|
|
||||
|
November 24th, 2024 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Uncategorized |  Print This Post | | Comments (115) Image: Keppel Prince By Jo Nova More proof that wind power can’t be used to make wind turbinesThe one and only Australian manufacturer of wind turbine towers is going out of business, despite Australian electricity reaching 35% glorious renewable, and the Prime Ministers big plan to have the $22 billion dollar Future Made in Australia, as well as our galloping Net Zero fantasy to reach 82% renewable by 2030. We are, in theory, supposed to install 40 new wind towers a month somewhere in Australia, but none of the towers, it turns out, will be Australian made. Imagine what we could do if Australia were the largest exporter of iron ore and coal in the world?¬† The government could still screw it up. Right now, we ship the iron and coal 7,000 kilometers away with heavy fuel oil, to be made into windmills to save the world, only to ship them right back, rather than make them here.
Renewables are the cheapest source of electricity on Earth, they say, and Australia has twice as much as China (proportionately). But China makes 65% of all wind turbines globally, and soon Australia will make 0%. The company Keppel Prince don’t mention the cost of electricity, although the boss of Glencore claims Australian prices are double or more the cost in China, which can’t be good for any business. Instead the company blames Chinese subsidized competitors for dumping, which may have some truth to it, but Keppel Prince has been living off renewable energy subsidies themselves in Australia for years. In 2009 the company warned of job losses if the government didn’t set a bigger renewable energy target (which it did), but then they had to sack 100 staff in 2014 when the target was cut. After that they got help from the Victorian State Energy Targets, and the requirement that 60 per cent of the manufacturing was done locally. The truth is there has probably never been a wind turbine built in Australia that wasn’t subsidized. The only question is “how big were the subsidies?”. The Opposition here, are naturally making fun of the abject failure of the Future Made In Australia plan: China subsidies smash Australian wind tower builder, signalling end of last major player Keppel PrinceThe Australian ‚ÄúThey‚Äôve got to look really bad that they are losing the only tower manufacturer accredited to build the things,‚Äù Stephen Garner [the Executive Director of Keppel Prince] told The Australian. ‚ÄúThe federal government continues to say, like Albanese says, we want to get back to manufacturing. Here we have a manufacturing facility already in place. ‚ÄúIt‚Äôs set up for renewable energy, which is what the government talks about every day of the week, and yet we‚Äôve got to mothball it because we can‚Äôt compete with China because our government won‚Äôt do anything about it.‚Äù Mr Tehan said the government‚Äôs pledge to build Australia‚Äôs manufacturing base was in disarray. ‚ÄúWhat a complete embarrassment,‚Äô‚Äô the member for Wannon said. ‚ÄúTheir renewables only policy has been such a success it has closed our last remaining wind tower manufacturer. ‚ÄúSo the government is not in breach of its own misinformation and disinformation laws, it needs to immediately pull its Made in Australia ads that proudly displays a wind farm. ‚ÄúIt would actually be funny, if workers weren‚Äôt losing their jobs…” We don’t like seeing any Australian business go under, but there is an element of live-by-the-sword, die-by-the-sword as the saying goes. Hopefully the expertise in Keppel Prince can be put to better use manufacturing things the market wants, instead of what the government wants. Ultimately, no Australian business can compete with slave labor and cheap coal fired and nuclear power. The only thing more stupid than that would be competing in an industry to make things the market doesn’t want, the country doesn’t need and which won’t save the environment.
November 23rd, 2024 | Tags: China, Renewable Energy, RET (Renewable Energy Target), Wind Power | Category: como depositar na gate.io | Print This Post | | Comments (55)November 23rd, 2024 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Uncategorized | Print This Post | | Comments (94)November 22nd, 2024 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Uncategorized | Print This Post | | Comments (152) Image by Thomas Breher from Pixabay By Jo Nova What looks, smells, and works like a Trojan horse to force all adults to use a digital ID?Incredibly, we have only until today (Friday) to put in submissions on this major, world first, social media ban for under 16s. Feel the panic. It’s as if our PM is running out of time to ram through complex legislation before the Donald Trump inauguration? Perhaps he’s hoping Elon is distracted. The Good News is The Australian Misinformation Bill appears to be dead. Congratulations! The Bad News is the Internet ID bill (posing as a ban on Under 16s using social media) has support from both major parties, even though it is wildly ambitious, vague, dangerous, and the first in the world. The government can’t answer questions on how this will be managed. Instead, the people who have screwed everything up, say “Trust us” we will work out the details later. (Thanks @Craig Kelly) The laws, supposedly, will pass next week, but then there will be a 12 month “consultation” to work out what will be banned. Since when do we pass the laws and consult later? Everyone knows this is just an excuse to make adults upload passports, drivers licenses, facial recognition or use some new form of government ID token in order to use X or any of the social media platforms. Australia plans to trial an age-verification system that may include biometrics or government identification to enforce a social media age cut-off, some of the toughest controls imposed by any country to date. [This is with UK consortium Age Check Certification Scheme, so presumably coming to the UK too. ]
The proposals are the highest age limit set by any country, and would have no exemption for parental consent and no exemption for pre-existing accounts.
Other countries don’t require ID, they treat parents like they are smart enough to figure this out:
France last year proposed a ban on social media for those under 15 but users were able to avoid the ban with parental consent. The United States has for decades required technology companies to seek parental consent to access the data of children under 13.
As Theo says on X: Funny I found out through SOCIAL MEDIA that I had less than 24 hours to make a submission. The government would like to parent your children for you. The government say they are helping parents, but parents can already ban social media or smart phones, or get apps to help limit or monitor their children’s behaviour. This legislation treats Australian parents like they are children themselves. It will remove parent’s choices. What about kids in the Australian outback who live far from friends? Too bad if they feel suicidal because their account and online friends are about to be nixed by the government. If only farmers were smart enough to manage their own kids, eh? What does “Social Media” mean? Whatever the Government wants…Somehow, thanks to the angels in Parliament,¬† students will still be able to see government funded propaganda at school, the mainstream news, and Google Classroom, but they won’t be allowed to seek out other views on X, Instagram, TikTok, Linked In, Facebook or Youtube. [Apparently, kiddie versions without news feeds, like Youtube kids, and “messaging services” like WhatsApp, and Facebook Messenger would be exempt, or maybe “SnapChat”– according to the ABC]. But that’s the point. Google is a political player, as is X, but one of them is banned, and one endorsed. The Conservatives are fools for falling for this. The definition of “social media” is so broad any platform that allows user interactions (ie. comments) could potentially fall under this ban. (Does that mean blogs like this one?) The responsibility for ensuring all commenters are over 16 would fall on the platform. No one seems able to explain how that works in a global internet. What if Australians use VPN’s (will they ban them too) and what if say, American children genuinely want to read an Australian site, and ask questions? Fines are up to $50 million or jail time. This could be particularly burdensome or onerous for small bloggers¬† and sites to comply with. Not to mention that readers may not want to speak up if they know their comment is tracked, or their information may be hacked. That’ll put a dampner on things. The Liberal Party (supposedly conservative) are supporting this legislation. Bizarrely. It’s the start of your social credit scoreIn the name of saving children from bullying on Facebook, we’re going to risk giving them a totalitarian dystopia.
Would you like be a whistleblower or government critic? Just put your face on the camera please.¬† It will be so much easier for the government to track and collate all your comments, and probably guess how you vote. When hackers steal the data, employers, the CCP, insurance companies, and marketing teams will be happy to buy the details for the right price. Not so many people will be able to retweet or “like” something risky, so great thoughts and wicked jokes will disappear like a drop of rain in a desert. Unliked, and unshared, and mostly unheard. Read the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 [Provisions] here (or PDF here). Or just search X for all the views on the social media ban. (While you still can). So much is unknown. Voice your concerns today!
The goal is always the same: They want control of the media.The lamestream news already answers to government regulators, and multinational conglomerate investors. But since Elon Musk bought Twitter there is freedom on social media. It’s a disaster for crony capitalists and career socialists. The Twitter files showed that the CIA was able to get social media giants to shadowban or block the voices they didn’t like. Forced internet ID is just another way to stop free-speech on the internet, especially on X for allowing The People to speak their minds. Anthony Albanese’s excuse for doing this is so that parents who feel they need to ban their own children don’t have to stand up to teenage peer pressure, they can blame the government instead. We all care about our children, but there must be a better way than a blanket ban which forces every Australian to use ID online. Instead we could be teaching young children what bullying looks like and how to deal with it. A skill they will need for the rest of their lives, especially against The Government. Please put in a short submission. It would help if you could also email your local Liberal representative and senator to ask them how they can possibly justify this. There is still time to stop this. If you feel strongly, let Liberal Party members know you will go out of your way to help small independent parties win votes on this free speech issue. Perhaps you could even hand out minor party flyers or How To Vote cards?
November 22nd, 2024 | Tags: Free Speech | Category: Global Warming | Print This Post | | Comments (73)By Jo Nova It’s just another day in an endless round of blockbuster stories that once would have occupied a news cycle and foreign affairs panels for days… Robert Redfield, the former head of the Centres for Disease Control (CDC), now says COVID-19 was ‘intentionally engineered as a part of a biodefense program. More radically, it may well have been a US program. He thinks there is a real possibility Covid-19 originated in a lab in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. So the virus that may have killed 20 million people, cost trillions, changed history and wreaked havoc across the world, might have grown from a US experiment. This won’t be a shock to people following this topic on blogs and on X. But to have the former head of the CDC during the pandemic talking about it, takes these claims to a whole new level. Isn’t it time we talked about bioweapon research?Right now around the world, some 36,000 scientists are working on bioweapons, and those are the scientists we know about. One year ago, a warehouse in California was discovered by chance to be a clandestine biolab that housed frozen samples of things labelled Dengue, Malaria and Ebola. As RFK Jnr explained it last year — Anthony Fauci was not only a ‚Äúdirector of health‚Äù, he was also a director of bioweapons. Trump’s former CDC director makes bombshell COVID claim that ‘there is a real possibility’ virus was born in North CarolinaBy Stephen M Lepore for the Daily Mail
He claims that the American government holds responsibility for funding research into the NIH, USAID and the Department of Defense.¬† He then calls out researcher Dr. Ralph Baric from the University of North Carolina, whom he calls ‘the scientific mastermind’ behind all of this. ‘I think he probably helped create some of the original viral lines, but I can‚Äôt prove that. But he was very involved,’ he said. When pressed on whether the virus was ‘actually developed here’ and that the Chinese may have been wrongfully accused of developing the virus, Redfield doubles down. ‘Well, I don‚Äôt know if they were framed, but I think there is a real possibility that the virus‚Äôs birthplace was Chapel Hill,’ Redfield said, naming the hometown of the University of North Carolina. Still no one is held to account for the biggest industrial accident in history:Trump’s Former CDC Chief Suggests US Origin for COVID: ‘Can’t Prove That’By Jess Thompson, Newsweek “When you look at the accountability for China, their accountability is not in the lab work and in the creation of the virus. Their accountability is not following the international health regulations after they realized that they had a problem. And allowing people like me at CDC to come in and to help them within 48 hours like they were obligated to, based on the treaty. But the U.S. role was substantial,” he said. “One is they funded the research both from NIH [National Institutes of Health], the State Department, USAID, and the Defense Department. All four of those agencies helped fund this research. Secondly, the scientific mastermind behind this research is a guy named Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina, and he was very involved in this research. I think he probably helped create some of the original viral lines, but I can’t prove that. But he was very involved.” Newsweek contacted Ralph Baric, the NIH, the State Department and USAID. The latter said they don’t fund “gain-of-function” research. (Though definitions of “gain of function” shrink and expand like elastic bands to fit.) Most officials who disagreed said there was “no evidence” it was man-made. Which is largely true because the CCP destroyed the samples and the digital data, in some cases, before they even admitted anyone was getting sick: “In August, September [2019], the initial cases of COVID in Wuhan began. Clearly, by the middle of September, there was a significant problem. OK, because‚Äîand I can’t remember the exact date. I think it’s in the public domain now, it was classified, but I think it was Sept. 19‚Äîbut they did three things,” Redfield said. “They changed the leadership of the lab. So it was a dual-use lab. They changed it from civilian to military. So the military was now put in charge of the lab. They did something highly irregular, which is they deleted the research sequences of COVID viruses that they had done years before. So the whole database was deleted.” If Covid was a US creation in part or full, or US funded programs were involved, this could explain why no one in the highest layers of medical power in the United States pushed for an investigation in Wuhan. And the UN was useless too. Redfield, at least admitted he personally should have pushed harder for the CDC to be allowed into the lab at Wuhan. The original interview was with a Dana Parish — 3rd Opinion podcast released on November 14. Available on X and on Spotify.
h/t Philc November 21st, 2024 | Tags: Bioweapon, Coronavirus, Gain of Function | Category: Global Warming | Print This Post | | Comments (85)November 21st, 2024 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Uncategorized | Print This Post | | Comments (141) Photo by Spiritrespect. By Jo Nova Everything just changed. For the first time in Climate Bureaucracy, Nuclear power can save the world too.Until today, only renewables had the Holy Sacred Power against Climate Change. But last night the UK and US signed a new agreement at COP29 to share “billions of pounds worth of nuclear research” in order to “decarbonize” the world. They did this backflip in such a tearing rush, they didn’t even have time to phone the Prime Ministers they were offering this bonanza to. They accidentally listed all the countries they expected to sign up, only to find the Australian government is going to an election waving the anti-nuclear flag, while the opposition demons carry the pro-nuclear pennant. Oopsie indeed. The press release was reissued, but the Labor government in Australia are now trying to explain why nuclear power is great¬† in submarines, but too expensive and slow for sites that don’t move and aren’t underwater. It’s entertaining. Apparently, Australia has too much sunshine, and thus we’re stuck with solar power. We also have the largest uranium reserves in the world, but shh. This is like energy lessons on Sesame Street.
Nuclear power is Kryptonite to RenewablesDon’t miss how big this is. Only a year ago France scandalized the world when they dropped their renewables target and fought the EU to get nuclear power accepted as a “low emissions” generator. They had to threaten to scupper the EU‚Äôs new Renewable Energy Directive unless the EU included a role for nuclear power. Renewables groupies hate nuclear power, because it’s everything they want to be but aren’t. Nukes are low emissions, reliable, proven, easy to add to a grid, and they don’t need a caravan of batteries, flywheels, hydro-dams or a 1,000 miles of high voltage lines. Obviously, if nuclear power can save the world from the Carbon Yeti, no one needs to build floating bird killers. The implication is that renewables are being quietly thrown under a bus. The Blob is backing away slowly from 30 years of¬† “free energy” propaganda. They have blinked, and switched to nuclear, the same obvious solution they could have picked from the start in Rio in 1992. Be prepared as they gaslight the world, hoping they will forget the trillions of dollars poured into the renewable energy port-a-loo. The Trump factor is already killing sacred cowsThe Blob is clearly tripping at full speed here — reacting to the shift in power with Trump’s win. Ed Miliband may be trying to try to save COP29 from terminal irrelevancy. But the Blob surely knows that the grifter game is up for renewables — now that investors are abandoning them, industries are headed to China, and electricity prices have taken off like one of Elon’s rockets. That and Google, Microsoft, Amazon and Oracle ignored their wind and solar pony showcases and rushed to get nuclear power to feed their pet AIs. For all we know, the new nuclear plan might have been written the day they released it. How much effort would it have taken for Ed Miliband to mention it to Australia’s Energy Minister (Chris-“Blackout”-Bowen). He didn’t even need to phone him. They’re¬† both at Baku. Giving away Nuclear technologyThe UK Government and the US will be giving away nuclear technology, to speed up deployment of civil nuclear power to “decarbonize industry”. The new agreement would start on March 1 2025, and is (was) expected to be signed by Canada, France, Japan, Republic of Korea, Republic of South Africa, China, Euratom [Europe], Switzerland and Australia. Thus it perfectly wedged the Australian government — which agreed to AUKUS, a nuclear sub sharing program, but is also 100% committed to a Glorious Renewable Future. The US and UK obviously assumed their AUKUS partner would leap at the chance. Instead the updated press release dropped the list of nations.
The Australian Energy Minister, clearly caught unprepared, said “No”
…and, we have too much sun.
For baffled foreigners, the next election in Australia has to be held by May 2025, and looks like it will hinge on nuclear power, which is currently banned in Australia, (largely by accident — because of an incidental Green ten-minute amendment in 1998). Our slow moving Labor diehards were already glued to the renewables-train but the opposition is making nuclear energy a key part of their platform. Polling suggests Australians are not anti-nuclear, but they are anti-electricity-bill-bonfires. So voters seem to find the idea of change appealing. Ed Miliband, of course, is still raving in a hollow rehearsed way about the unreliable transition, but it is a simple fact that the more nuclear power a grid has, the less wind and solar it wants.¬† In the new world order of Trump — The Australian Labor Party may be the last man standing on unreliable renewables.
November 20th, 2024 | Tags: Nuclear Energy, United Nations (UN) | Category: Global Warming | Print This Post | | Comments (108)November 20th, 2024 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Uncategorized | Print This Post | | Comments (52)
By Jo Nova Finally, twenty years too late, Australian leaders are talking about the galactic cost of making a spare energy grid that might, maybe, hopefully one day reduce world temperatures by one thousandth of a degree. Sadly they are still not talking about why that’s a pointless quest, why CO2 feeds the poor, warmth is good, humans emissions are irrelevant, or how science has become a turgid swamp patrolled by dead sacred cows. But it’s a start! We got the trifecta: Our car-crash energy bills, the revolution of common sense in the US, and the appearance of our own election on the horizon have set off the Air-raid sirens to wake a sleeping nation. It’s only half a trillion dollarsThe Minister for Energy says the cost of renewables by 2050 will be $122 billion (AUD). Not convinced, the Opposition commissioned a study that estimates it’s more like $650 billion. But what’s a half a trillion dollars when you have hope, faith, and a fantasy to make storms a bit nicer? It’s a horror show. The Labor Government wants every family of four to spend something like $100,000 on their wind and solar vision over the next 25 years. There goes the house deposit, the uni fees, the family holidays. There goes our lifestyle. Australian energy is twice the priceThings are so bad here in Renewable Crash Test Dummy World, that the CEO of Glencore said Australian energy costs twice as much as in the US, Canada, China and India. Glencore, is the largest coal miner in Australia, the fifth largest miner in the world, and employs about 140,000 people.¬† Gary Nagle went on to tell the Daily Telegraph¬† that Australia has a bad attitude: He argued that the negative attitude to coal in Australia was increasingly out of step with other parts of the world. ‚ÄúMany stakeholders globally are now taking a more pragmatic view about coal,‚Äù Mr Nagle said. It’s such a first world problem. Imagine being the world’s largest coal exporter nation every other year, and spending billions to undermine one of your two largest industries? How did we get here, standing on a plank, sawing the ship off? Tricked by “free energy” scamThe electricity-fashion-queens chased a vision of fairy-energy so they could win cat-walk parades at the UN, but lose in every other race that matters. The wind and sun appear to be free, but cost us the Earth to collect, and the Universe to store. All the politicians had to do was get scientists and engineers to debate in public and they would have realized that they can’t keep electricity in a shoe-box, or post it from the Simpson Desert to Sydney harbor. Instead, they employed the yes-men who agreed with the vision, and sacked, silenced or never funded the 1,000 engineers who could have told them it was stupid. That, and they all watched the ABC: Bowen, others should be ashamed of our $650bn renewables disasterRobert Gottleibsen, The Australian Since Federation, Australian ministers on both sides of the parliament have made major mistakes and misleading statements. But nothing in our history matches the looming renewable energy conversion financial disaster. The Bowen calculations are based on ‚Äúnet present value‚Äù, or NPV, which involves calculating the final cost and adjusting it back to the current dollars. But commercial infrastructure projections work on what will actually be outlaid. Frontier have now done those outlay calculations to 2050 for the governments and now the public. And of course, by 2050 all the windmills and sacred glass panels will be due to expire and we will need to find a very big hole to bury them in, and start again with the fire-hose from the bank account spraying direct to China. The only hope, as Gottleibsen says, is if the protests from farmers and country towns have glued up the plans enough that we can pull the pin before we sink any more into this pit. It only makes sense if imaginary “carbon credits” had some value: So, the state and federal governments devised a system which I would call ‚Äúrigging the books‚Äù. But they would justify it by saying carbon savings had a value which must be counted in the project. And so, a transmission network hypothetically costing $100m would be given a carbon credit, which would reduce its ‚Äúcost‚Äù substantially and justify investment. Frontier calculates that some $80bn of the $650bn came from these carbon credits. And this half a trillion doesn’t include half the country (the Western half and the Northern Territory). The price can only rise. Despite the blockbuster costs, Frontier Economics have almost certainly underestimated the true cost of converting Australia into a third-world nation. The direct costs are bad, but the secondary costs are existential. Once the factories and mines are gone, who is left to defend the green-god ideology? November 19th, 2024 | Tags: Electricity Cost, JoNova's Favourites | Category: Australia, Big-Government, Cost, Global Warming, Renewable | Print This Post | | Comments (95)November 19th, 2024 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Uncategorized | Print This Post | | Comments (68)November 18th, 2024 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Uncategorized | Print This Post | | Comments (164)November 17th, 2024 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Uncategorized | Print This Post | | Comments (124)By Jo Nova It’s a war on The BlobTrump has endorsed the man they call the anti-vax conspiracy theorist, the one who wrote the book accusing Anthony Fauci of abusing his power for thirty years. (Something Fauci has not sued him for). RFK Jr has relentlessly criticized the CDC, the FDA, and the NIH for more than twenty years, while they’ve mocked him and refused to give him the data, and now he’ll be in charge of them. This move has been telegraphed for months, and happened exactly as promised, yet shares in vaccine makers GSK, Moderna, Pfizer, and Sanofi fell¬† three to seven percent today anyhow. It’s a moment of master trolling. The far right extremist Donald Trump has put a Democrat environmentalist in charge of health and told him to “Go wild”.  https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/14/trump-administration-rfk-criticisms Despite the so-called “controversy” of this decision, everyone seems to have forgotten that only six weeks ago the former head of the CDC, Robert Redfield, admitted that Trump and Kennedy were both right. In a blockbuster Newsweek article, the man Kennedy had criticized said: “All three of the principal health agencies suffer from agency capture”. “A large portion of the¬†FDA‚Äòs budget is provided by pharmaceutical companies. NIH is cozy with biomedical and pharmaceutical companies and its scientists are allowed to collect royalties on drugs NIH licenses to pharma. ‚ÄúDonald Trump Has a Plan to Make America‚Äôs Children Healthy Again. It‚Äôs a Good One.‚Äù¬† Trump, he said, ‚Äúhas chosen exactly the only person who can do this, Robert F Kennedy, Jnr.‚Äù Staff within the CDC and FDA are so concerned about decisions to vaccinate babies, but afraid to speak up, they say ‚ÄúIt‚Äôs like a horror movie I‚Äôm being forced to watch‚Äù. Government institutions have been rotting for decades. Way back in 1969 the retired FDA Commissioner Dr Herbert Ley warned us: “The FDA protects the big drug companies… and attack those who threaten the big drug companies. People think that the FDA is protecting them. It isn’t.” ” Ley stated that he had ‚Äúconstant, tremendous, sometimes unmerciful pressure‚Äù from the drug industry” Kennedy’s core point — there were no placebo controlled studies before licensing any of the 72 childhood vaccinesAs Kennedy says in the video below: Every other medication requires that the company performs a safety trial that compares health outcomes and placebo group and a similarly situated vaccine group. My assumption was done for vaccines, but we found out that they weren’t. To simply get this answer he had to ask for the data, get publicly scorned, sue the HHS, and it took a year of litigation to get a letter confirming they were not able to locate a single trial. These are zero liability vaccines.
Kennedy is such a radical he thinks it’s a problem that nearly one in every five teenagers has fatty liver disease, one in four women are on anti-depressants, 40% of teens have a mental health diagnosis, and fifteen percent of high schoolers are on amphetamine. In other words, he’s as mainstream as anyone in health could get.
Luckily, there is a solution for Trump Derangement Syndrome: (Don’t stop at the logo, there’s more.)
Wow. The rise of AI satire. One day we will wonder how we filled 24 hour television with no AI.
November 16th, 2024 | Tags: CDC, Corruption (Medicine), FDA, R.F.Kennedy Jnr | Category: Global Warming | Print This Post | | Comments (79)November 16th, 2024 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Uncategorized | Print This Post | | Comments (77)November 15th, 2024 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Uncategorized | Print This Post | | Comments (186)By Jo Nova In the annual tournament for cash handouts, the UN now enables charity for space-faring nations with slaves. Somehow, the demands for climate reparations were led by the nation burning more coal than the rest of the world combined, and no one laughed, or wondered whether they should mention it. … a group of 77 ¬≠developing¬†countries, led by China, called for $US1.3 trillion a year in new, ¬≠additional, adequate and affordable finance to address mitigation, adaptation and loss and damage. –-Graham Lloyd, The Australian It’s almost as if the CCP invented the UN definition of “developing” as an industrial weapon.  ….OWID
Like most developing nations, two weeks ago China launched a manned spacecraft with propellants made from natural gas, and coal because it could not afford to use solar panels and windmills.  Oct 30: China puts astronauts in space aboard Shenzhou 19. For the moment, the world’s poor have to settle for using unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine (UDMH) and nitrogen tetroxide (N2O4) to get their citizens in orbit. China’s space exploration plans include bringing back the first samples from Mars, and from the near-Earth asteroid gate io верификация, and to look for ice in craters on the moon. What’s the point when we call a nation “developed” — when it wrecks its own electricity grid? November 14th, 2024 | Tags: China, Coal, UNFCCC | Category: Global Warming | Print This Post | | Comments (63)November 14th, 2024 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Uncategorized | Print This Post | | Comments (62) Photo by Colin Maynard By Jo Nova Imagine we were spending $200 million to inject pregnant women and vaccinate babies against RSV, and the real cause of many of the life threatening cases was just low vitamin D? RSV (Respiratory syncytial virus) is something nearly everyone catches by the time they are two years old. It’s like a bad cold. We’ll go on to catch it every few years for the rest of our lives, and it’s really only a problem for babies and the very old. In the last week by some odd coincidence, the BBC, ABC and CBC all have stories promoting the idea of saving babies with RSV vaccines which often cost $300 dollars each (USD). The government rollouts are being promoted with free advertising on news programs that pretend to be journalists. But not a single journalist asked the obvious question — if most babies recover just fine, what is different about the babies that struggle. Could it be that low vitamin D puts them at risk? Two studies suggest that babies with low vitamin D are, by golly, 5 to 10 times more likely to need intensive care. Vitamin D3, Cholcalciferol. Back in 2011, Belderbos et al looked at 158 babies and measured the levels of vitamin D in their cord blood and found those with low levels went on to have six times the risk of a severe lung infection compared to babies with normal levels. (Low was <50 nmol/L (20 ng/ml) and normal was 75 nmol/L (30 ng/ml). It was a small study but other studies at the time already showed vitamin D played a major role in stopping the inflammatory responses getting out of control. By 2022, another study on 125 babies showed that the amount of virus each child had didn’t predict how severe their infection would be, but their vitamin D level when they arrived in hospital did. Those with the lowest vitamin D had a ghastly 11 fold increase in odds of suffering a life threatening illness. (Again low means <50nmol/L (20ng/ml)). If 20% of babies are deficient in Vitamin D, and the 11 fold risk is not just an artefact, that means about half of the babies suffering a life threatening disease are struck down because of their deficiency. Maybe this is a gross overestimate, but where are the studies? Why aren’t our Ministers for Health launching big programs to figure it out? Even if the risk is only 50% more, these are actual babies we’re talking about. And if we get the MAD misinformation laws, will anyone even be able to ask these questions?Critics might be damaging confidence in “public health”. Crazy people might think that if our Healthcare system was trying to save babies, rather than generate profits for Big Pharma (or Big Hospitals) the first thing they would do is study and fix the vitamin D deficiency. It’s not like this is an endangered animal or an exotic disease. It’s not a stretch to say every winter babies are dying because our health departments have little interest in vitamins or saving lives cheaply. To give some idea of how many people this affects — in Ireland during winter about a third of all babies would be classified as deficient. But in sunny-country Australia, it’s hard to even find published numbers. Despite the blazing sun here, about a quarter of adults still have a deficiency, so there’s probably plenty to go around in baby-world. Where is the cost benefit comparison?The long term side effects of injecting pregnant women with a new type of therapy are completely unknown. The side effects of higher Vitamin D levels though, correlate with lower rates of cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure, asthma, heart disease, dental caries, preeclampsia, autoimmune disease, depression, anxiety, and sleep disorders.¬† Vitamin D influences over 200 genes — it is a chief meddler of molecules. Not only are deficient babies at risk of going down to RSV in a bad way, they’re at risk of autism spectrum disorder, behavioral disorders, schizophrenia, depression, and multiple sclerosis [Rogers et al]. As it happens, Vitamin D deficiency may cause as many as 40% of respiratory deaths in older people and one in six dementia cases. People deficient in Vitamin D are 14 times more likely to get severe forms of Covid. Vitamin D reduced intensive care by 80%. Despite all this low-hanging fruit littering the floor of hospitals, and vaporising dollars out of our medicare pot, Ministers apparently don‚Äôt want to know? In the UK, Ontario and Australia the vaccine is free (or will be by next winter) for pregnant women and people over 75, but you’ll have to pay to get vitamin D (which doesn’t cost much). But you’d think if we have “free $300 injections” we could have free bottles of vitamin D3 at every post office and school?¬† In Australia, the government is paying $174 million for the vaccines, they call it “investing”. They argue that otherwise about 12,000 babies will be hospitalized each winter. But it only makes sense if we don’t “accidentally” make those babies healthier and keep them out of hospital in the first place doesn’t it? And since you are wondering, yes, there is a new mRNA vaccine for RSV (by Moderna). There are also a couple of protein based ones. Where’s the informed choice? Imagine if pregnant women were also¬† given information on the risks of being low in Vitamin D? At the moment, we’re barely even studying those risks, possibly so Ministers can say “there’s no evidence there is a better alternative.” It’s like the last thing our health system wants is good data on cheap alternatives. REFERENCESBelderbos ME, Houben ML, Wilbrink B, Lentjes E, Bloemen EM, Jan L et al. Low vitamin D levels linked with RSV infection. Pediatrics 2011;127: e1513‚Äì20. – PubMed ,¬†Pediatrics, 2011 Jun;127(6):e1513-20. doi: 10.1542/peds.2010-3054. Ferolla et al. (2022)¬† Serum Vitamin D Levels and Life-Threatening Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection in Previously Healthy Infants,”¬† The Journal of Infectious Diseases in 2022.
November 13th, 2024 | Tags: Vitamin D | Category: Global Warming, Media-matters | Print This Post | | Comments (48)November 13th, 2024 | Tags: Unthreaded | Category: Uncategorized | Print This Post | | Comments (136) |
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets
   
 
|
|||
|
Copyright © 2024 JoNova - All Rights Reserved |
||||
.jpg){kind=link}
Recent Comments