Chief Stipe

FFS you really are an economic ignoramus.

Disease-X Is A High-Return Business Strategy ⋆ Brownstone Institute brownstone.org Fearistan, having done very well economically and provided its citizens a long lifespan, noticed that people were still occasionally dying in road accidents. Fearistanis were wealthy and really liked the freedom to travel. While road deaths were uncommon, any unnecessary death surely seemed worth avoiding. The road-building industry, working closely with government, came up with the idea of building 6-lane highways between cities. Soon the big cities were all connected, and experts from the University of Transport proved that the new highways had a 7 percent lower accident rate than normal roads. University modelers predicted that if 6-lane highways were built between every town in Fearistan, they would save thousands of lives. Experts predicted that they would even save more lives than were actually dying on the existing roads. The country followed the experts (they were, after all, renowned for building roads) and invested in 6-lane highways everywhere. While the country exhausted itself and most people could not afford to drive their cars anymore, they were rightly grateful that the road-builders were saving them. The near empty roads were now almost completely accident-free, proving the experts right. Eventually, the road-building industry faced a dilemma; they were running out of towns to which roads could be built. This was not what their investors needed. Then the road regulator and the road-builders met and identified an urgent need to build roads to towns that did not yet exist. Fearistan had vast areas of empty desert that were completely open to town-building. When such towns were eventually built, experts predicted an inevitable and devastating tsunami of road accidents. This would return Fearistan to the total carnage from which they had so narrowly escaped years before. The new Town-X roads (as they termed them) were brilliant examples of high-tech road construction. And everyone could see how important this work was, to keep the public safe. In public health, we follow a similarly important business model. We call it ‘Disease-X.’ Understanding pandemic risk from infectious disease Humans suffered for millennia from pandemics or ‘plagues.’ These killed up to a third of some populations. While causes in some cases remain unclear, such as the Athenian plague of 430 BC, the major plagues since Medieval times were mostly bacterial; particularly bubonic plague, cholera, and typhus. Bacterial pandemics ceased in late 19th century Europe with improved sanitation, and elsewhere after the addition of antibiotics. Most deaths from the pre-antibiotic Spanish flu outbreak in the early 20th century are also thought to be untreated secondary bacterial pneumonia. Cholera remains an intermittent marker of extreme poverty and social disruption, whilst most deaths from malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS are associated with poverty, which restricts access to effective treatment. When indigenous populations long separated from the bulk of humanity encountered carriers of smallpox and measles, the effects were also devastating. Having no inherited immunity, whole populations were decimated, particularly in the Americas, Pacific Islands, and Australia. Now the world is connected, and such mass death events don’t occur. Connectedness can be a strong defense against pandemics, contrary to what Disease X proponents claim, through its role in supporting early-age immunity and frequent boosting. These realities reflect orthodox public health but are poorly compatible with current business models. They are, therefore, increasingly ignored. A century of safety The past hundred years have seen two significant natural influenza pandemic events (in 1957-8 and 1968-9) and one major coronavirus outbreak (Covid-19) that appears to have arisen from gain-of-function research in a lab. The influenza outbreaks each killed less than currently die annually from tuberculosis, while the coronavirus outbreak was associated with mortality at average age above 75 years, with roughly 1.5 people per thousand dying globally. While the media fusses about other outbreaks, they have actually been relatively small events. SARS-1 in 2003 killed about 800 people worldwide, or less than half the number of children that die every single day from malaria. MERS killed about 850 people, and the West African Ebola outbreak killed about 11,300. Context here is important; tuberculosis kills over 1.5 million people every year while malaria kills over half a million children, and over 600,000 people die of cancer each year in the United States alone. SARS-1, MERS and Ebola may gain more media coverage than tuberculosis, but this is unrelated to actual risk. Why are we living longer? The reason behind increasing human lifespans is frequently forgotten, or ignored. As medical students were once taught, advancements came primarily through improved sanitation, better living conditions, better nutrition, and antibiotics; the same changes responsible for the reduction in pandemics. Vaccines came after most improvement had already occurred (with a few exceptions such as smallpox). While vaccines do remain an important addition, they are also of particular importance to pharmaceutical companies. They can be mandated, and together with the constant birth of children this provides a continuing, predictable, and profitable market. This is not an anti-vaccine statement. It is just a statement of fact. Facts are what health policy should be based on. So, we can be confident that, barring an intentional or accidental release of a pathogen engineered by humans, it is highly unlikely that a Medieval-style outbreak will affect anyone currently living. While poverty will reduce life expectancy, it will remain relatively high in wealthier countries. However, we can also be very confident that those half-million young children will die of malaria next year and that 1.5 million people, many of them children and young adults, will die of tuberculosis. Over 300,000 women in low-income countries will also die agonizing deaths from cervical cancer because they cannot access cheap screening. We know this, because it happens every year – it is what international public health, particularly the World Health Organization (WHO), was supposed to prioritize. The ability to monetize an illusion The Covid-19 response demonstrated how the sponsors of international public health institutions have found a way to monetize public health. This business model involves promoting abnormal responses to relatively normal viruses. It employs behavioral psychology and media campaigns to instill inappropriate fear into the public, then ‘locking them down’ – prison terminology before 2020. The public may then regain a degree of freedom (e.g., fly to visit a dying relative, or work) if they agree to take a vaccine, which in turn directly benefits the original sponsors of the scheme. The heavy public investment in Covid-19 mRNA vaccine development enabled pharmaceutical companies and their investors to reap unprecedented returns. The major public-private partnership for vaccine development for pandemics, CEPI (inaugurated at the World Economic Forum in 2017), states that “The threat of Disease-X infecting the human population, and spreading quickly around the world, is greater than ever before.” Health practitioners are quite susceptible to this propaganda (they are only human). Many also seek income from investments and patents from technologies that may help lock others down or make vaccine production quicker and cheaper. Basing their salaries and careers on loyalty to this pandemic industry, they join in vilifying and scapegoating those who speak against it. Shielded by their sponsors’ ‘greater threat than ever before’ claims, they can blind themselves to the major causes of ill health and act as if only pandemic risk matters. Why not rely on existing threats? Despite current efforts with yet another variant, Covid-19 is losing its ability to scare. Sustained fear is necessary for politicians in penetrated governments (as Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum notes) to provide this support. This business paradigm requires a continuing target. The overall aim is for the public to think that only a corporate authoritarian (fascist) nanny-state can save them from a continuing threat. Major natural outbreaks being rare, and lab escapes also infrequent, Disease-X fills this need. It provides the material for the media and politicians to work with between variant or monkeypox events. Where to from here? For the public, diversion of resources to fairyland diseases will increase mortality by diverting funding for real threats and productive areas of investment. Of course, if increasing lab leaks of engineered pathogens are expected from ongoing and future research, that would be different. But then this would have to be explained plainly and transparently, and prevention may be more effective than a very expensive cure. Disease-X is a business strategy, dependent on a series of fallacies, dressed up as an altruistic concern for human welfare. Embraced by powerful people, the world they move in accepts amoral practice in public health as a legitimate path to their version of success. If our primary aim is to channel taxpayer funding to development of biotechnologies that the public can then be mandated to buy, to their own detriment but at great benefit to the developers, then Disease-X is the road forward. This market model ensures that a relative few can concentrate wealth gained from the many, at virtually no risk to themselves. The public must decide whether they want to keep their part of this highly abusive bargain. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author. David Bell, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute, is a public health physician and biotech consultant in global health. He is a former medical officer and scientist at the World Health Organization (WHO), Programme Head for malaria and febrile diseases at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) in Geneva, Switzerland, and Director of Global Health Technologies at Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund in Bellevue, WA, USA.

Even if the National Party funding figures are wrong at least they are making an attempt to balance their spending. As opposed to Labour printing some more money to fund free dental care between 18 and 30.

Anything will be better than the Borrower Robertson. Sold the country to the money lenders. September 12 when the books are opened will be the death knell of the Labour Party for at least 2 terms. THEY will be eviscerated at the polls. Here's hoping Bob Jones's prediction that your lot will only get 20% of the vote is correct.

You really have it bad. Who do you think owns the debt generated by the Labour Government? Every "fact" you've posted has been wrong.

Do you want us to arrange support for you post the election?

You're barking at the 🌙

God help this country if they don't hold ministerial positions.

Wrong? I understated the debt figures because I cited an older figure that has since grown significantly.

About what? Turns out the debt is MORE than I said not less. Have you revised your Key Government GDP growth rate figures? Geez the reds are in for a hiding this election.

Where does the SOE/QUANGO debt get reported?

That's what McAnulty said - revenue from betting overseas on racing and sport is $38m. Sounds a bit light to me. Hell half of that is @Brodie

I read it in the NZ Herald so it possibly might not be true. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/nation-of-debt-govts-seismic-borrowing-is-coming-at-a-huge-cost/EVYPNHJPQVFHNPLLEWYUH36XJY/#:~:text=All up%2C core Crown borrowings,per cent in May 2023.

Do you honestly believe that on race and sport betting alone there is on $38m spent offshore by New Zealanders?

So you agree with the rest of my post or are you waiting for another Labour Party press release?

So McAnulty lied previously as did TABNZ about the potential returns? You can't have it both ways @holy ravioli . $130m over $4.6billion is 2.8%. Perhaps better to look at it a different way. Government bonds and Treasury bills on issue are now 75% higher than 2019 (worse if we go back to the start of this Labour Government). Core Crown borrowing has doubled in 4 years to $196billion!!!! It is projected to worsen once we see the books on 12 September. Now the kicker the interest costs are now over $6billion or 16 million a day. So $130m represents just over a week in Labours interest costs on the debt borrowed. Time for you to read and weep!!!

No deal: I Wish I Win camp not interested in Giga Kick showdown SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA – APRIL 01: Luke Nolen riding I Wish I Win wins Race 7 Furphy T J Smith Stakes in “The Star Championships Day 1” during Sydney Racing at Royal Randwick Racecourse on April 01, 2023 in Sydney, Australia. (Photo by Jeremy Ng/Getty Images) (Photo by Jeremy Ng/Getty Images) By Trenton Akers 09:03am • 31 August 2023 0 Comments A mooted match race between Australia's two best sprinters is all but over before it gets off the ground. Connections of I Wish I Win saying they are not prepared to jeopardise their campaign for The Everest for $500,000. Waikato Stud boss Mark Chittick told Racenet he informed organisers on Thursday that he was not keen on the idea, which was floated on Wednesday night as a race at Cranbourne towards the end of September under lights against last year's Everest winner Giga Kick. Wagering giants Entain, in partnership with the Cranbourne Turf Club came up with the concept and approached connections of both horses on Wednesday. "I gave them the ‘definitely not' this morning, if it was a few million we could think about it," Chittick said. "We just aren't interested at $500,000 a couple of weeks before The Everest at $20m — that is the main aim. "I don't know who came up with the idea but we wouldn't be stepping out for $500,000, when we are stepping out for $20m after it." Giga Kick resumes next Saturday in the McEwen Stakes at The Valley. So bad were I Wish I Win's legs when he was a foal, he was once compared to Forrest Gump, as they pointed at right angles. I Wish I Win won't compete in a match race against Giga Kick. Picture: Jeremy Ng—Getty Images. Chittick knew he would never make the sales so elected to race him himself after a series of natural remedies to get him right. Wearing the Waikato colours, I Wish I Win has beaten the odds at every turn in his career and has established himself as one of Australia's best sprinters after winning the Group 1 TJ Smith in the autumn. Chittick will make the trip to Melbourne to watch his superstar on Saturday in the Group 1 Memsie Stakes, as he begins his trek to The Everest. "He is all good, we are going to go over and watch him, we were over there doing some stuff for (Everest slot holders) Entain three or four weeks ago," he said. He is a $3.60 favourite for the race, ahead of Mr Brightside at $4.20.

That's a lie. You can't blame the Key Government for the GFC and the 2008 negative growth. Now we have an out of control Reserve Bank working to the letter of Robertson's memo regarding QE. They've printed at least $150 billion of debt.

Isn't that exactly what Labour have promised TABNZ and ENTAIN?

It's worse than the odds changing in the last few seconds. I've seen gallops races run 600m before the tote pools are adjusted. I can't understand why with modern computer systems the odds don't adjust in real time.

What disguise did you wear? Obviously left the red star cap behind.

In Davos for a World Economic Forum.

Been like it for years. If you keep an eye on the tote odds you will notice that they reduce closer to the Fixed Odds after the horses have started. Many theories why - time lag to balance overseas bets and or the bookies/computer lay off at the last second.

Entain's share price falls after BetMGM's UK announcement www.gamblinginsider.com MGM Resorts recently announced it will be launching its BetMGM operations in the UK without its US counterpart Entain. Entain's share price dropped by 5% following BetMGM’s UK announcement. In 2021, MGM sought to acquire Entain for £8.1bn ($10.3bn), but the bid was rejected. However, now that MGM has entered the UK without using Entain’s tech, it will be using its LeoVegas brand to handle the casino operations, while Kambi will power BetMGM’s UK sportsbook. BetMGM was initially launched as a collaborative product between MGM Resorts and Entain in North America. MGM Resorts will continue to operate the BetMGM brand in the US and Canada, using the technology and platform provided by Entain. As of the time of writing, Entain’s share price is £11.57 compared to 10 July, the day that the company released its H1 report, when the share price was at £13.80. This drop represents a 16% decrease in just eight days. Furthermore, in the past two days, since the launch of BetMGM in the UK, the share price fell from £12.33 to the current £11.57 - this is a representative of a 6% fall in just two days. Despite it seeming peculiar to not use Entain’s technology for its UK operations, a spokesperson from Entain commented: "MGM has been operating a UK online casino for some time under the LeoVegas brand." Before adding: “We do not consider that this new launch will make any impact on our business or indeed the market."