Weather and climate forecasting, a difficult science to master.

An old British saying used to be: “Everybody complains about the weather, but nobody does anything about it.” We may not be able to do much about the weather, but at least we can try to save the world from the “Climate Crisis”. The term used to be Climate Change, but with the new administration the term has been upgraded.

When I grew up a long time ago in Sweden the old folks used to say “If you make it through February, you will make it another year.” This was of course before electricity and central heating”.

There is a saying in Norway: “There is no bad weather, only bad clothes.” Here is an example, the souwester” It works well in freezing rain.

The long term weather forecast for February, issued January 21 by the weather channel looked like this:

Great, no need to buy that extra sweater, and Texans can go another season with thin t-shirts and designer pre-torn jeans.

But the weather forecast three weeks later looked like this:

But the windmills don’t work in freezing rain, so the electric grid was challenged when over half of the windmills froze just as the demand spiked. Normally coal and natural gas electrical plants would have kicked in, but many of the coal plants had been shut down due to environmental regulations, and the emergency request to restart them were denied due to environmental concerns. The natural gas plants ran full bore until the natural gas pressure in the pipelines started dropping below safe levels. This lead to rotating power-outs to preserve gas line pressure. But in the wisdom of the authorities the gas line pressure compressors had been switched from natural gas to electricity (environmental concerns), so if the compressors were in an area of electric blackout, there went the gas pressure, causing a chain reaction, and the whole power grid came within hours of a total collapse. Only nuclear power hummed along as if nothing had happened, but nuclear power is a base load and cannot increase the power above a certain level. Back in 2017, Secretary of Energy Rick Perry proposed paying Coal and Nuclear Power Stations to keep at least 90 days worth of coal  onsite, for disaster resilience. At the time the resilience proposal was widely criticized as being a thinly disguised Trump scheme to pump government money into the coal and nuclear industries. So the plan was rejected by the bureaucracy. But in hindsight, a bit more resilience might have saved Texas from days of painful electricity blackouts, and even deaths.

The bill for these monumental miscalculations is yet to be paid. The cost of electricity for these 2 weeks off horror is yet to be paid. The Texans who were fortunate enough to have power have to pay the bill for intermittent electricity at a cost of two dollars per kilowatt-hour. A retired veteran on social security got a bill for over 16,000 dollars for part of February.

Since weather is so hard to predict, do we have any hope of being able to predict future climate? People keep trying. And they keep developing climate models. Here is a chart of most of them:

Not much has changed since this chart was first published. While the IPCC confidence in their climate models keep increasing, so does the difference between model prediction and actual temperature.

Climate finance continues to be the central issue in how the global community proposes to follow through with implementation of the Paris Agreement, which Joe Biden has decided to rejoin by executive fiat. This is in the opinion of his advisors, such as John Kerry appropriate in the context of the last IPCC report showing a USD 1.6-3.8 trillion energy system investment requirement to keep warming within a 1.5 degree Celsius scenario to avoid the most harmful effects of climate change (IPCC, 2018).

Does this still make sense?

Anyone?

 

 

Clouds, water vapor and CO2 – why nearly all climate models fail. – and a Limerick.

 

Fear spreads up on Capitol Hill

The Climate change will break their will.

AOC: In Ten years

our world disappears!

She acts as a New Green Deal shill.

Quote from Alexandria Occasio-Cortez in January 2019: “Millennials and Gen Z and all these folks that come after us are looking up, and we’re like, ‘The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change, and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?’ ” she said.

I beg to differ.

We live in only one world. As a concerned citizen I realize we have immense environmental challenges before us, with water pollution; from plastics in the ocean, excess fertilizer in the rivers, poison from all kinds of chemicals, including antibiotics, birth control and other medicines flushed down the toilet after going through our bodies, animals fed antibiotics, pest control, weed control and so on. Increasing CO2 is not one of the problems, it will in fact help with erosion control, and allow us to feed more people on less agricultural land with proper management, and require less fertilizer and water to do so. In fact, proper water management is a larger problem, with some rivers no longer even reaching the ocean. All water is already spoken for, especially in the 10 to 40 degrees latitude, where most people live.

Allow me to be somewhat technical and give the background to why I know we will never experience the thermal runaway they are so afraid of.

Many years ago I worked at Hewlett Packard on an Atomic Absorption Detector. It was a huge technical success but a commercial failure, as it was too expensive to use for routine applications. However it found a niche and became the detector of choice when dismantling the huge nerve gas stockpiles remaining from the cold war. I was charged with doing the spectrum analysis and produce the final data from the elements. One day two salesmen came and tried to sell us  a patented device that could identify up to 21 different elements with one analysis. They had a detector that divided the visual band into 21 parts, and bingo, with proper, not yet “fully developed” software you could now analyze up to 21 elements with one gas chromath analysis. What could be better? We could only analyze correctly four or five elements simultaneously. It turns out the elements are absorbing in the same wavelength bands, scientifically speaking they are not orthogonal, so software massaging can only go so far. It turned out that the promised new detector was inferior to what we already had and could only quantify three or 4 elements at the most.

In the atmosphere the two most important greenhouse gases are water vapor and CO2 with methane a distant third. Water vapor is much more of a greenhouse gas everywhere except near the tropopause high above the high clouds and near the poles when the temperature is below 0 F, way below freezing. A chart shows the relationship between CO2 and water vapor:

Image result for h20 and co2 as greenhouse gases

Source: http://notrickszone.com/2017/07/31/new-paper-co2-has-negligible-influence-on-earths-temperature/

Even in Barrow, Alaska water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas. Only at the South Pole (And North Pole) does CO2 dominate (but only in the winter).

All Climate models take this into account, and that is why they all predict that the major temperature increase will occur in the polar regions with melting icecaps and other dire consequences. But they also predict a uniform temperature rise from the increased forcing from CO2 and the additional water vapor resulting from the increased temperature.

This is wrong on two accounts. First, CO2 and H2O gas are nor orthogonal, that means they both absorb in the same frequency bands. There are three bands where CO2 absorbs more than H2O in the far infrared band, but other than that H2O is the main absorber. If H2O is 80 times as common as CO2 as it is around the equator, water vapor is still the dominant absorber, and the amount of CO2 is irrelevant.

Secondly gases cannot absorb more than 100% of the energy available in any given energy wavelength! So if H2O did absorb 80% of the energy and CO2 absorbed 50%, the sum is not 130%, only 90%. (0.8 + 0.5×0,2 or 0.5 + 0.8×0.5). In this example CO2 only adds one quarter of what the models predict.

How do I know this is true? Lucky for us we can measure what increasing CO2 in the atmosphere has already accomplished. For a model to have credibility it must be tested with measurements, and pass the test. There is important evidence suggesting the basic story is wrong. All greenhouse gases work by affecting the lapse rate in the tropics. They thus create a “hot spot” in the tropical troposphere. The theorized “hot spot” is shown in the early IPCC publications. (Fig A)

Fig. B shows observations. The hotspot is not there. If the hotspot is not there, the models must be wrong. So what is wrong with the models? This was reported in 2008 and the models still assume the additive nature of greenhouse gases, even to the point when more than 100% of the energy in a given band is absorbed.

How about Methane? Do not worry, it absorbs nearly exclusively in the same bands as water vapor and has no measurable influence on the climate.

But it will get warmer at the poles. That will cause melting of the ice-caps? Not so fast. When temperature rises the atmosphere can hold more water vapor, so it will snow more at higher latitudes. While winter temperatures will be higher with more snowfall, this will lower the summer temperatures until the extra snow has melted. And that is what is happening in the Arctics

As we can see from this picture, the winters were about 5 degrees warmer, but starting from late May through early August temperatures were lower. It takes time to melt all the extra snow that fell because of the less cold air, able to contain more water vapor.

These are my suggestions

  1. Do not worry about increasing CO2 levels. The major temperature stabilizer is clouds, and they will keep the earth from overheating by reflecting back into space a large amount of incoming solar radiation. Always did, and always will, even when the CO2 concentration was more than 10000 ppm millions of years ago. Ice ages will still come, and this is the next major climate change, maybe 10000 years from now, probably less.
  2. Clean up rivers, lakes and oceans from pollution. This is a priority.
  3. Limit Wind turbine electric energy to areas not populated by large birds to save the birds. Already over 1.3 million birds a year are killed by wind turbines, including the bald and Golden Eagles that like to build their aeries on top of wind turbines.
  4. Do not build large solar concentration farms. They too kill birds.
  5. Solar panels are o.k. not in large farms, but distributed on roofs to provide backup power.
  6. Exploit geothermal energy in geologically stable areas.
  7. Where ever possible add peak power generation and storage capacity to existing hydroelectric power plants by pumping back water into the dams during excess capacity.
  8. Add peak power storage dams, even in wildlife preserves. The birds and animals don’t mind.
  9. Develop Thorium based Nuclear Power. Russia, China, Australia and India are ahead of us in this. Streamline permit processes. Prioritize research. This should be our priority, for when the next ice age starts we will need all the CO2 possible.
  10. Put fusion power as important for the future but do not rush it, let the research and development be scientifically determined. However, hybrid Fusion -Thorium power generation should be developed.
  11. When Thorium power is built up and has replaced coal and gas fired power plants, then is the time to switch to electric cars, not before.
  12. Standard Nuclear Power plants should be replaced by Thorium powered nuclear plants, since they have only 0,01% of the really bad long term nuclear waste.
  13. Start thinking about recovering CO2 directly from the air and produce aviation fuel. This should be done as Thorium power has replaced coal and gas fired power plants.
  14. This is but a start, but the future is not as bleak as all fearmongers state.

Hydroxychloroquine + Zinc + Azithromycine + maybe vitamin D still the best treatment if administered early, not experimental vaccine still under medical trial (you will be tracked for 2 years).

This is getting interesting. I have been following the Hydroxychloroquine saga since President Trump started promoting it, and I heard from a medical receptionist how dangerous it was. Even Neil Cavuto of FOX news interviewed a doctor that stated it was very dangerous and Cavuto summarized ‘If you take this YOU WILL DIE”. Then on July 27 a group of medical personnel  gathered outside the Supreme Court for an impromptu press conference touting the benefits of Hydroxychloroquine. It was viewed 20 million times in a few hours and then promptly taken down by you-tube, Facebook, Instagram and twitter, among others.

There was a “Riot” on December 6 on the Capitol grounds, and a lot of people were basically invited to demonstrate in the Rotunda. One of the people that went in to the rotunda after being more or less ushered in was Dr. Simone Gold. (seen below). She used a bull horn for a short while , not to incite violence, but to try to inform people of the benefits of early treatments of the Wuhan virus and the unknowns consequences of the experimental vaccines available.

By being in the Rotunda on January 6 she is now a designated domestic terrorist according to most of the mainstream media.

Here is Dr. Simone Gould holding a seminar about the Wuhan virus and what we can do about it.

I ask you to see the whole video and draw your own conclusions. Does she seem to you to be a domestic terrorist as most of the media and prominent politicians assert, or is she trying to help bring forth the truth?

If you agree with her, you can sign this petition https://stopmedicaldiscrimination.org/

Biden stops Keystone XL construction at great environmental cost.

Newly elected Joe Biden has decided to stop building the Keystone XL pipeline, thus satisfying the environmentalists that want to wean us off our dependency on carbon based products, such as fuel, food and fertilizer. The arguments for denying the decision are nearly exclusively political, while the arguments to build the pipeline are concerns for our national security, economy and the environment.

Here is the deal:

Canada has the tar-sands and is extracting the oil. This was not our decision. If we don’t buy the oil, China will.

We export refined products to the Caribbean islands, which by the way have a larger carbon footprint per person than the U.S. This is good business, since the islands are too small to have a refinery of their own.

It takes more energy to run a refinery up north in a cold climate than in hot, humid Baytown, Texas.

The last time a major oil refinery was built in the U.S was 1976. A small refinery was built in 1993, in Valdez, Alaska. The  US. regulatory climate is hostile to refineries. Warren Buffett bought Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad in February 2010 and paid 44 Billion dollars for it. The railroad paid Berkshire Hathaway 2.25 Billion in dividends during the first 13 months. Warren Buffet bought the railroad after President Obama took office, since he nixed the pipeline the first time.

Right now the crude oil is transported from the Athabasca tar sands to Houston mostly by Warren Buffet’s Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC railroad. It is among U.S. and Canadian railroads that did stand to benefit from the decision to reject TransCanada Corp. (TRP)’s Keystone XL oil pipeline permit.
With modest expansion, railroads can handle all new oil produced in western Canada through 2030, according to an analysis of the Keystone proposal by the U.S. State Department.
https://lenbilen.com/2012/01/25/warren-buffet-profiting-from-working-on-the-railroad/
The cost of transporting the oil is about #14 dollars per barrel, much of it the cost of burning diesel fuel, generating CO2. The pipe-line can do the job for about seven dollars per barrel, much of it capital costs, some of it already spent.
We can see what happens when transporting crude oil: https://lenbilen.com/2013/07/07/ttain-derailment-in-quebec-and-keystone-xl-pipeline-a-limerick/

Warren Buffet is a major Democratic political player; he will again have frequent access to the White House. Last year the Warren Buffet organizations donated 58 million dollars to the Biden presidential campaign.

Sarah Palin once succinctly coined the phrase: “This is Crony Capitalism.”

By not importing oil from Canada the total carbon footprint will increase. We lose, and Canada loses. (I am not concerned that the CO2 is increasing, but that a valuable natural resource is unnecessary depleted.) Now it turns out that Canada has left the Kyoto Protocol but has joined the Paris accord, so they have to export the crude oil to countries that still can expand their fossil fuel burning, such as China, but they would rather export to the U.S.

So why is Joe Biden against the Keystone XL pipeline? Here are seven possibilities:

1. Like Obama, Joe Biden is a true believer that ”this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal”.

2. Joe wants to deliberately wreck our economy to create a more fair society of shared sacrifices, refuses to have an energy policy that will create jobs, but will support protest movements and foment unrest.

3. Joe is acting on orders from Global Governance people that do want U.S. to be totally dependent on international law and U.N. mandates.

4. Joe wants to show leadership in implementing the Paris Climate Conference 2015, and its associated treaty.

5. Joe Biden wants to show leadership on something, like touting the “breakthrough” agreement with China, where China is allowed to emit six times as much CO2 as the U.S. by the year 2030.

6. The real reason? Like Obama, Joe is fully bought and paid for, this time by China. The old reason: https://lenbilen.com/2014/02/14/the-real-reason-obama-wont-approve-the-keystone-xl-pipeline/

7. Joe is half insane and surrounded by bad advisors.

This is the best I can do to explain the reasons for this decision.

Vitamin D as COVID-19 fighter, a most important virus fighter!

The organization Grassroots health put out the results of 212 people that had the COVID-19 virus, roughly 50 each having a critical or severe or normal or mild outcome. The results were stunning. Nearly all with a high level of vitamin D level in the blood had a mild outcome, as opposed to those with a vitamin D deficiency.

Up to now vitamin D deficiency has mostly been a concern for the people with the following risk factors, but not as a virus fighter.

  • Osteoporosis or other bone disorder
  • Previous gastric bypass surgery
  • Age; vitamin D deficiency is more common in older adults.
  • Obesity
  • Lack of exposure to sunlight
  • Having a darker complexion
  • Difficulty absorbing fat in your diet

It should be fairly simple and fast to expand this analysis to a larger sample of people that also include people with antibodies to COVID-19 but never showed any symptoms.

If this holds true, we did the exact wrong thing by keeping people indoors in hope to slow the spread. Instead we should have encouraged people to be outdoors as much as possible, still practicing hygiene and social distance, give vitamin D to all over 65 (4000 IU), to all obese and people of dark complexion.

This is by no means the only suggestion, but it is one more weapon in the arsenal to combat this virus.

An Indonesian study indicates the link between Vitamin D Deficiency and death is even stronger:

 

It is correct special attention should be given African Americans and Native Americans, since they have a much higher rate of Vitamin D deficiency.

Conclusion: The AMA should start paying attention to food supplements and issue recommendations for Vitamin D that it is an  important therapeutic and prophylactic against COVID-19.

This also means that forbidding outdoor dining, forcing people to eat indoors in their own homes makes matters worse. This is also confirmed by the statistics of lockdown states, they do worse after lockdown than before. In contrast, states with less confinement are nearly all well past their peak.

 

 

Hydroxychloroquine should be sold over the counter in limited quantities, It is safer than Aspirin, Tylenol and Benadryl. Sign the petition

We are making great strides in the fight against the corona-virus. In the beginning the disease had an 8,67% death rate. It is now down to 2.19%.

The corresponding numbers for U.S.A :  7.02%  death rate at the beginning of the disease. Ir is now down to 1.53%, a 78% decrease. With unrestricted availability to take HCQ+ we can reduce the death rate even further.

These are the numbers for every state.

State      Death rate max   7 day death rate now

Connecticut          9.62%     3.22%

New Hampshire  9.33%     5.2%

Missouri                8.96%     0.86% Prescribing hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, and azithromycin for COVID-19 prophylactic is discouraged and not recommended. Prescribers include the diagnosis code or diagnosis with the prescription. Prescribers should consider limiting the amount prescribed.

Pennsylvania       8.81%     1.63%

Indiana                 8.77%     1.39%

New Jersey           8.73%     4.23%

New York State    8.64%     1.79%    Positive COVID-19 test result must be documented as part of the prescription.•Prohibits use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for experimental or prophylactic use.

Michigan               8.58%     0.92%

South Carolina     8.52%     3.09%

Kansas                   7.69%     1.30% Strongly encourages vigilance in processing new prescriptions for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine •Recommends that if used, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine should be restricted to patients who are admitted to hospitals with COVID-19 infections.•Urges pharmacists to consider that patients currently taking hydroxychloroquine for FDA-approved indications (lupus, rheumatoid arthritis) could be affectedby increased prescribing and that supplies should be monitored by pharmacists for medication availability.•Recommends reaching out to prescribers to verify COVID-19 diagnosis.

West Virginia       7.68%     1.1%

Arizona                 7.62%     3.08%

Nevada                  7.53%     1.55% Restricts the dispensing of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine. The patient must have a diagnosis of COVID-19 and the diagnosis is indicated on the prescription;

D.C.                         7.45%     0.86%

Oklahoma             7.29%     0.65%

Massachusetts     7.24%     4.55%

New Mexico         7.14%     1.97%

Maine                    7%           2%

Mississippi           7.06%     1.62%

Wisconsin            6.97%      0.93%

Colorado               6.96%     1.28%

Rhode Island       6.92%      0.88%

Alabama               6.61%     1.21%

Delaware              6.55%      2%

Maryland              6.16%     1.10%

Washington          5.69%     1.10%

Georgia                 5.24%     1.23%

Kentucky              5.02%     0.93% Prescriptions for chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, mefloquine, and azithromycin may only be dispensed if: The prescription bears a written diagnosis from the prescriber consistent with its use;

Ohio                       4.97%     1.93% Prescriptions for either presumptive positive patients or prophylactic use of chloroquineor hydroxychloroquine related to COVID-19 is strictly prohibited unless the drugs are for use as part of a documented institutional review board-approved clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the drugs to treat COVID-19

California             4.82%     1.47%

Arkansas              4.70%     1.20%

Oregon                  4.66%    1.76%

Illinois                  4,66%    1.12%

North Carolina   4.47%     1.27% Rule applies to hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, ribavirin, darunavir, and azithromycin;•For above drugs, a pharmacist can only fill or refill a prescription if that prescription bears a written diagnosis from the prescriber consistent with its evidence for use;•If a patient has been diagnosed with COVID-19, any prescription of a drug listed above for the treatment of COVID-19 must: Indicate on the prescription that the patient has been diagnosed with COVID-19

Louisiana             4.18%     1.85% The boardoriginally issued an emergency rule to limit the dispensing of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine to address shortages,but rescinded the rule after it received information about a significant donation and distribution of the drugs from the manufacturer, along with the removal of the drug from FDA’s drug shortage list.•It now encourages each pharmacy to exercise professional discretion to dispense limited quantities of the drug as appropriate

Florida                  4.02%     1.75%

Montana               4%          1.4%

Idaho                     3.70%     1.21%  No prescription for chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine may be dispensed except if the following apply: The prescription bears a written diagnosis from the prescriber consistent with evidence for its use;

Vermont                3.6%       1%

Texas                     3.60%     2.56% No prescription or medication order for chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, mefloquine or azithromycin may be dispensed or distributed unless all the following apply:oThe prescription or medication order bears a written diagnosis from the prescriber consistent with the evidence for its use; The prescription or medication order is limited to no more than a 14-day supply unless the patient was previously established on the medication; and no refills may be permitted unless a new prescription or medication order is furnished

North Dakota       3.6%       0.8%

Minnesota            3.55%     0.70%

Tennessee            3.50%      0,71%

Alaska                   3.5%        1%

Iowa                      2.95%      1.27%

Hawaii                  2.8%        0.5%

Virginia                2.76%      1.40%

Utah                      1.66%      0.97%

South Dakota       1.1%       1.25%

Wyoming              1%           0.5%

Nebraska              0.82%     0.72%

For all states, June 15, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revoked the emergency use authorization (EUA) that allowed for chloroquine phosphate and hydroxychloroquine sulfate donated to the Strategic National Stockpile to be used to treat certain hospitalized patients with COVID-19 when a clinical trial was unavailable, or participation in a clinical trial was not feasible. The agency determined that the legal criteria for issuing an EUA are no longer met. Based on its ongoing analysis of the EUA and emerging scientific data, the FDA determined that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are unlikely to be effective in treating COVID-19 for the authorized uses in the EUA.

By the time the patient is hospitalized it may be too late to have any benefit of HCQ+ treatment. It works best as a prophylactic or taken as soon as the telltale sign occurs, loss of taste and smell, shortness of breath, etc. Then is the time to start the HCQ + Zn + Zmax treatment, even before a positive diagnosis is established.

Release HCQ to be sold as over the counter medication. For LUPUS and rheumatorial arthritis patients it is even prescribed to pregnant women and nursing mothers. It is that safe.

Here is the petition to the WhiteHouse to release it to over the counter dispensation. (19287 signed so far)

 

The case for Thorium. 27. With electric cars and trucks replacing combustion engine cars, only Thorium Nuclear power is the rational solution to provide the extra electric power needed.

It seems that electric powered vehicles are finally taking off, and sales are ready to explode. The Tesla electric car company capitalization value has increased eight-fold in the last half year, and is now worth more on paper than GM, Ford, Chrysler and Honda combined .

If CO2 is the great driver of environmental destruction, never mind that the increased CO2 is feeding 2 billion more people than before thanks to the greening effect of increased CO2, then we should work at warp speed to develop the additional electricity needs that will arise with all electric vehicles coming to market needing charging stations.

It makes no sense to build more coal and gas fired electric plants, replacing one CO2 generator with another, the best wind power sites are already taken, waste, geothermal and solar power is still a pipe dream, so, what to do?

Conventional nuclear power is limited and requires a very long and extensive approval process, partly due to the not in my backyard regulation attitude.  We are already the world’s largest importer of Uranium, and the world’s supply is to a large extent controlled by non allies. .

How do you eliminate all Coal and natural gas electric plants? Look at the U.S usage: (Last  year 2016)

Image result for electric production"

We can see that renewable energy will not suffice. The only real answer is to expand nuclear electricity, but we are already the world’s biggest importer of Uranium. (The Uranium One deal, when we sold 20% of our Uranium mining rights to Russia did not help, but we were in trouble even before ). No, the only real answer is to rapidly develop molten salt Thorium nuclear electricity production. They do not require water for cooling, so they can be placed anywhere where additional capacity is needed, eliminating rapid expansion of the electric grid.

Let us go to it now!

The case for Thorium. 15. No need for evacuation zones, Liquid Fuel Thorium Reactors can be placed near urban areas.

No need for evacuation zones, can be placed near urban areas. Molten Salt Thorium reactors operate at atmospheric pressure and have a very high negative temperature coefficient, so there is no risk for a boil-over. They are easily made earthquake-safe and no pressure vessel is needed. This will greatly simplify the approval process, no need for elaborate evacuation plans have to be developed. Since the Three Mile Island accident there was a thirty year gap in approvals for new nuclear plants. The “not in my backyard ” mentality reigned supreme, and delay and denial was the rule of the years. But the lawyers still got their share, leading to escalating cost for new nuclear power. In the early days of nuclear power France took the approach of building some of their nuclear plants near the Belgian and German border, so they only had to develop half of an  evacuation plan, leaving the other half to their understanding neighbors. It also leads to placing the nuclear plants where there is the least resistance, not where they are needed the most, adding to the strain on the electric grid. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors have one additional advantage. They do not need access to water, so they can be placed even in desert areas.

Hydroxychloroquine + Zinc is the answer? Check the death rates of nine countries that use it.

This is a very interesting chart:

But wait. Not so fast. These countries have a younger population, and the death rate is much lower for younger people. This chart tells it all.

The death rate doubles for every 8 years as you age or about 9% per year. The world median age is 30.4 years. So let the world death rate be the norm

World death rate as of May 21 is 6.42% of diagnosed cases.

Turkey: Death rate 2.77%, median age 30.9, adjusted death rate 2.64%

South Korea: Death rate 2.37%, median age 30.9, adjusted death rate 2.26%

Malaysia: Death rate 1.61%, median age 28.5, adjusted death rate 1.91%

Senegal: Death rate 1.13%, median age 18.8, adjusted death rate 3.00%

Costa Rica: Death rate 1.11%, median age 31.3, adjusted death rate 1.02%

United Arab emirates: Death rate 0.88%, median age 30.9, adjusted death rate 0.84%

Bahrain: Death rate 1.43%, median age 32.3, adjusted death rate 1.20%

Morocco: Death rate 2.70%, median age 29.3, adjusted death rate 2.92%

Russia: Death rate 1.00%, median age 30.9, adjusted death rate 0.95%

Taking the average, not adjusted for the size of the populations we get the average adjusted death rate for countries, where people are taking HCQ + Zinc when diagnosed positive, is 1.89%.

This means that the risk of death is reduced by a factor of 3.4 if HZQ + Zinc is taken as early as possible after a positive diagnosis for coronavirus!

These 9 countries are living proof of it. Why are we not implementing it today?

 

 

 

Coronavirus death rates and trends for the five worst states versus the five best states. Look at Michigan versus South Dakota.

The trend of the five worst and the five best states of Covid-19 death rates versus percent of population tested:

State                     death rate               trend   percentage of population tested

.                             May 8      May 11  up/down     May 8   May 11

  1.  Michigan              9.48%        9.64%    up                2.4%       3.1%

2.  Connecticut      8,87%        8.91%   up                3.1%        3.7%

3.  New York          7.80%        7.80%     __                 5.6%      6.2%

4.  Lousiana           7.23%       7.32%     up                 4.4%      4.9%

5.  New Jersey       6.55%       6.71%     up                 4.4%      4.9%

….

46. Tennessee         1.66%      1.61%    down             3.4%       4.0%

47. Nebraska           1.17%       1.16%  down             2.0%        2.5%

48. Wyoming           1.08%      1.05%   down            2.1%         2.3%

49. Utah                    1.03%       1.06%  up                 4.3%          4.7%

50. South Dakota     0.98%      0.94%   down            2.4%         2.7%

Beside from the obvious fact that the five worst states are all run by Democrat Governors and the five best state are all run by Republicans, these are my observations:

The five worst states show a rising death rate, even though the test rate is increasing. The five best state show a falling death rate, which is to be expected as testing is increased.

Michigan has a Detroit problem. The COVID-19 death rate there is over 10%, many got turned away from the few hospitals and were sent home without first being tested. Governor Gretchen Whitmer seems more interested in controlling the healthy population than to protect the vulnerable.

Why Connecticut is second on the list I don’t know, but Hartford County has a problem with a death rate over 10%. It is also next to New York, where the death rate in New York City still is either 7.92% or 10.7% if you include probable deaths.

The problem with New York is that Governor Cuomo ordered nursing home facilities to accept COVID-19 patients, they are not set up to handle highly contagious patients, and so the infection and death rate among the most vulnerable population skyrocketed. One interesting statistics is that two thirds of all New York COVID-19 cases were from people staying home, not going out at all.

The problem with Louisiana is that it let Mardi Gras proceed, people came, did their thing and went back to where they came from, often to under-served areas.

New Jersey is next to New York. Need I say more?

On the other hand, the five best states concentrated their efforts to protect the at risk people, concentrating on hygiene and social distancing rather than trying to micromanage the healthy population. There seems to be no improvement in the outcome by adding testing. In addition the death rate among the five worst states is still rising, whereas the death rate in the five best states is declining.

Governor Kristi Noem of South Dakota, the state with the best outcome of all states so far did order a clinical test of using the combination Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin + Zinc for five days and that may be the reason the death rate is less than 1 percent. Unfortunately the FDA is concerned that hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine are being used inappropriately to treat non-hospitalized patients for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) or to prevent that disease.  Quote:” We authorized their temporary use only in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 when clinical trials are not available, or participation is not feasible, through an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA).  These medicines have a number of side effects, including serious heart rhythm problems that can be life-threatening.”

Here is my suggestion: Issue an executive order opening up a clinical study in the effectiveness of COVID-19 treatment with Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin + Zinc for five days, and open it up to any qualified Physician or Nurse Practitioner who want to participate. They do the heart test, check for other ailments and report the results to a central data base and a follow up report, and even if it is not a double blind study, once you have a million or so results the FDA can approve the medication. In the meantime over 90% of the patients were getting better, and hopefully nobody had given it to patients with severe preexisting heart conditions. The risk is minimal. It is already approved for Lupus, Rheumatism and Malaria, and the same protocol should apply here.

It is very important the drugs are administered as early as possible. By the time the patient is admitted to a hospital it may be too late. Especially if the patient is already on a ventilator it may do more harm than good.

Why is this study even necessary? This medication is too cheap, it is generic, so no pharmaceutical company is willing to foot the bill on something unprofitable, so it must be done by a university or through a government agency.

It is not that daring a thing to do. Here is a result of a COVID-19 study with more than 6,200 physicians in 30 countries.

  • The three most commonly prescribed treatments among COVID-19 treaters are 56% analgesics, 41% Azithromycin, and 33% Hydroxychloroquine
  • Hydroxychloroquine usage among COVID-19 treaters is 72% in Spain, 49% in Italy, 41% in Brazil, 39% in Mexico, 28% in France, 23% in the U.S., 17% in Germany, 16% in Canada, 13% in the UK and 7% in Japan
  • Hydroxychloroquine was overall chosen as the most effective therapy among COVID-19 treaters from a list of 15 options (37% of COVID-19 treaters)
    • 75% in Spain, 53% Italy, 44% in China, 43% in Brazil, 29% in France, 23% in the U.S. and 13% in the U.K.
  • The two most common treatment regimens for Hydroxychloroquine were:
    • (38%) 400mg twice daily on day one; 400 mg daily for five days
    • (26%) 400mg twice daily on day one; 200mg twice daily for four days
  • Outside the U.S., Hydroxychloroquine was equally used for diagnosed patients with mild to severe symptoms whereas in the U.S. it was most commonly used for high risk diagnosed patients
  • Globally, 19% of physicians prescribed or have seen Hydroxychloroquine prophylactically used for high risk patients, and 8% for low risk patients.

And this is a very recent tweet from president Donald Trump, without which frequent and persistent recommendation this drug combination would have already been approved, as it is in at least 12 other countries.

  • Hcq