“Cushing Oil Inventories Are Soaring Again” By Tsvetana Paraskova

[Tom Nolan + 2,443]

Cushing Oil Inventories Are Soaring Again

By Tsvetana Paraskova - Nov 21, 2020, 12:00 PM CST

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Cushing-Oil-Inventories-Are-Soaring-Again.html

Crude oil inventories at the Cushing storage hub in Oklahoma are approaching the high levels seen in April when limited storage capacity amid crashing demand contributed to the plunge in WTI Crude prices into negative territory.  Cushing is the designated delivery point for NYMEX crude oil futures contracts, and rapidly dwindling spare capacity there spooked the oil market at the end of April and early May. 

Commercial stocks at Cushing rose to 61.6 million barrels in the week to November 13, according to the latest data from the weekly petroleum report of the Energy Information Administration (EIA). That’s up from 60.4 million barrels in stocks at the hub at the end of the previous week, and a 39.3-percent jump compared to the same week in 2019 when inventories at Cushing stood at 44.2 million barrels.  

The current stockpile at Cushing means that the hub is full to around 81 percent of its capacity of 76 million barrels, according to Bloomberg’s estimates.

To compare, in the first week of May at the peak Cushing inventories this year, commercial crude oil inventories at the site exceeded 65 million barrels, which was 83 percent of the site’s working capacity, according to EIA data. Between early May and the last week of June, crude oil inventories at the storage hub had decreased to 45.6 million barrels, but they started rising again in July, weekly data from the EIA shows.

Analysts do not expect a repeat of the April negative price of oil because trading and clearing houses put limits to retail traders’ bets after the crash, while exchange traded funds (ETFs) of oil spread the risks by limiting the piling of contracts into front-month months.  

Even without a new slump in prices because of storage limits, the near-term prospects for oil demand in the United States are not rosy as some states return to re-imposing restrictions and curfews as COVID-19 cases soar.

By Tsvetana Paraskova for Oilprice.com

[TooSteep + 142]

And yet oil is breaking out today. In fact a very strong break after months of flatlining in a narrow range.

[Rob Kramer + 696]

Because production is down and total petroleum products keep falling 12M barrels per week. And 6M barrels of air travel and cruise lines are waiting to be unleashed. 

[Bob D + 562]

IF IF IF refinery utilization gets back to 2019 levels Cushing will draw down throughout 2021.

The demand picture is always so much harder to forecast than the supply picture.  

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

8 hours ago, TooSteep said:

And yet oil is breaking out today. In fact a very strong break after months of flatlining in a narrow range.

Yep, that looks strange. I assume its some sort of technical issue such as a short squeeze.

[Tom Nolan + 2,443]

Why The Vaccine Oil Rally Won't Last

By Irina Slav - Nov 24, 2020, 5:00 PM CST

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/Why-The-Vaccine-Oil-Rally-Wont-Last.html

Oil is on the rise after a third company developing a vaccine for Covid-19 announced positive efficacy results this week. They may well continue to rise for a while, but it would pay to be careful with betting on an endless rally. Yesterday, after AstraZeneca said its vaccine candidate had 90% efficacy in some cases, oil benchmarks jumped to the highest in three months as traders rushed to build their positions ahead of the rebound that should logically follow a successful vaccination campaign.

Fund managers also went on a buying spree, Reuters’s John Kemp said in his weekly column. The total purchases made in the most traded crude oil and product contracts over the last two weeks reached 539 million barrels, Kemp noted, which was the highest since the start of September.

The buying spree is not limited to oil, either, and analysts are taking note. The Bank of America last Friday said traders have swarmed into riskier assets after the two vaccine updates from Moderna and Pfizer, pouring $27 billion in to equity funds and shares in the industries that were worst affected by the pandemic, including energy, banking, and travel.

But the bank cautioned against too much optimism: “We say credit and equity prices (are) to peak in coming months on peak positioning, peak policy, peak profits as optimism tops ahead of vaccine distribution,” the analysts told BofA clients.

Indeed, the higher oil—and stock—prices rise on this vaccine-prompted bullishness, the more vulnerable they become to a correction. Reuters’ Kemp noted this in his column, and bank analysts have warned about it in notes to clients.

The problem seems to be that traders are buying the vaccine efficacy news, but efficacy—and safety—is only the beginning. Swift distribution is another major aspect of a vaccine’s success, and the scale of vaccinations is another. The process, which the head of the U.S. federal government’s vaccination program said could begin in early December, would take at least several months until vaccinations are mass enough to make a difference to the so-called new normal.

In other words, it will be at least several months before oil demand picks up in a way that would be meaningful for prices over a period longer than 24 hours. That is, of course, if there are no serious side effects from the approved vaccines that could wreak a whole new kind of havoc on oil—and other—markets.

Meanwhile, OPEC+ is contributing to the bullish sentiment by signaling it would extend its current rate of production cuts into 2021, although it remains to be decided how long the extension will be. The cartel is meeting next Monday and Tuesday to discuss the issue.

News from China is also supporting prices this week: Bloomberg reported the country has started drawing down its oil inventories as domestic demand picks up and imports decline because independent refiners have used up most of their import quotas. China’s inventories were a cause for concern among oil traders when they were running near capacity, so the news of a drawdown has been welcome.

Right now, the going is good for oil. Pharma companies are bound to continue providing updates, and these are more likely than not to be positive. The rally could last a week or two if OPEC+ decides on an extension of more than three months. But it will likely come to an end when traders get a reality check, which is bound to happen. Air travel will not return to pre-pandemic levels overnight. It won’t return to normal over a fortnight, either. It will take months. 

The sooner market players accept this fact, the less likely a major oil price slump caused by spooked traders would be.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

[JoMack + 549]

Saudis released 900,000 bbls to U.S.

 

[Tom Nolan + 2,443]

U.S. Shale Bankruptcies Accelerate Despite Pandemic Protection

By Tsvetana Paraskova - Nov 25, 2020, 7:00 PM CST

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Shale-Bankruptcies-Accelerate-Despite-Pandemic-Protection.html

The U.S. oil industry is trying to recover from the worst demand shock in the history of oil markets. Some companies launched the long-awaited consolidation in the sector, while many others filed for bankruptcy as unsustainably low oil prices this year weighed on already weakened balance sheets.   The U.S. shale patch had access to some form of government relief during the pandemic, like all businesses in the United States. The oil and gas industry received tax breaks, royalty relief, and forgivable loans under the Paycheck Protection Program to keep employees during the pandemic.  

Yet, bankruptcies in the shale patch started to accelerate in the second quarter after oil prices crashed in early March because of the demand collapse and the Saudi-Russian price war. U.S. drillers immediately scaled back capital spending and curtailed more than 2 million barrels per day (bpd) of oil production between April and June in response to the crash in prices. 

Thousands of jobs in the industry have been lost over the past six months, and a good portion of those jobs lost may never return. 

The U.S. shale patch has been struggling this year and is bracing for more hardship with the incoming Administration of Joe Biden, who has vowed to ban new oil and gas drilling on federal lands and waters. 

The federal relief during the pandemic, especially royalty rate reductions on federal land and offshore, has not been very effective because of a lack of uniform decision-making, the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) said last month. 

Environmental advocates, of course, point the finger at the mere fact that the federal government dared provide relief for the fossil fuel industry.

According to a new analysis by BailoutWatch, Public Citizen, and Friends of the Earth, the fossil fuel industry received between US$10.4 billion and US$15.2 billion in direct economic relief, with more than 26,000 coal, oil, and gas companies benefiting directly. In addition, indirect benefits in the form of bond funds bought by the Fed and billions of newly issued company bonds “pushed government aid to the industry past US$110 billion,” say the activists in their report Bailed Out & Propped Up, which slams government support to the “money-losing dirty energy companies” and shames the firms that made use of federal government programs. The report goes on to recommend that “Congress must explicitly exclude further aid to the fossil fuel industry from any future coronavirus relief packages.” 

The Fed wasn’t spared in the report either: “By insisting fossil fuel companies deserve protection and support, the Fed has exacerbated the already dire threat of climate change, prolonging oil and gas companies’ ability to borrow money at lower rates than investors were willing to offer before the pandemic,” the authors say. 

Some other analyses have shown that “the dirty energy companies” did not just tap into government money to boost top executive pays and keep dividends to shareholders. 

According to a Houston Chronicle analysis from July, the Paycheck Protection Program, with more than US$1 billion in forgivable loans to companies, helped to save more than half of oilfield jobs in Texas. According to the analysis of figures from the Small Business Administration, companies in Texas were able to keep 93,117 jobs or more than half of the 182,500 people employed in the sector in Texas.  

Thousands of jobs have been lost since March in the U.S. upstream and oilfield services sectors as the oil industry is becoming leaner in the aftermath of the pandemic. 

After a wave of bankruptcies in the third quarter, North American oil producers and oilfield services companies continued to file for protection from creditors at the start of the fourth quarter, law firm Haynes and Boone said in its latest tally to October 31 last week. 

Among healthier companies with quality assets, consolidation has been the hottest thing in recent weeks. 

There is new-found enthusiasm for M&A deals in the U.S. shale patch, data and analytics company GlobalData said in a new report on Tuesday. 

“In all of the recent deals and likely in future mergers, there is a significant acreage in unconventional areas involved, especially in Permian Basin,” said Andrew Folse, Oil and Gas Analyst at GlobalData.  

“This basin remains the most attractive acreage in the US Lower 48 and provides very competitive payback periods, measured in months, unlike offshore projects where the payback periods are usually measured in years.”

By Tsvetana Paraskova for Oilprice.com

[0R0 + 6,251]

On 11/24/2020 at 10:58 PM, Tom Nolan said:

Why The Vaccine Oil Rally Won't Last

By Irina Slav - Nov 24, 2020, 5:00 PM CST

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/Why-The-Vaccine-Oil-Rally-Wont-Last.html

Oil is on the rise after a third company developing a vaccine for Covid-19 announced positive efficacy results this week. They may well continue to rise for a while, but it would pay to be careful with betting on an endless rally. Yesterday, after AstraZeneca said its vaccine candidate had 90% efficacy in some cases, oil benchmarks jumped to the highest in three months as traders rushed to build their positions ahead of the rebound that should logically follow a successful vaccination campaign.

Fund managers also went on a buying spree, Reuters’s John Kemp said in his weekly column. The total purchases made in the most traded crude oil and product contracts over the last two weeks reached 539 million barrels, Kemp noted, which was the highest since the start of September.

The buying spree is not limited to oil, either, and analysts are taking note. The Bank of America last Friday said traders have swarmed into riskier assets after the two vaccine updates from Moderna and Pfizer, pouring $27 billion in to equity funds and shares in the industries that were worst affected by the pandemic, including energy, banking, and travel.

But the bank cautioned against too much optimism: “We say credit and equity prices (are) to peak in coming months on peak positioning, peak policy, peak profits as optimism tops ahead of vaccine distribution,” the analysts told BofA clients.

Indeed, the higher oil—and stock—prices rise on this vaccine-prompted bullishness, the more vulnerable they become to a correction. Reuters’ Kemp noted this in his column, and bank analysts have warned about it in notes to clients.

The problem seems to be that traders are buying the vaccine efficacy news, but efficacy—and safety—is only the beginning. Swift distribution is another major aspect of a vaccine’s success, and the scale of vaccinations is another. The process, which the head of the U.S. federal government’s vaccination program said could begin in early December, would take at least several months until vaccinations are mass enough to make a difference to the so-called new normal.

In other words, it will be at least several months before oil demand picks up in a way that would be meaningful for prices over a period longer than 24 hours. That is, of course, if there are no serious side effects from the approved vaccines that could wreak a whole new kind of havoc on oil—and other—markets.

Meanwhile, OPEC+ is contributing to the bullish sentiment by signaling it would extend its current rate of production cuts into 2021, although it remains to be decided how long the extension will be. The cartel is meeting next Monday and Tuesday to discuss the issue.

News from China is also supporting prices this week: Bloomberg reported the country has started drawing down its oil inventories as domestic demand picks up and imports decline because independent refiners have used up most of their import quotas. China’s inventories were a cause for concern among oil traders when they were running near capacity, so the news of a drawdown has been welcome.

Right now, the going is good for oil. Pharma companies are bound to continue providing updates, and these are more likely than not to be positive. The rally could last a week or two if OPEC+ decides on an extension of more than three months. But it will likely come to an end when traders get a reality check, which is bound to happen. Air travel will not return to pre-pandemic levels overnight. It won’t return to normal over a fortnight, either. It will take months. 

The sooner market players accept this fact, the less likely a major oil price slump caused by spooked traders would be.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

It is the wrong reason quoted. It isn't the vaccine news, it is the rapid rise in cases bringing about herd immunity among the active population who are only weakly susceptible to the virus. That means that the lockdowns will have to be lifted because the a$$ hats running Dem states and cities will run out of hospitalized people and deaths to point to as an excuse for their intended goal of destroying the economy and the middle class of small businesses. Then soon after will have no new positive tests to panic about.

The  exodus of small business out of the Dem cities is creating a boom of business startups outside the cities to go along with the housing boom.. Those will not be served by efficient city transportation but by gas guzzlers. If Trump is elected via his court challenges then there will be no way to extend the Dem's attempt at destroying the economy nationwide and the issue of CV19 is toast. So beyond Senate races blocking the Dem's fraud ridden power grab, they will also not have the presidency and have their voting machines removed permanently so will have to move back to center and remove the progressives from power positions.

[Rob Kramer + 696]

There is a few more weak demand eia reports coming up then globally it will be go time . And they'll thank the vaccine.  But ORO is correct. In Canada the 2nd wave has 6k+ cases per day vs 1700 in wave 1 . And deaths are 70 per day vs 150 in wave 1. So between not effecting the non aged , the weakest already dying, better responses to thoes who get it and whatever else theres no longer a pandemic . But thank the vaccine. And masks. And social distancing.  I'm just happy its almost over whatever people think. Time for high oil and slow economic recession recovery.  Thats what the people voted for! 

[0R0 + 6,251]

Dakotas outbreak peaked around Nov 8 on the Kinsa temp. measurement map

Nov 26 Temp map shows Dakotas outbreak slowing down and new "center" is in Cincinnati. Note that the old first wave urban centers are showing no temp elevations. So Boston Chicago-Gary, NYC, DC Seattle Portland, LA SF are all cold spots with little elevated temp activity.

So the Plains states wave is done, at least for now. Cincinnati is in round 2

This is showing a relatively rapid decline for now in the worst hit Dakotas. We can compare to Cincinnati to see what it would look like in a worst case peak.

   

Compare that to epicenter of the outbreak in Bronx (also Queens) NY - truly ridiculous that NY officials are concerned. There is no sign of a real outbreak in the city so far. Not so much because of CV19 safety measures but because most of the active population already had it.

 

 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

On 11/26/2020 at 5:37 PM, 0R0 said:

It is the wrong reason quoted. It isn't the vaccine news, it is the rapid rise in cases bringing about herd immunity among the active population who are only weakly susceptible to the virus. That means that the lockdowns will have to be lifted because the a$$ hats running Dem states and cities will run out of hospitalized people and deaths to point to as an excuse for their intended goal of destroying the economy and the middle class of small businesses. Then soon after will have no new positive tests to panic about.

The  exodus of small business out of the Dem cities is creating a boom of business startups outside the cities to go along with the housing boom.. Those will not be served by efficient city transportation but by gas guzzlers. If Trump is elected via his court challenges then there will be no way to extend the Dem's attempt at destroying the economy nationwide and the issue of CV19 is toast. So beyond Senate races blocking the Dem's fraud ridden power grab, they will also not have the presidency and have their voting machines removed permanently so will have to move back to center and remove the progressives from power positions.

It's election and vaccine news; the world is celebrating.

You have been saying "herd is here" for months.  Hospitalization and deaths, not just cases, are still rising.  "Serious critical" was stable around 17,000 for a while now it's 24,000+.  

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

I do agree that the vaccine will be less important for the states because it is so bad there it is has become essentially uncontrollable.

Other countries which are no where near herd, the economies are recovering as well; so vaccines and trump loss are the reasons for market optimism.  Remember, trump actively attacks the international economy (international trade makes us all money). 

Zero Right 0

Edited November 28, 2020 by Enthalpic

[0R0 + 6,251]

Nobody should care about the case numbers. They have to be normalized to testing rates to mean anything. We are testing 60X more than in March, 20 X more than Apr 2-3 X than Summer. It is an irrelevant number with lots of false positives.

Absolutely that Trump attacks trade with net exporters. Short term bad for stocks as 30-40% of income is generated via trade and booked overseas from production in China and competing economies and EU. But long term it is beneficial for companies rearranging their supply chains out of China and other terminal demographic countries.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

55 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

Nobody should care about the case numbers. They have to be normalized to testing rates to mean anything. We are testing 60X more than in March, 20 X more than Apr 2-3 X than Summer. It is an irrelevant number with lots of false positives.

Absolutely that Trump attacks trade with net exporters. Short term bad for stocks as 30-40% of income is generated via trade and booked overseas from production in China and competing economies and EU. But long term it is beneficial for companies rearranging their supply chains out of China and other terminal demographic countries.

Look at deaths and hospitalizations, it is not just increased testing.

The disturbing thing is those are active cases not total cases.  5,000,000+ with it right now infecting others and they do not yet have an outcome (many of those will die). 

 

Trumps disruption of international trade might help companies return manufacturing to the US, but no guarantee.   Trade, even with an imbalance, tends make both parties money.  Fairness is not a requirement of successful trade.

Consider the Ultimatum game. I give China a trillion and China chooses how to distribute it between themselves and the USA.  Trump would be emotional and reject an unfair deal even though it is completely illogical.  A bad deal is still better than no deal in this case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimatum_game

 

 

[0R0 + 6,251]

58 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

Look at deaths and hospitalizations, it is not just increased testing.

The disturbing thing is those are active cases not total cases.  5,000,000+ with it right now infecting others and they do not yet have an outcome (many of those will die). 

 

Trumps disruption of international trade might help companies return manufacturing to the US, but no guarantee.   Trade, even with an imbalance, tends make both parties money.  Fairness is not a requirement of successful trade.

Consider the Ultimatum game. I give China a trillion and China chooses how to distribute it between themselves and the USA.  Trump would be emotional and reject an unfair deal even though it is completely illogical.  A bad deal is still better than no deal in this case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimatum_game

 

 

The level of hospitalizations in peaking states in the plains around the Dakotas outbreak is not different than what we experienced before, worse than AZ and FL in the summer, though I expected worse since that was their 1st wave and it was into winter already. .

The ultimatum game does not describe the situation. China is not a competitor but a predatory strategic player not concerned with the economics of their trade. It is solely intended to bring harm to particular sectors in the US and create monopolies. They use loss making investment, free financing with infinite rollover of losses and subsidized inputs (free electricity, coal and steel you don't have to pay for). There are no commercial motivations on the Chinese side so no trade with them qualifies for fair trade or worthwhile trade at all.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

8 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

1 hour ago, Enthalpic said:

Look at deaths and hospitalizations, it is not just increased testing.

The disturbing thing is those are active cases not total cases.  5,000,000+ with it right now infecting others and they do not yet have an outcome (many of those will die). 

 

Trumps disruption of international trade might help companies return manufacturing to the US, but no guarantee.   Trade, even with an imbalance, tends make both parties money.  Fairness is not a requirement of successful trade.

Consider the Ultimatum game. I give China a trillion and China chooses how to distribute it between themselves and the USA.  Trump would be emotional and reject an unfair deal even though it is completely illogical.  A bad deal is still better than no deal in this case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimatum_game

 

 

The level of hospitalizations in peaking states in the plains around the Dakotas outbreak is not different than what we experienced before, worse than AZ and FL in the summer, though I expected worse since that was their 1st wave and it was into winter already. .

Although it isn't Wiki, there are Facts from Johns Hopkins:

She explained that the significance of COVID-19 on U.S. deaths can be fully understood only through comparison to the number of total deaths in the United States. 

 

After retrieving data on the CDC website, Briand compiled a graph representing percentages of total deaths per age category from early February to early September, which includes the period from before COVID-19 was detected in the U.S. to after infection rates soared. 

 

Surprisingly, the deaths of older people stayed the same before and after COVID-19. Since COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly, experts expected an increase in the percentage of deaths in older age groups. However, this increase is not seen from the CDC data. In fact, the percentages of deaths among all age groups remain relatively the same. 

 

“The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals,” Briand said.

 

Briand also noted that 50,000 to 70,000 deaths are seen both before and after COVID-19, indicating that this number of deaths was normal long before COVID-19 emerged. Therefore, according to Briand, not only has COVID-19 had no effect on the percentage of deaths of older people, but it has also not increased the total number of deaths. 

 

These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people’s assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States.

 

This comes as a shock to many people. How is it that the data lie so far from our perception? 

 

To answer that question, Briand shifted her focus to the deaths per causes ranging from 2014 to 2020. There is a sudden increase in deaths in 2020 due to COVID-19. This is no surprise because COVID-19 emerged in the U.S. in early 2020, and thus COVID-19-related deaths increased drastically afterward.

 

Analysis of deaths per cause in 2018 revealed that the pattern of seasonal increase in the total number of deaths is a result of the rise in deaths by all causes, with the top three being heart disease, respiratory diseases, influenza and pneumonia.

 

“This is true every year. Every year in the U.S. when we observe the seasonal ups and downs, we have an increase of deaths due to all causes,” Briand pointed out.

 

When Briand looked at the 2020 data during that seasonal period, COVID-19-related deaths exceeded deaths from heart diseases. This was highly unusual since heart disease has always prevailed as the leading cause of deaths. However, when taking a closer look at the death numbers, she noted something strange. As Briand compared the number of deaths per cause during that period in 2020 to 2018, she noticed that instead of the expected drastic increase across all causes, there was a significant decrease in deaths due to heart disease. Even more surprising, as seen in the graph below, this sudden decline in deaths is observed for all other causes

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

6 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

Although it isn't Wiki, there are Facts from Johns Hopkins:

She explained that the significance of COVID-19 on U.S. deaths can be fully understood only through comparison to the number of total deaths in the United States. 

 

After retrieving data on the CDC website, Briand compiled a graph representing percentages of total deaths per age category from early February to early September, which includes the period from before COVID-19 was detected in the U.S. to after infection rates soared. 

 

Surprisingly, the deaths of older people stayed the same before and after COVID-19. Since COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly, experts expected an increase in the percentage of deaths in older age groups. However, this increase is not seen from the CDC data. In fact, the percentages of deaths among all age groups remain relatively the same. 

 

“The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals,” Briand said.

 

Briand also noted that 50,000 to 70,000 deaths are seen both before and after COVID-19, indicating that this number of deaths was normal long before COVID-19 emerged. Therefore, according to Briand, not only has COVID-19 had no effect on the percentage of deaths of older people, but it has also not increased the total number of deaths. 

 

These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people’s assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States.

 

This comes as a shock to many people. How is it that the data lie so far from our perception? 

 

To answer that question, Briand shifted her focus to the deaths per causes ranging from 2014 to 2020. There is a sudden increase in deaths in 2020 due to COVID-19. This is no surprise because COVID-19 emerged in the U.S. in early 2020, and thus COVID-19-related deaths increased drastically afterward.

 

Analysis of deaths per cause in 2018 revealed that the pattern of seasonal increase in the total number of deaths is a result of the rise in deaths by all causes, with the top three being heart disease, respiratory diseases, influenza and pneumonia.

 

“This is true every year. Every year in the U.S. when we observe the seasonal ups and downs, we have an increase of deaths due to all causes,” Briand pointed out.

 

When Briand looked at the 2020 data during that seasonal period, COVID-19-related deaths exceeded deaths from heart diseases. This was highly unusual since heart disease has always prevailed as the leading cause of deaths. However, when taking a closer look at the death numbers, she noted something strange. As Briand compared the number of deaths per cause during that period in 2020 to 2018, she noticed that instead of the expected drastic increase across all causes, there was a significant decrease in deaths due to heart disease. Even more surprising, as seen in the graph below, this sudden decline in deaths is observed for all other causes

The retracted paper?  https://www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19

Like vaccines cause autism!  Retracted.

There are excess deaths. You could list "unknown cause" on every death certificate and we would still be noticing more deaths than normal.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

 

 

 

Edited November 28, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Rob Kramer + 696]

18 hours ago, 0R0 said:

Dakotas outbreak peaked around Nov 8 on the Kinsa temp. measurement map

Nov 26 Temp map shows Dakotas outbreak slowing down and new "center" is in Cincinnati. Note that the old first wave urban centers are showing no temp elevations. So Boston Chicago-Gary, NYC, DC Seattle Portland, LA SF are all cold spots with little elevated temp activity.

So the Plains states wave is done, at least for now. Cincinnati is in round 2

This is showing a relatively rapid decline for now in the worst hit Dakotas. We can compare to Cincinnati to see what it would look like in a worst case peak.

   

Compare that to epicenter of the outbreak in Bronx (also Queens) NY - truly ridiculous that NY officials are concerned. There is no sign of a real outbreak in the city so far. Not so much because of CV19 safety measures but because most of the active population already had it.

 

 

I saw on Twitter and have not verified anything.  But it was a graph of N vs S Dakota and the infection rates looked identical and they both had peaked and started decline and S Dakota was leading .... and that was the one without a mask policy . I truly believe masks do nothing. And I read a report by 3m that stated they "may" help very specific circumstances and that hospitals and places were covid is its worse to wear a mask. (Non n95) . But I just mention this because you have some Dakota info and I saw it a few days ago.

[0R0 + 6,251]

Thanks to Gateway Pundit

From CDC website

Comorbidities

Table 3 shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death. The number of deaths with each condition or cause is shown for all deaths and by age groups. For data on comorbidities,

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm?fbclid=IwAR2-muRM3tB3uBdbTrmKwH1NdaBx6PpZo2kxotNwkUXlnbZXCwSRP2OmqsI

 

https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Conditions-contributing-to-deaths-involving-corona/hk9y-quqm

has the download (click "export")

Corresponds to post mortem survey of Lombardy CV19 deaths from June showing about 12% of CV19 deaths were primarily of the CV19 virus rather than the comorbidities.

It goes along with the Johns Hopkins data analysis of excess deaths that shows a lack of a significant difference.

While I would not say the IFR is thus 0.02% rather than the antibody based 0.2%, I would say that based on this kind of info it would be likely that IFR based on antibody prevalence is actually <0.06% average and take it as reasonable to assume that the 2.6 X morbidities per CV19 deaths would be roughly equally distributed as contributors to the final outcome to similar degrees, counting as 1/3.6 of "died with CV19" deaths.

That would still leave the question of NYC metro deaths being way up there as % of the population indicating either total infection, or a more complex circumstance of death. Like deliberately infecting the nursing homes.

[0R0 + 6,251]

1 hour ago, Rob Kramer said:

I saw on Twitter and have not verified anything.  But it was a graph of N vs S Dakota and the infection rates looked identical and they both had peaked and started decline and S Dakota was leading .... and that was the one without a mask policy . I truly believe masks do nothing. And I read a report by 3m that stated they "may" help very specific circumstances and that hospitals and places were covid is its worse to wear a mask. (Non n95) . But I just mention this because you have some Dakota info and I saw it a few days ago.

Well, masks do "something" useful. But they are a net benefit only if you replace them every hour or  2. It not then you increase the odds of mouth and lung bacterial infections  which are more dangerous than CV19.

[0R0 + 6,251]

Commentary on Pfizer's airways meds chief (retired) Dr. Yeadon's video

The 2nd wave in the cities is fake, made up of false positives on hyped up tests doing well over 40 PCR cycles, In my temp tracking on Kinsa it is obvious that the big cities are largely cool zones. They got herd immunity at the first go. The entire show there is Kabuki. There is nothing resembling an actual second wave there. In flatter cities there is a sort of 2nd wave that is quite minor.

http://tapnewswire.com/2020/11/pandemic-is-over-former-pfizer-chief-science-officer-says-second-wave-faked-on-false-positive-tests/

They will run out of excuses to keep the Dem cities locked down when nobody shows up in the hospital and nobody dies with CV19.

[0R0 + 6,251]

Another piece about Yeadon and a recent Nature article about the myth of asymptomatic carriers.

Essentially, the shedding peaks upon the appearance of symptoms. You only have a short window of hours' worth of duration as you go from pre to symptomatic. Actual asymptomatics do not transmit at all. Thus widespread testing is a ridiculous strategy of waste and panic. To go along with the ridiculous setting of 40 cycles on the PCR test (97% of "cases" positive at 35 cycles do not have live virus you can culture) .

http://tapnewswire.com/2020/11/there-is-no-asymptomatic-spread-mass-testing-can-stop-study/

Article referenced

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33219229/

Also related

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/seeing-the-invisible/given-new-data-we-must-downgrade-the-severity-of-this-pandemic/

 

 

[Tom Nolan + 2,443]

This article by Irina Slav should go on this Thread

 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

12 hours ago, 0R0 said:

They will run out of excuses to keep the Dem cities locked down when nobody shows up in the hospital and nobody dies with CV19.

I don't know anyone who enjoys the lockdowns and wants them to continue. I do know several physicians who support their use, but they personally still hate it. They want to see their friends too. 

Sometimes the medicine tastes bad.

 

 

 

 

[Tom Nolan + 2,443]

2 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

I don't know anyone who enjoys the lockdowns and wants them to continue. I do know several physicians who support their use, but they personally still hate it. They want to see their friends too. 

Sometimes the medicine tastes bad.

Enthalpic,  Do you advocate lockdowns, or masks, or social distancing, or all three?