32 Comments

As someone who relies quite heavily on the Seroprevalence data in my own analysis - I don't know that I can argue with your conclusion that it's becoming something that's not worth what it used to be. Not only is there a time dependent peak and fade in antibodies in even the S protein (with no mention similar to the N antibodies), their shift from 4 to 12 week sampling (and once monthly reporting) is mystifying to me in a report that it all about looking at the recent timeframe. If I were a suspicious man, I'd say it's to use the peak antibody levels from 8-10 weeks back to mask a rapidly fading level in their oldest populations long enough to get the booster campaign really going. I suspect it might have been stealth enough that many of their target demographic weren't really aware of it.

Their new antibody level charts do show some evidence of their silent booster campaign, but it really isn't marked at the moment aside from the 70-84 year-old group.

But this all adds up to the data possibly undergoing more manipulation that was originally the case. And data manipulated before it gets to us in unknown ways is kind of useless for analysis.

I really really wish you were wrong, but I've got a sneaking suspicion that you aren't.

Expand full comment
Oct 23, 2021Liked by Brian Mowrey

Excellent reading - thank you Brian. I apologize that I will have to read more than once in order to fully digest. I keep going back to Footnote #13. Your surmising is supported by Peter Doshi https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3563 who articulates evidence of SARS-CoV-2 T-Cell reactivity in US blood specimens between 2015 and 2018. If you REALLY want to find out whether you caught it, https://www.t-detect.com/ allows for T Cell testing. Sadly, mine was negative. But I was happy to know either way.

Expand full comment

I agree that the UKHSA statement has been amplified and expounded upon too greatly. It’s vague and non-quantitative (paraphrasing egm).

And that it’s tempting to write off the world as a place where you can choose your own reality and go live in it. But this is highly unsatisfying - the internet is a huge junkpile but there is useful stuff in there if we keep digging. We will find parts that fit together, explain observable reality, and predict future trends. Let’s have the courage to continue to look for truth and not get discouraged by all the bad, sensationalized factoids out there.

The real scandal is why the scientific “community” (wow I dislike that word) isn’t looking for the definitive set of conditions which enables us to eject individuals from this never-ending pandemic game. What do you have to do in order to be able to quit playing and go to the kitchen to make yourself a sandwich? We’re not going to get out of this as a group, all at once, but rather as one “immune”person at a time.

Expand full comment
Oct 23, 2021Liked by Brian Mowrey

interesting as always - but here is the deal. UK data is missing 2 very important pieces of data. The percentage of patients with prior infection AND All Cause Mortality. Those 2 uncertainties make conclusions very difficult.

So why doesnt the UK publish all cause mortality for the Vax and Unvaxed populations?

Expand full comment
Oct 23, 2021Liked by Brian Mowrey

I’m bored with Berenson. His appearance on Bro Rogaine (Joe Rogan) was lackluster. Then he attempted to be spooky about vaccines on Tucker. It’s almost as if he is making the media rounds for upcoming book(not buying it) release. He seems preoccupied with being the one who finally puts the coffin nail into c19 vaccines. This will never happen and is a waste of time. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn he is triple jabbed. Writers like eugyppius, although thoughtful, are swept up in this dialogue which ultimately underwhelms. The data that does come out is convoluted. Made more so as individuals like elgatomalo apply their hands to it with more math. At this point the pro vax crowd is all in. If you told them the vaccines would kill them in 18 months but they wouldn’t get c19 the uptake would likely be the same. Our situation now is one of wait and see. As you mentioned I’m more concerned about mandates causing loss of work and then eventually civil war.

Expand full comment
Oct 23, 2021Liked by Brian Mowrey

This actual virus has become irrelevant to the story- except the unknowns that will later reveal themselves from its manufacturing. But for now, I agree, the concerning factors in this are the jab related harms and Molnupiravir use this winter. If humanity manages to escape skyrocketing increases in vascular diseases, cancer, reproductive and neonatal consequences... it will be the equivalent of hell freezing over.

Expand full comment

Your attitude reminds me of a poem by Rudyard Kipling. I appreciate it, as well as your articles.

We might very well be stooping and building up with worn out tools the broken things we gave our life to.

I was enjoying life, freedom and the pursuit of goals. Civil war does not appeal at all. Am expanding my mind by reading some Luttwak.

Expand full comment

(formerly commented as dendroica)

ADE is what everyone is expecting, but the storm is often not what is expected. Those facing a hurricane fear the wind but more often drown.

Thanks for your unique perspectives. I share your concerns with regard to cancer, and I can find no real-time source for cancer diagnosis numbers so it appears we will be reliant on anecdote until the 2021 numbers are compiled in January. Cancer is increasingly appearing as a topic in John Michael Greer's weekly covid discussion board.

Here's a comment I shared there this week, as food for thought for your upcoming cancer post.

-------

I would not expect the vaccines to directly cause mutations leading to cancer, but they could easily cause the immune system to miss nascent cancers or to be weakened in its fight against existing cancers. In fact I would not be at all surprised if this is an unfortunate side effect of genetic vaccines in general.

Consider that within the innate immune system are cells (natural killer cells and killer T cells) whose mission includes patrolling the body for cancer cells and destroying them. The signal they are searching for is unusual proteins on the cell surface.

Now let's inject an mRNA or viral vector vaccine that hijacks thousands of cells so that they produce strange surface proteins.

This will have two likely outcomes, both of them bad:

1. The killer cells are overwhelmed by the sudden appearance of thousands of aberrant cells, and in the chaos they fail to find new developing cancers or to fight existing cancers.

2. The body recognizes a large-scale self-attack and downregulates the killer cells or signals them to back off, assuming some sort of autoimmune dysfunction is underway. This would fall under the umbrella of "tolerance" and would also lead to a weakened immune response to nascent and existing cancers which could last well beyond the departure of the spike protein from the body.

--------

Now combine immune tolerance/exhaustion with widespread deployment of a directly mutagenic new drug, and we might unfortunately have a perfect storm on our hands.

Expand full comment
Oct 22, 2021Liked by Brian Mowrey

The Gates foundation is donating $120MM to help increase use of Molnupiravir.

Expand full comment

Great to get an alternative perspective on some of these "hot topics". It is comforting that you don't fear ADE but how to explain all the livestock that were felled by it during testing of earlier attempts at corona vaccine? Surely they could have been given therapeutics in any strength desired, if that would have been enough to mitigate it.

Expand full comment