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. 22. With a Molten Salt Reactor, accidents like the Three Mile Island disaster will not happen.

With a Molten Salt Reactor, accidents like the Three Mile Island disaster will not happen. Ah yes, I remember it well, March 28, 1979. We lived in South East Pennsylvania at the time, well outside the evacuation zone, but a fellow engineer at work took off, took vacation and stayed at a hotel in western Virginia over the weekend fearing a nuclear explosion. My wife went to a retreat just outside the evacuation zone, and none of them so much as heard of any problem, there never was any evacuation. There was concern though, and a disaster it was indeed with a partial meltdown of the core, rendering the installation a total loss, leaving a big, forever cleanup bill. The cost so far has totaled over 2 billion dollars.

A combination of personnel error, design deficiencies and component failures caused the TMI accident, which permanently changed both the nuclear industry and the NRC. Public fear and distrust increased, NRC’s regulations and oversight became broader and more robust, and management of the plants was scrutinized more carefully. Careful analysis of the accident’s events identified problems and led to permanent and sweeping changes in how NRC regulates its licensees – which, in turn, has reduced the risk to public health and safety.

The side effect of increased regulation is increased cost and delay in construction of new nuclear plants. Eventually, more than 120 reactor orders were cancelled, and the construction of new reactors ground to a halt. Of the 253 nuclear power reactors originally ordered in the United States from 1953 to 2008, 48 percent were canceled.

Another side effect of the TMI accident is fear of trying a different and safer approaches, since they conflict with existing regulations. The next Nuclear power reactor came online in 2016, but it is the same type of boiling water reactor as before, not a Molten Salt Thorium reactor with its inherent radically increased safety.

COVID response for Sweden and Michigan. Which response is better?

Of all the states in America Michigan is the state that is most like Sweden.

Michigan has a population of 10 million, Sweden 10.2 million

Median age in Michigan is 39.8 years, Sweden’s is 41.1 years.

Michigan has the Upper Peninsula, Sweden has Norrland.

Michigan has slightly colder winters and slightly warmer summers than Sweden, but the average temperature is about the same.

Both Michigan and Sweden got hit hard by the corona virus, but their response was quite different.

Sweden never closed the schools for children under 15, Michigan is still debating when to open the schools again after they were shutdown.

Sweden never closed the stores or restaurants completely, Michigan did.

Both Michigan and Sweden closed large events and other gatherings. No sports, and no concerts.

In Sweden wearing masks is not mandatory, only recommended, as long as social distancing and personal hygiene is practiced.

Sweden did what they could to shield the most vulnerable from the injection, in Michigan they moved COVID infected patients from overcrowded nursing homes in the Detroit area to nursing homes upstate with excess capacity.

Michigan recently delayed the partial opening of the state for another two weeks, one more delay of many. In addition the Governor, Gretchen Wittmer issued draconian regulation on what could or could not be done, leading to protests. One protest sign read:

Other regulations were just as ridiculous, you could go out in a row-boat or a sailboat as long as you were no more than two in the boat, but motorboats were verboten. And don’t even dream about visiting your cottage in the woods; horror of horrors!

How did Sweden and Michigan fare? Check these charts and judge for yourselves:

Michigan total cases as of July 14: 78,914 total deaths 6,330 Sweden total cases 76,001, total deaths 5,455

Cases started rising around Jun 15, two weeks after the protests started

The number of deaths daily has stabilized and remained constant for the last month

The new cases are in a rapid decline. Sweden may be close to have achieved herd immunity.

The number of new death are racing to nearly zero.

 

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

 

It is more dangerous to live in a state with a Democrat Governor than it is with a Republican Governor, at least in regard to COVID-19

Taking a snapshot of the COVID-19 cases as of Apr 23 I was curious to see if there were any differences in infection and death rates between states that has a Democrat Governor and those states that has a Republican Governor. And indeed there is, there are nearly three times as many cases (2.89) in states with a Democrat Governor as there are in states with a Republican governor, and the death rate is 62% higher, a more telling statistic.

There could be many reasons for this discrepancy, but here is some food for thought: The indoor environment is where most viruses spread, elevators, staircases, central ventilation, mass transportation just to name a few. This is typical of the urban environment. Living in rural areas on the other hand, much more time is spent outdoors, in sunshine, which kills the virus nearly immediately and fresh air is very good for basic health. Therefore to issue a nationwide ban to stay inside was the wrong thing to do. Cleanliness, social distancing and get outside as much as possible would have been much better. Go out, plant your garden, take your boat out for a weekend spin or visit your cottage in the woods. If you don’t have a cottage just take a walk in the woods and listen to the sounds of spring, but don’t put canned music in your ears. If you don’t have any woods nearby, use any area not crowded.  That is one way to eliminate cabin fever.

Here are the statistics, state by state.

Democratic governor      Cases                  Deaths

New York                             268,581                 20861

New Jersey                         100,025                 5428

California                             39620                    1531

Pennsylvania                     37053                    1685

Illinois                                   36934                    1688

Michigan                              35291                    2997

Louisiana                             25739                    1599

Connecticut                        23100                    1639

Washington                        12753                    711

Virginia                                 11594                    410

Colorado                              11262                    552

North Carolina                   7854                       281

Rhode Island                      6256                       189

Wisconsin                            5052                       257

Nevada                                4208                       189

Kentucky                             3481                       191

District of Columbia        3361                       139

Delaware                             3308                       92

Minnesota                          2942                       200

Kansas                                  2734                       113

New Mexico                       2379                       78

Oregon                                 2127                       83

Maine                                   937                         44

Hawaii                                   596                         12

Montana                             442                         14

Total:                            647,099                   40,983  Death rate 6.33%

 

 

Republican governor     Cases                    Deaths

Massachusetts                  46023                    2360

Florida                                  29648                    987

Texas                                    22393                    576

Georgia                                21883                    881

Maryland                             15737                    748

Ohio                                      14694                    656

Indiana                                 13039                    706

Tennessee                          8266                       170

Missouri                               6384                       243

Alabama                              5832                       201

Arizona                                 5769                       249

Mississippi                          5153                       201

South Carolina                   4917                       150

Iowa                                      3924                       96

Utah                                      3612                       35

Oklahoma                           3017                       179

Arkansas                              2599                       45

Nebraska                             2124                       47

South Dakota                     1956                       9

Idaho                                    1836                       54

New Hampshire                1670                       51

West Virginia                      981                         31

Vermont                              825                         43

North Dakota                     709                         15

Wyoming                             453                         7

Alaska                                   337                         9

Total:                           223,781                       8,749      Death rate 3.91%

Clinical trials take too long. With the COVID-19 virus acting on a time scale of 3 days, not 3 years, allow unlimited trials now!

The medicine suppliers have to go through a lot to get a new drug approved. There are the double blind tests that can take years to verify, and some of the people in the protocol are given placebos that only produce the side-effects, not the potential cure. Some of these people may die as a result, but that the cost of getting a drug approved. The cost can be upwards of 10 million dollars, so as a reward the Medical supplier company gets awarded a patent for the new medicine. This can take many years to develop, and a patent is valid for only 20 years, so a patent extension of up to 5 years is almost routinely granted. After the patent is expired it becomes a generic drug. And another thing, there has to be at least 170000 people suffering from the disease to make it worthwhile.

There is another way. Over 10 years ago my wife got a case of wet macular degeneration in one eye, but it was not the normal type, more like a blood-filled polyp lodging itself under the retina and causing warped vision to say the least.

There was an approved medication at 2000 dollars an injection, the insurance company paid for it, so she tried it, and it did absolutely nothing. But the eye doctor said, he worked with the Amish community, and they are uninsured and cannot afford more than generic drugs. He had had good results for a few to inject Avastin, an approved drug for colon and rectal cancer among other things, and in the amount needed for injection in one eye the cost was only 70 dollars. The trade-off was obvious; 2000 dollars for a drug that the insurance company paid for, but didn’t work versus a 70 dollar medicine that might work, so she let herself be included in the study. And it worked! And the doctor paid for the cost of the medicine himself, he wanted the study to succeed. He was not alone, a few other doctors worked together to find the cure. A few years later the insurance company accepted the treatment, and my wife’s polyp eventually disappeared.

The point of the story? To rely only on approved medications when confronted with cases out of the ordinary, medical science is advancing not only by medical companies seeking new and profitable drugs, or by University research, but by your regular doctor, in consultation with his peers, as they seek to find the best cure for the individual patient.

The Government is always to slow to react. In the case of COVID-19, it works on a time-scale of 3 days, so the best treatment must be administered immediately, not wait for normal approval procedures. So is the case with Hydroxychloroquine, it is approved and generic, no one will make a case study, the side effects are minimal for Lupus or rheumatic patients, of which there are tens of thousands patients and no one has died from it when applied in approved doses, so administer it to anyone that accepts to be in the study now!

 

 

 

 

Climate change is real and is caused by rising CO2 levels, leading to less extreme weather. This is on balance good for the environment!

We have experienced a 50% increase in CO2 levels since the beginning of industrialization. In the last 30 years the level has risen 17%, from about 350 ppm to nearly 410 ppm. Is this good or bad for the climate?

The traditional way to approach the problem of guessing what effect of rising CO2 levels has on the climate is by creating climate models. Thy have recently been adjusted, and they suddenly show a much higher rate of future temperature increase, in this case what is supposed to happen to global temperatures for a doubling of CO2 from pre-industrial times, from 270ppm to 540ppm.

https://lenbilen.files.wordpress.com/2020/02/screenshot_2020-02-07-climate-models-are-running-red-hot-and-scientists-done28099t-know-why1.png

The first thing that strikes you is the great discrepancies between the models. The Russian, Chinese and Norwegian models show a much slower temperature rise than  rest of the models. Why is that?

There are two ways to approach this problem. The climate models make certain assumptions about the behavior of the changing atmosphere, and based on these assumptions model future temperature changes. This is the approach from IPCC for the last 32 years. These models are failing miserably when compared to actual temperature changes. This is the traditional way.

The other way i to observe what is actually happening to our temperature over time as the CO2 increases. We have over 50 years of excellent global temperature data, so with these we can see where, when and by how much the earth has warmed.

The most drastic temperature rise on earth has been in the Arctic above the 80th latitude. In the winter of 2018 it was 8C above the 50 year average. See charts from the Danish Meteorological Institute:

Note, there is no increase at all in the summer temperatures!

The fall temperature saw an increase of 5C and the spring temperature saw an increase of about 2.5C.

The 2020 winter has so far seen an about 5c increase Source: DMI.

This 8C ( or 5C) rise in winter temperatures is significant, most would even say alarming, but my response is, why is that?

To get the answer we must study molecular absorption spectroscopy and explain a couple of facts for the 97% of all scientists who have not studied molecular spectroscopy. IPCC and most scientists claim that the greenhouse effect is dependent on the gases that are in the atmosphere, and their combined effect is additive according to a logarithmic formula. This is true up to a certain point, but it is not possible to absorb more than 100% of all the energy available in a certain frequency band! For example: If water vapor absorbs 50% of all incoming energy in a certain band, and CO2 absorbs another 90% of the energy in the same band, the result is that 95% is absorbed, (90% + 50% * (100% – 90%)),  not 140%, (90% + 50%).

The following chart shows both CO2 and H2O are absorbing greenhouse gases, with H20 being the stronger greenhouse gas, absorbing over a much wider spectrum, and they overlap for the most part. But it also matters in what frequency ranges they absorb.

To better understand the importance of frequency spectra this we will look at the frequency ranges of the incoming solar radiation and the outgoing black body radiation of the earth. It is the latter that causes the greenhouse effect. Take a look at this chart:

The red area represents the observed amount of solar radiation that reaches the earth’s surface. the white area under the red line represents radiation absorbed in the atmosphere. Likewise, the blue area represents the outgoing black body radiation that is re-emitted. The remaining white area under the magenta, blue or black line represents the retained absorbed energy that causes the greenhouse effect.

Let us now take a look at the Carbon Dioxide bands of absorption, at 2.7, 4.3 and 15 microns. Of them the 2.7 and 4.3 micron bands absorb where there is little black body radiation, the only band that counts is at 15 microns, and that is in a band where the black body radiation has its maximum. However it is also in a band where water vapor also absorb, not as much as CO2,only about 20% to 70% as much. Water vapor or absolute humidity is highly dependent on the temperature of the air, so at 30C there may be 50 times as much water vapor, at 0C there may be ten times as much water vapor, and at -25C there may be more CO2 than water vapor. At those low temperatures the gases are mostly additive. In the tropics with fifty times more water vapor than CO2, increased CO2 has no influence on the temperature whatsoever. Temperature charts confirm this assertion:

The temperature in the tropics displays no trend whatsoever. It follows the temperature of the oceans, rises in an el niño and falls in a la niña. We are now in the end of an el niño, soon to be followed by a rather strong la niña.The temperature in the southern hemisphere shows no trend. In the northern temperate region there is a slight increase, but the great increase is occurring in the Arctic. There is no increase in the Antarctic yet even though the increase in CO2 is the same in the Antarctic as it is in the Arctic and the winter temperature in the Antarctic is even lower than in the Arctic. So CO2 increase cannot be the sole answer to the winter temperature increase in the Arctic.

A few days ago there was a storm of historic magnitude, filled with moisture going up from the Mexican Gulf through the Atlantic and really sacked Scotland and Norway. The weather warnings called for severe floods and hurricane-like winds:

What happened to the temperature when the storm arrived?

The Arctic temperature above the 80th latitude rose about 12C, from about -30C to about -18C, and most of the moisture snowed out. What happened to the ice cover when the storm arrived? Let’s see the most recent Arctic ice cover.

As the storm arrives, some of the ice breaks up, but at the end of the storm it bounces back, helped with all the snow that just fell. After the snowfall ends the ice formed easily breaks up again.

Is the snow cover increasing in the Arctic? Let us see what the snow statistics show. These are from the Rutgers snow lab.

The fall snow extent is increasing by more than 2 percent per year.

The winter snowfall has also increased but only by 0.04 percent per year.

The snow covers all of Russia, Northern China, Mongolia, Tibet, Kashmir and northern Pakistan, Northern Afghanistan, Northern Iran, Turkey, Part of Eastern Europe, Scandinavia, Canada, Alaska, Greenland and parts of Western and Northern United States.

In the spring on the other hand the snow pack is melting faster, about 1.6 percent less snow per year. One of the major reasons for an earlier snow-melt is that the air is getting dirtier, especially over China, and to some extent Russia. The soot from burning coal and mining and manufacturing changes the albedo of the snow. The soot is visible on old snow all the way up to the North Pole. The other reason is that the poles are getting warmer. In the fall and winter it is mostly due to increased snowfall, but in the spring, as soon as the temperature rises over the freezing point, melting occurs.

Moving down to the continental U.S. there are even more good news.

The data presented in the next six graphs were extracted from the data available at the NOAA National Data Center Climate Data Online (NNDC CDO) website.

Yes, rain (and snow) are increasing, but it is also raining slightly more often and regularly, so the net result is a slight decrease in flooding.

Of course, this could change in the future, and we need to watch the rain patterns, as they are constantly changing. Building more levees is not always the answer, since this will increase the risk for flooding in other places. It may be necessary to let certain areas, mostly farmland and woodland be flooded from time to time.

The Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) uses readily available temperature and precipitation data to estimate relative dryness. It is a standardized index that generally spans -10 (dry) to +10 (wet). The chart shows Continental U.S. is getting wetter, about 0.01 PDSI index per year with the lows trend is getting wetter the fastest. This is good news.

The temperature extremes keep narrowing, the maximum temperatures decrease by 0.033 degree F/decade, but the minimum temperatures increase by 0.309 degree F/decade. This is good, since tornadoes are a result of extreme temperature differences, most often associated with cold fronts.

 The Continental U.S. has not had an EF5 tornado (the most severe) since 2013. Let us hope this trend continues.

Contrary to popular belief, hurricanes making landfall on the U.S. mainland are decreasing slightly, especially major hurricanes.

Taking a closer look at the seasonal temperature trends  we can see that the winter aveerage temperatures are rising by about 0.3F per decade but the summer temperatures rise only about one seventh as much, (0.04F/decade)  .

These are the average temperatures. The minimum average temperatures rise in all seasons, but mostly in the winter,

The maximum temperatures barely budge. They rise in the winter and decrease ever so slightly in the summer.

Watching the warming of the poles, and even the continental U.S., far from being an impending end of mankind as we know it, may even be beneficial. Warmer poles in the winter means less temperature gradient between the poles and the tropics, leading to less severe storms. They will still be there, but less severe.

There is one great benefit of increased CO2, the greening of the earth.

Thanks to this greening, which is accomplished with the fertilizer effect of CO2, the earth can now keep another 2 billion people from starvation, not to mention what it does to plants and wildlife.

Having said that, I am still a conservationist. Coal, oil and gas will run out at some time, and I for one would like to save some for our great grandchildren, not yet born. In addition I would like to minimize the need for mining, which can be quite destructive. We have immense environmental problems, like water pollution, deforestation, intoxication of the soil, over-fertilization with nitrogen, real air pollutants, such as Sulfur compounds and soot, just to name a few. They have one thing in common: It takes lots of energy to do the cleanup.

The best solution is to switch most electricity generation to Thorium molten salt nuclear power. There are multiple reasons why this should be done as a priority by streamlining regulation and facilitate competition in development of the best solutions to the energy problems.

Twenty-five reasons to rapidly develop Thorium based Nuclear Power generation.

We need badly to develop and build Thorium based molten salt fast breeder nuclear reactors to secure our energy needs in the future. Lest anyone should be threatened by the words fast breeder, it simply means it uses fast neutrons instead of thermal neutrons, and breeder means it produces more fissible material than it consumes, in the case of Thorium the ratio is about 1.05.

1. A million years supply at today’s consumption levels.

2. Thorium already mined, ready to be extracted.

3. One ten-thousandth of the TRansUranium waste compared to a U-235 based fast breeder reactor.

4. Thorium based nuclear power produces Pu-238, needed for space exploration.

5. Radioactive waste from an LFTR decays down to background radiation in 300 years compared to a million years for U-235 based reactors.

6. Thorium based nuclear power is not suited for making nuclear bombs.

7. Produces isotopes that helps cure certain cancers.

8. Molten Salt Thorium Reactors are earthquake safe.

9. Molten Salt Thorium Reactors cannot have a meltdown, the fuel is already molten.

10. Molten Salt Nuclear Reactors have a very high negative temperature coefficient leading to a safe and stable control.

11. Atmospheric pressure operating conditions, no risk for explosions.

12. Virtually no spent fuel problem, very little on site storage or transport.

13. Thorium Nuclear Power generators  scale  beautifully from small portable generators to full size power plants.

14. No need for evacuation zones, can be placed near urban areas.

15. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors will work both as Base Load and Load Following power plants.

16. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors will lessen the need for an expanded national grid.

17. Russia has an active Thorium program.

18. China is having a massive Thorium program.

19. India is having an ambitious Thorium program.

20. United States used to be the leader in Thorium usage. What happened?

21. With a Molten Salt Reactor, accidents like the Three Mile Island disaster will not happen.

22. With a Molten Salt Reactor, disasters like Chernobyl are impossible.

23. With Molten Salt Reactors, a catastrophe like Fukushima cannot happen.

24. Produces electrical energy at about 4 cents per KWh.

25. Can deplete some of the existing radioactive waste and nuclear weapons stockpiles.

 

The climate change caused by rising CO2 levels leads to less extreme weather, not more, weather statistics prove.

We have experienced a 50% increase in CO2 levels since the beginning of industrialization. In the last 30 years the level has risen 17%, from about 350 ppm to nearly 410 ppm. Is is time to panic and reduce the CO2  emissions to stop the rise?

The traditional way to approach the problem of guessing what effect of rising CO2 levels has on the climate is by creating climate models. Thy have recently been adjusted, and they suddenly show a much higher rate of future temperature increase, in this case what is supposed to happen to global temperatures for a doubling of CO2 from pre-industrial times, from 270ppm to 540ppm.

There are two ways to approach this problem. The models make certain assumptions about the behavior of the changing atmosphere and model future temperature changes. This is the approach from IPCC for the last 32 years. These models are all failing miserably when compared to actual temperature changes.

The other way i to observe what is actually happening to our temperature over time as the CO2 increases. We have 50 years of excellent global temperature data, so with these we can see where, when and by how much the earth has warmed.

The most drastic temperature rise on earth has been in the Arctic above the 80th latitude. In the winter of 2018 it was 8C above the 50 year average. See charts from the Danish Meteorological Institute:

Note, there is no increase at all in the summer temperatures!

The fall temperature saw an increase of 5C and the spring temperature saw an increase of about 2.5C.

The 2020 winter has so far seen an about 4c increase Source: DMI.

This 8C winter rise of temperature is significant, most would even say alarming, but my response is, why is that?

To get the answer we must study molecular absorption spectroscopy and explain a couple of facts for the 97% of all scientists who have not studied molecular spectroscopy. IPCC and most scientists claim that the greenhouse effect is dependent on the gases that are in the atmosphere, and their combined effect is additive according to a logarithmic formula. This is true up to a certain point, but it is not possible to absorb more than 100% of all the energy available in a certain frequency band! For example: If water vapor absorbs 90% of all incoming energy in a certain band, and CO2 absorbs another 50% of the energy in the same band, the result is that 95% is absorbed, (90% + 50% * (100% – 90%)),  not 140%, (90% + 50%).

The following chart shows both CO2 and H2O are absorbing greenhouse gases, with H20 being the stronger greenhouse gas, absorbing over a much wider spectrum, and they overlap for the most part. But it also matters in what frequency range s they absorb.

For this we will have to look at the frequency ranges of the incoming solar radiation and the outgoing black body radiation of the earth. It is the latter that causes the greenhouse effect. Take a look at this chart:

The red area represents the observed amount of solar radiation that reaches the earth’s surface. the white area under the red line represents radiation absorbed in the atmosphere. Likewise, the blue area represents the outgoing black body radiation that is re-emitted. The remaining white area under the magenta, blue or black line represents the retained absorbed energy that causes the greenhouse effect.

Let us  now take a look at the Carbon Dioxide bands of absorption, at 2.7, 4.3 and 15 microns. Of them the 2.7 and 4.3 micron bands absorb where there is little black body radiation, the only band that counts is at 15 microns, and that is in a band where the black body radiation has its maximum. However it is also in a band where water vapor also absorb, not as much as CO2,only about 20% to 70% as much. Water vapor or absolute humidity is highly dependent on the temperature of the air, so at 30C there may be 50 times as much water vapor, at 0C there may be ten times as much water vapor, and at -25C there may be more CO2 than water vapor. At those low temperatures the gases are mostly additive. In the tropics with fifty times more water vapor than CO2, increased CO2 has no influence on the temperature whatsoever. Temperature charts confirm this assertion:

Here the temperature in the tropics displays no trend whatsoever. It follows the temperature of the oceans, rises in an el nino and falls in a la nina. The temperature in the southern hemisphere shows no trend. In the northern temperate region there is a slight increase, but the great increase is occurring in the Arctic. There is no increase in the Antarctic yet even though the increase in CO2 is greater in the Antarctic and the winter temperature in the Antarctic is even lower than in the Arctic. So CO2 increase cannot be the sole answer to the winter temperature increase in the Arctic.

A few days ago there was a storm of historic magnitude, filled with moisture going up from the Mexican Gulf through the Atlantic and really sacked Scotland and Norway. The weather warnings called for severs floods and hurricane-like winds:

What happened to the temperature when the storm arrived?

ice The Arctic temperature above the 80th latitude rose about 12C, from about -30C to about -18C, and most of the moisture snows out. What happens to the ice covercover when the storm arrives? Let’s see the most recent Arctic ice cover.

As the storm arrives, some of the ice breaks up, but at the end of the storm it bounces back, helped with all the snow that just fell.

Is the snow cover increasing in the Arctic?Let us see what the snow statistics show. These are from the Rutgers snow lab.

The fall snow extent is increasing, and has increased by more than 2 percent per year.

The winter snowfall has also increased but only by 0.04 percent per year. The snow covers all of Russia, Northern China, Mongolia, Tibet, Kashmir and northern Pakistan, Northern Afghanistan, Northern Iran, Turkey, Part of Eastern Europe, Scandinavia, Canada, Alaska, Greenland and part of Western and Northern United States.

In the spring on the other hand the snow pack is melting faster, about 1.6 percent less snow per year. One of the major reasons for an earlier snowmelt is that the air is getting dirtier, especially over China, and to some extent Russia. The soot from burning coal and mining and manufacturing changes the albedo of the snow. The soot is visible on old snow all the way up to the North Pole. The other reason is that the poles are getting warmer. In the fall and winter it is mostly due to increased snowfall, but in the spring, as soon as the temperature rises over the freezing point, melting occurs.

Moving down to the continental U.S. there are even more good news.

The data presented in the next six graphs were extracted from the data available at the NOAA National Data Center Climate Data Online (NNDC CDO) website.

Yes, rain (and snow) are increasing, but it is also raining slightly more often and regularly, so the net result is a slight decrease in flooding.

Of course, this could change in the future, and we need to watch the rain patterns, as they are constantly changing. Building more levees is not always the answer, since this will increase the risk for flooding in other places. It may be necessary to let certain areas, mostly farmland and woodland be flooded from time to time.

The Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) uses readily available temperature and precipitation data to estimate relative dryness. It is a standardized index that generally spans -10 (dry) to +10 (wet). The chart shows Continental U.S. is getting wetter, about 0.01 PDSI index per year. This is good news.

The temperature extremes keep narrowing, the maximum temperatures decrease by 0.033 degree F/decade, but the minimum temperatures increase by 0.309 degree F/decade. This is good, since tornadoes are a result of extreme temperature differences, most often associated with cold fronts.

 The Continental U.S. has not had an EF5 tornado (the most severe) since 2013. Let us hope this trend continues.

Contrary to popular belief, hurricanes making landfall on the U.S. mainland are decreasing slightly, especially major hurricanes.

Taking a closer look at the seasonal temperature trends  we can see that the winter temperatures are rising. but the summer temperatures stay the same.

hh

These are the average temperatures. The minimum temperatures rise in all seasons, but mostly in the winter,

The maximum temperatures barely budge. They rise in winter and decrease ever so slightly in the summer.

Watching  the warming of the poles, and even the continental U.S., far from being an impending end of mankind as we know it, may even be beneficial. Warmer poles in the winter means less temperature gradient between the poles and the tropics, leading to less severe storms. They will still be there, but less severe.

There is one great benefit of increased CO2, the greening of the earth.

Thanks to this greening, done with only the fertilizer of CO2 the earth can now keep another 2 billion people from starvation, not to mention what it does to plants and wildlife.

Having said that, I am still a conservationist. Coal, oil and gas will run out at some time, and I for one would like to save some for my great grandchildren, not yet born. In addition I would like to minimize the need for mining, which can be quite destructive. We have immense environmental problems, like water pollution, deforestation, intoxication of the soil, over-fertilization with nitrogen, real air pollutants, such as Sulfur compounds and soot, just to name a few. They have one thing in common: It takes lots of energy to do the cleanup.

The best solution is to switch most electricity generation to Thorium molten salt nuclear power. There are multiple reasons why this should be done as a priority.

Twenty-five reasons to rapidly develop Thorium based Nuclear Power generation.

We need badly to develop and build Thorium based molten salt fast breeder nuclear reactors to secure our energy needs in the future. Lest anyone should be threatened by the words fast breeder, it simply means it uses fast neutrons instead of thermal neutrons, and breeder means it produces more fissible material than it consumes, in the case of Thorium the ratio is about 1.05.

1. A million years supply at today’s consumption levels.

2. Thorium already mined, ready to be extracted.

3. One ten-thousandth of the TRansUranium waste compared to a U-235 based fast breeder reactor.

4. Thorium based nuclear power produces Pu-238, needed for space exploration.

5. Radioactive waste from an LFTR decays down to background radiation in 300 years compared to a million years for U-235 based reactors.

6. Thorium based nuclear power is not suited for making nuclear bombs.

7. Produces isotopes that helps cure certain cancers.

8. Molten Salt Thorium Reactors are earthquake safe.

9. Molten Salt Thorium Reactors cannot have a meltdown, the fuel is already molten.

10. Molten Salt Nuclear Reactors have a very high negative temperature coefficient leading to a safe and stable control.

11. Atmospheric pressure operating conditions, no risk for explosions.

12. Virtually no spent fuel problem, very little on site storage or transport.

13. Thorium Nuclear Power generators  scale  beautifully from small portable generators to full size power plants.

14. No need for evacuation zones, can be placed near urban areas.

15. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors will work both as Base Load and Load Following power plants.

16. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors will lessen the need for an expanded national grid.

17. Russia has an active Thorium program.

18. China is having a massive Thorium program.

19. India is having an ambitious Thorium program.

20. United States used to be the leader in Thorium usage. What happened?

21. With a Molten Salt Reactor, accidents like the Three Mile Island disaster will not happen.

22. With a Molten Salt Reactor, disasters like Chernobyl are impossible.

23. With Molten Salt Reactors, a catastrophe like Fukushima cannot happen.

24. Produces electrical energy at about 4 cents per KWh.

25. Can deplete some of the existing radioactive waste and nuclear weapons stockpiles.

Obamacare made sharing of data between federal departments, including citizenship question possible. A Limerick.

Since the legal delays made it impossible to put the question of citizenship back on the 2020 census forms, where it had been from the 1800’s to 2000, President Trump issued an executive order directing the Commerce Department to obtain citizenship data through means other than the census. That includes documents from the Department of Homeland Security, which houses citizenship and asylum services, and the Social Security Administration.
The order was signed and released to reporters late Thursday night. The Justice Department notified federal district judges of the administration’s decision.
Sharing of data between federal agencies has always been a sticky point, since federal agencies jealously protect their turf. The introduction of Obamacare changed all that, so the legal hindrances were removed for sharing data.

 

Obamacare did blaze the trail

of sharing of data, no fail.

Who’s a citizen now

can be found out somehow.

It’s better in every detail.

We all remember the introduction of the Obamacare website. It will stand out as an example for all time how not to design a website. The cost was estimated to be 95 million dollars to design and implement. The final cost was more than 2.2 Billion dollars, maybe an all time record for a website. There were many reasons for this overrun, one of which was it had to import a number of data bases and read the data securely. One of the features of Obamacare was that you were not eligible to enroll if you was not a citizen, so they needed full access to all that data. If the need for sharing had arisen first now, imagine the legal delays!

Since the citizenship question on the census form was voluntary, this is a much better way to obtain somewhat accurate data (the drug runners and child traffickers and sex slaves will never be counted accurately anyway)

One final question: Who took the citizen question off the 2010 long form census and why?

Here is the 2000 long form.