Homebuyers aren't taking climate change seriously, says Redfin CEO

Business

CNBC 03 September, 2021 - 06:59pm 45 views

Bitcoin price is back at $50,000 and until either support at $30,000 is broken to the downside or a new all-time high is set, the direction of the market won’t be as distinguishable.

Fundamentally, the network continues to grow, and sentiment remains high surrounding the cryptocurrency space. Better yet for bulls, here are five outrageously bullish charts filled with technical signals that suggest that bulls have very little fear about what could come in the months ahead.

For those looking for evidence of a bear market, you won’t find it on the chart above. After the peak was put in December 2017, Bitcoin price immediately plummeted below the line to kickstart the most recent bear market. The weekly RSI is back holding above this line – which following the December 2013 peak was lost and a bear market began.

A parabolic curve supports the price action in all examples above and below. Also in the chart directly below, the Ichimoku shows that during past bearish phases, Bitcoin price action sliced through a steep and thin cloud, while price action today is well above the cloud on weekly timeframes.

Bitcoin is currently above the baseline (Kijun-Sen) and conversion line (Tenken-Sen), but the two lines are still crossed bearish. A bull cross driven by another impulse could do the trick.

Elliott Wave International recently shared a video discussing Bitcoin and a potential fifth wave brewing. Packaged with the video was a detailed explanation of the study where Elliott Wave Theory was compared to a “roadmap” that could potentially be followed.

For added measure, the Parabolic SAR is turned on, highlighted in green for the sake of showing a new uptrend could be in its early stages. But the real meat and potatoes of the chart are the waves and their structure.

Drawn from where Bitcoin broke down to bear market lows to across both major local highs since the bottom was put in, we have a potential target for where a wave five might end. According to Elliott Wave Theory,  wave two and four alternate in length and severity, and the third wave is typically the longest, strongest, and easiest to recognize.

Wave five is usually around the same length in power and duration as the first wave – and also just so happens to line up with the previous mid-cycle pullbacks. If accurate, the cryptocurrency could run around 325% or higher from the bottom around $30,000 and bring the high of this cycle to around $125,000 to $150,000 per BTC.

Fifth waves can extend, however, and match or even exceed the length of a wave three, so truly any outcome is possible with an asset with this much potential application.

NewsBTC is a cryptocurrency news service that covers bitcoin news today, technical analysis & forecasts for bitcoin price and other altcoins. Here at NewsBTC, we are dedicated to enlightening everyone about bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

We cover BTC news related to bitcoin exchanges, bitcoin mining and price forecasts for various cryptocurrencies.

© 2021 NewsBTC. All Rights Reserved.

© 2021 NewsBTC. All Rights Reserved.

Read full article at CNBC

Top 3 with Professor Michael Kidd: Pfizer side effects, Pfizer eligibility, & mental health support

Australian Government Department of Health 03 September, 2021 - 06:30pm

Health Officials Advise Biden to Scale Back Covid-19 Booster Shots Plan For Now

The New York Times 03 September, 2021 - 06:30pm

Federal regulators warned on Thursday they may not have enough data to recommend boosters for anyone except certain recipients of the Pfizer vaccine by late September.

WASHINGTON — Top federal health officials have told the White House to scale back a plan to offer coronavirus booster shots to the general public later this month, saying that regulators need more time to collect and review all the necessary data, according to people familiar with the discussion.

Dr. Janet Woodcock, the acting commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, and Dr. Rochelle P. Walensky, who heads the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, warned the White House on Thursday that their agencies may be able to determine in the coming weeks whether to recommend boosters only for recipients of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine — and possibly just some of them to start.

The two health leaders made their argument in a meeting with Jeffrey D. Zients, the White House pandemic coordinator. Several people who heard about the session said it was unclear how Mr. Zients responded. But he has insisted for months that the White House will always follow the advice of government scientists, wherever it leads.

Asked about the meeting, a White House spokesman on Friday said, “We always said we would follow the science, and this is all part of a process that is now underway,” adding that the administration was awaiting a “full review and approval” of booster shots by the F.D.A. as well as a recommendation from the C.D.C.

“When that approval and recommendation are made,” the spokesman, Chris Meagher, said, “we will be ready to implement the plan our nation’s top doctors developed so that we are staying ahead of this virus.”

Less than three weeks ago, Mr. Biden said that contingent on F.D.A. approval, the government planned to start offering boosters the week of Sept. 20 to adults who had received their second shot of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccine at least eight months ago. That would include many health care workers and nursing home residents, as well as some people older than 65, who were generally the first to be vaccinated. Administration officials have said that recipients of the single-dose Johnson & Johnson vaccine would probably be offered an additional shot soon as well.

Mr. Biden cast the strategy as another tool that the nation needed to battle the highly contagious Delta variant, which has driven up infection rates, swamped hospitals with Covid-19 patients and is now leading to an average of more than 1,500 deaths a day. “The plan is for every adult to get a booster shot eight months after you got your second shot,” he said on Aug. 18, adding, “It will make you safer, and for longer. And it will help us end the pandemic faster.”

Like Mr. Biden, members of his pandemic response team have said that the plan depended on the F.D.A. and the C.D.C. authorizing the booster shots. Both Dr. Woodcock and Dr. Walensky helped craft the plan and publicly endorsed it. Some public health experts have said that by doing so, they increased pressure on scientists weighing the evidence for boosters within their respective agencies to go along with the administration’s strategy.

“Now those agencies are in a box,” said Dr. Steven Joffe, a professor of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania. “We want doctors and scientists and the public to trust in the recommendations and decisions that are made, to be able to point to the F.D.A. and C.D.C. doing their due diligence.”

Privately, Dr. Woodcock had argued that it was risky to set a firm date for a booster rollout before regulators had a chance to thoroughly review the data, some of which had yet to be submitted by the vaccine manufacturers, and decide whether shots were safe and necessary, according to several people familiar with the discussions.

And since the White House announced the booster plan in mid-August, they said, new hurdles appeared.

Among the reasons for delaying is that regulators need more time to decide the proper dosage for a possible third Moderna shot. The company’s application asking the F.D.A. to authorize a booster shot contains insufficient data, one federal official familiar with the process said. Other data expected from Johnson & Johnson has not been delivered.

Nor has the raw data that the F.D.A. has been seeking from Israel, which is already giving boosters to everyone 12 and older. Israeli officials say their data shows that the potency of Pfizer’s vaccine wanes over time against severe disease and hospitalization, but that a third shot bolsters protection significantly. The F.D.A. wants to see the underlying data, to make sure it backs up summaries that the Israeli government has provided.

Narrowing the booster plan could confuse the public and create a perception that federal vaccine policy is in some degree of disarray. But some public health experts will most likely welcome it.

They have been arguing strenuously that the administration lacks the data to justify a broad rollout of extra shots and should instead concentrate on vaccinating the roughly 25 percent of Americans who are eligible for shots but remain unprotected. And some have said that senior Biden officials, including the leaders of health agencies, wrongly cornered regulators by announcing a strategy before they could conduct a full review.

Regulators are only beginning to review critical data that will help them determine if and how boosters should be given. Pfizer completed its booster application to the F.D.A. last week, officials said, and Moderna has just initiated its own.

More friction may lie ahead. On Sept. 17, the F.D.A.’s outside advisory committee is scheduled to publicly review Pfizer’s data supporting a booster shot. Even though Pfizer has asked the F.D.A. to approve booster doses for people 16 and up, the agency could decide to restrict who gets a booster. The C.D.C. and its outside advisory panel would also have to weigh in.

One key member of the F.D.A.’s advisory panel, Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, argues boosters are premature. “There is no compelling reason to get a third dose” now, he said in an interview on Thursday.

He said the administration had appeared to expect that the F.D.A. and the C.D.C. would rubber-stamp its booster timeline. “Bypassing and marginalizing those agencies led veterans who you need in this pandemic to leave the F.D.A.” he said, referring to the departures of Dr. Gruber and Dr. Krause.

Various studies have shown that the potency of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines ebbs against infection over time, but suggest that the vaccines continue to offer robust protection against severe illness and hospitalization.

But Dr. Vivek Murthy, the surgeon general, said in an interview on Thursday that a few studies have suggested a dip in protection against severe disease over time. “Our feeling was that if we waited several more months we would see protection against hospitalizations and deaths break down,” he said.

In an interview published Thursday on WebMD.com, Dr. Woodcock echoed that view, saying that the trend of breakthrough infections has led health officials to believe at some point, “we are going to see hospitalizations and more serious disease” among fully vaccinated people. When that happens, she said, “we want to be ready” with the booster plan.

Some Americans are already getting booster shots ahead of F.D.A. approval: more than a million fully vaccinated people have received an additional dose since mid-August.

Dr. Scott Gottlieb on the battle over Covid booster shots

CNBC Television 03 September, 2021 - 06:30pm

Dr. Scott Gottlieb on the battle over Covid booster shots

The Washington Post 03 September, 2021 - 06:30pm

US states that had some of the worst Covid-19 case rates in past week also reported the highest rates of new vaccinations

CNN 03 September, 2021 - 06:30pm

Updated 2:01 AM ET, Fri September 3, 2021

CNN's Naomi Thomas, Lauren Mascarenhas, Jacqueline Howard, Maggie Fox, Amanda Sealy, Lauren del Valle and Madeline Holcombe contributed to this report.

You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not work.

Horowitz: Why is Pfizer – the leakiest vaccine – enjoying the most approval from government?

TheBlaze 02 September, 2021 - 09:35am

Even the most unflinching supporters of the COVID vaccines who deny any risks whatsoever should be asking the following salient question: Why is it the Pfizer vaccine that is getting the first full approval, the first booster approval, and the first emergency use for children, given that Moderna clearly works better?

Any intellectually honest person at this point would have to admit that Moderna has won the battle of vaccine champions vs. Pfizer. According to a Mayo Clinic study, as of July, Americans were twice as likely to experience breakthrough infections after having had the Pfizer shot compared to Moderna. "In Florida, which is currently experiencing its largest COVID-19 surge to date, the risk of infection in July after full vaccination with mRNA-1273 (the Moderna shot) was about 60% lower than after full vaccination with BNT162b2 (Pfizer)," the researchers said.

Overall, the Mayo Clinic researchers pegged Pfizer's efficacy at 42% vs. 76% for Moderna.

Israel, a country where almost the entire adult population got the Pfizer shot, found just 39% efficacy in the Pfizer shot from data that is now two months old. And evidence is mounting that the efficacy wanes with every increasing month. Given these numbers, and the known risks of leaky viruses creating stronger, more durable viral immune escape, isn't anyone interested in researching whether Pfizer's leakiness is the possible culprit for both the U.S. and Israel seemingly experiencing a worse surge than ever before?

The fact that Pfizer is leaking with antibodies waning much quicker is not surprising. A new study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that Moderna recipients had twice the antibody levels of those who received the Pfizer shots after a similar follow-up period after the second shot.

"Pfizer is the lowest dose of mRNA, at 30 micrograms per shot, and it's therefore obvious that Pfizer has the lowest estimated vaccine efficacy," said Dr. Peter McCullough, a world-renowned cardiologist who has raised serious questions about the mass vaccination strategy.

McCollough said that the differential vaccine efficacy is not merely about academic intrigue but has real-life consequences. "A common question I'm asked by my patients is which vaccine is the best and how can it be safely given," he said. Based on the government's stronger and quicker approval of Pfizer, the public perception is that Pfizer is the best bet, and Pfizer is winning the market share and almost completely owns the teen demographic.

However, how can "the experts" ask Americans now to take a risk on a booster from Pfizer, in itself an indictment of Pfizer's existing efficacy, with the same failed formula without giving proper informed consent about the efficacy of each vaccine? Israeli researchers came out with a new study concluding that "elderly individuals (60+) who received their second dose (of Pfizer) in March 2021 were 1.6 (CI: [1.3, 2]) times more protected against infection and 1.7 (CI: [1.0, 2.7]) times more protected against severe COVID-19 compared to those who received their second dose in January 2021." They found similar results across all age groups; it's just that most of the seniors were vaccinated earlier, so they are experiencing waning immunity quicker.

There are so many unanswered questions based on the existing science. Why should Pfizer be the first to be rewarded with a third shot if its product failed quicker than anyone else's? And how will another dose of the same formula with an ever-evolving virus work even as long as last time? Shouldn't we first study why the vaccine is so leaky and whether the leakiness is the culprit for this bizarre viral enhancement we seem to be experiencing, which is so unnatural? Typically, a virus that is more transmissible becomes less virulent, not more virulent.

Business Stories