in that the output side is higher than the income side, the opposite of the standard pattern over the last quarter century.

It is standard for economists to assume that the true number for GDP is somewhere between the two measures. If we make that assumption about the data for 2023, it would imply that income is somewhat higher than the data now show and consumption somewhat lower.

In that story, as I showed in the blogpost, the saving rate for 2023 would be 6.8 percent of disposable income, roughly the same as the average for the three years before the pandemic. This would mean that people are not dipping into their rainy-day funds as the Post tells us. They are spending pretty much as they did before the pandemic.

 

Credit Card Debt

The next graph shows that credit card debt is rising again, after sinking in the pandemic. The piece tells readers:

“But now, debt loads are swinging higher again as families try to keep up with rising prices. Total household debt reached a record $17.5 trillion at the end of 2023, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. And, in a worrisome sign for the economy, delinquency rates on mortgages, car loans and credit cards are all rising, too.”

There are several points worth noting here. Credit card debt is rising, but measured relative to income it is still below where it was before the pandemic. It was 6.7 percent of disposable income at the end of 2019, compared to 6.5 percent at the end of last year.

The second point is that a major reason for the recent surge in credit card debt is that people are no longer refinancing mortgages. There was a massive surge in mortgage refinancing with the low interest rates in 2020-2021.

Many of the people who refinanced took additional money out, taking advantage of the increased equity in their home. This channel of credit was cut off when mortgage rates jumped in 2022 and virtually ended mortgage refinancing. This means that to a large extent the surge in credit card borrowing is simply a shift from mortgage debt to credit card debt.

The point about total household debt hitting a record can be said in most months. Except in the period immediately following the collapse of the housing bubble, total debt is almost always rising.

And the rise in delinquencies simply reflects the fact that they had been at very low levels in 2021 and 2022. For the most part, delinquency rates are just getting back to their pre-pandemic levels, which were historically low.  

 

Grocery Prices and Gas Prices

The next two charts show the patterns in grocery prices and gas prices since the pandemic. It would have been worth mentioning that every major economy in the world saw similar run-ups in prices in these two areas. In other words, there was nothing specific to U.S. policy that led to a surge in inflation here.

 

The Missing Charts

There are several areas where it would have been interesting to see charts which the Post did not include. It would have been useful to have a chart on job quitters, the number of people who voluntarily quit their jobs during the pandemic. In the tight labor markets of 2021 and 2022 the number of workers who left jobs they didn’t like soared to record levels, as shown below.

 

The vast majority of these workers took other jobs that they liked better. This likely explains another item that could appear as a graph, the record level of job satisfaction.

In a similar vein there has been an explosion in the number of people who work from home at least part-time. This has increased by more than 17 million during the pandemic. These workers are saving themselves thousands of dollars a year on commuting costs and related expenses, as well as hundreds of hours spent commuting.

Finally, there has been an explosion in the use of telemedicine since the pandemic. At the peak, nearly one in four visits with a health care professional was a remote consultation. This saved many people with serious health issues the time and inconvenience associated with a trip to a hospital or doctor’s office. The increased use of telemedicine is likely to be a lasting gain from the pandemic.

 

The World Has Changed

The pandemic will likely have a lasting impact on the economy and society. The Washington Post’s charts captured part of this story, but in some cases misrepr

The post Correcting the Washington Post’s 11 Charts That Are Supposed to Tell Us How the Economy Changed Since Covid appeared first on Center for Economic and Policy Research.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

“Extreme Events”: US Cancer Deaths Spiked In 2021 And 2022 In “Large Excess Over Trend”

"Extreme Events": US Cancer Deaths Spiked In 2021 And 2022 In "Large Excess Over Trend"

Cancer deaths in the United States spiked in 2021…

Published

on

"Extreme Events": US Cancer Deaths Spiked In 2021 And 2022 In "Large Excess Over Trend"

Cancer deaths in the United States spiked in 2021 and 2022 among 15-44 year-olds "in large excess over trend," marking jumps of 5.6% and 7.9% respectively vs. a rise of 1.7% in 2020, according to a new preprint study from deep-dive research firm, Phinance Technologies.

Algeria, Carlos et. al "US -Death Trends for Neoplasms ICD codes: C00-D48, Ages 15-44", ResearchGate, March. 2024 P. 7

Extreme Events

The report, which relies on data from the CDC, paints a troubling picture.

"We show a rise in excess mortality from neoplasms reported as underlying cause of death, which started in 2020 (1.7%) and accelerated substantially in 2021 (5.6%) and 2022 (7.9%). The increase in excess mortality in both 2021 (Z-score of 11.8) and 2022 (Z-score of 16.5) are highly statistically significant (extreme events)," according to the authors.

That said, co-author, David Wiseman, PhD (who has 86 publications to his name), leaves the cause an open question - suggesting it could either be a "novel phenomenon," Covid-19, or the Covid-19 vaccine.

"The results indicate that from 2021 a novel phenomenon leading to increased neoplasm deaths appears to be present in individuals aged 15 to 44 in the US," reads the report.

The authors suggest that the cause may be the result of "an unexpected rise in the incidence of rapidly growing fatal cancers," and/or "a reduction in survival in existing cancer cases."

They also address the possibility that "access to utilization of cancer screening and treatment" may be a factor - the notion that pandemic-era lockdowns resulted in fewer visits to the doctor. Also noted is that "Cancers tend to be slowly-developing diseases with remarkably stable death rates and only small variations over time," which makes "any temporal association between a possible explanatory factor (such as COVID-19, the novel COVID-19 vaccines, or other factor(s)) difficult to establish."

That said, a ZeroHedge review of the CDC data reveals that it does not provide information on duration of illness prior to death - so while it's not mentioned in the preprint, it can't rule out so-called 'turbo cancers' - reportedly rapidly developing cancers, the existence of which has been largely anecdotal (and widely refuted by the usual suspects).

While the Phinance report is extremely careful not to draw conclusions, researcher "Ethical Skeptic" kicked the barn door open in a Thursday post on X - showing a strong correlation between "cancer incidence & mortality" coinciding with the rollout of the Covid mRNA vaccine.

Phinance principal Ed Dowd commented on the post, noting that "Cancer is suddenly an accelerating growth industry!"

Continued:

Bottom line - hard data is showing alarming trends, which the CDC and other agencies have a requirement to explore and answer truthfully - and people are asking #WhereIsTheCDC.

We aren't holding our breath.

Wiseman, meanwhile, points out that Pfizer and several other companies are making "significant investments in cancer drugs, post COVID."

Phinance

We've featured several of Phinance's self-funded deep dives into pandemic data that nobody else is doing. If you'd like to support them, click here.

 

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/16/2024 - 16:55

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending