The Playground

Quote from THHuxleynew

And re RB's "paper" above - this is of course another example where THH's anti-vaxxer detection kit* works.

Seneff, the lead author, is a prominent anti-vaxxer, and has no medical expertise. She is a Computer Scientist, working on HCI, language understanding, speech recognition.

And, were she a medical scientist the extraordinarily variety of her claimed contributions to medical science, and the way that the historic ones have all been so completely debunked - again woudl trigger anti-vaxxer detection systems.

THH

* - ok - I can't really take credit, it is common sense and many others use it independently of me. I am juts popularising it on the thread where it seems almost unknown.

Display More

And you are a circuit jocky who thinks he is smarter and more informed than all. They do research, you do character assignations. You knew nothing of seneff before the pandemic and now you are an expert on her research. You are so see thru

Is there a Mr. Koch in the room, first name Micheal, but goes by Mike?

2022-06-24 03:24 Michael Koch 

Dear Mr. Rossi,

thank you for your overall important research.

I tried to order 1 pcs of the ECat via the Leonardo Corp. but received no answer. Is this company still alive? They wanted to reach 1 million orders until Dec.2022 but I think this is delusional. Nevertheless I find the whole project as too important to disappear.

Can you inform us how to purchase an ECat – I know a number persons who are strongly interested in this concept.

Regards

Michael Koch

2022-06-24 05:54 Andrea Rossi 

Michael Koch:

I checked, but to me results that your pre-order has been received and that you received the confirmation.

Warm Regards,

A.R.

Paxlovid and Molnupiravir the drugs that keep on giving.......... You Covid, over and over!

COVID-19 rebound after Paxlovid and Molnupiravir during January-June 2022

COVID-19 rebound after Paxlovid and Molnupiravir during January-June 2022

Abstract Importance Recent case reports document that some patients who were treated with Paxlovid experienced rebound COVID-19 infections and symptoms 2 to 8…

www.medrxiv.org

Abstract

Importance Recent case reports document that some patients who were treated with Paxlovid experienced rebound COVID-19 infections and symptoms 2 to 8 days after completing a 5-day course of Paxlovid. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recently issued a Health Alert Network Health Advisory to update the public on the potential for COVID-19 rebound after Paxlovid treatments. However, the rates of COVID-19 rebound in a real-world population or whether rebound is unique to Paxlovid remains unknown.

Objectives To examine the rates and relative risks of COVID-19 rebound in patients treated with Paxlovid or with Molnupiravir and to compare characteristics of patients who experienced COVID-19 rebound to those who did not.

Design, Setting, and Participants Retrospective cohort study of electronic health records (EHRs) of 92 million patients from a multicenter and nationwide database in the US. The study population comprised 13,644 patients age ≥ 18 years who contracted COVID-19 between 1/1/2022-6/8/2022 and were treated with Paxlovid (n =11,270) or with Molnupiravir (n =2,374) within 5 days of their COVID-19 infection.

Exposures Paxlovid or Molnupiravir.

Main Outcomes and Measures Three types of COVID-19 rebound outcomes (COVID-19 infections, COVID-19 related symptoms, and hospitalizations) were examined. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence interval (CI) of 7-day and 30-day risk for COVID-19 rebound between patients treated with Paxlovid and patients treated with Molnupiravir were calculated before and after propensity-score matching.

Results The 7-day and 30-day COVID-19 rebound rates after Paxlovid treatment were 3.53% and 5.40% for COVID-19 infection, 2.31% and 5.87% for COVID-19 symptoms, and 0.44% and 0.77% for hospitalizations. The 7-day and 30-day COVID-19 rebound rates after Molnupiravir treatment were 5.86% and 8.59% for COVID-19 infection, 3.75% and 8.21% for COVID-19 symptoms, and 0.84% and 1.39% for hospitalizations. After propensity-score matching, there were no significant differences in COVID-19 rebound risks between Paxlovid and Molnupiravir: infection (HR 0.90, 95% CI: 0.73-1.11), COVID-19 symptoms (HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.83-1.27), or hospitalizations (HR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.56-1.55). Patients with COVID-19 rebound had significantly higher prevalence of underlying medical conditions than those without.

Conclusions and Relevance COVID-19 rebound occurred both after Paxlovid and Molnupiravir, especially in patients with underlying medical conditions. This indicates that COVID-19 rebound is not unique to Paxlovid and the risks were similar for Paxlovid and Molnupiravir. For both drugs the rates of COVID-19 rebound increased with time after treatments. Our results call for continuous surveillance of COVID-19 rebound after Paxlovid and Molnupiravir treatments. Studies are necessary to determine the mechanisms underlying COVID-19 rebounds and to test dosing and duration regimes that might prevent such rebounds in vulnerable patients.

These ER doctors said profit-driven company officials pressed them to work while they had Covid symptoms

One doctor who worked for American Physician Partners says in a lawsuit there was an unwritten policy: “Motrin, mask, man-up and must not test.”

These ER doctors said profit-driven company officials pressed them to work while they had Covid symptoms

One doctor who worked for American Physician Partners says in a lawsuit there was an unwritten policy: “Motrin, mask, man-up and must not test.”

www.nbcnews.com

In January, Sonali Patel, an emergency department doctor at a big Houston hospital, became ill while on duty. After testing positive for Covid, she said she told her boss she had the coronavirus and was going home.

“He insisted I stay and finish the shift,” she recalled in an interview with NBC News and in a recent lawsuit. “I told him it’s not the safe thing to do. We have a ton of immunocompromised patients and we were putting them at risk.

By requesting time off from work while sick with Covid, Patel breached an unofficial policy promoted by officials at the hospital staffing company she works for — American Physician Partners — according to the lawsuit filed against the company by her and seven physician colleagues.

Those doctors say American Physician Partners' officials pressed them to work while ill, even if they contracted Covid and could spread it to patients and colleagues, according to the suit filed in Harris County, Texas, district court in March. Physicians who worked while sick were celebrated, while those who stayed home with Covid had their pay docked, the lawsuit says.

Quote from RobertBryant

mRNA vaccines promote sustained synthesis of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

Sustained compared to what? It only lasts a day or two. It occurs only in one small part of your arm muscle tissue. The common cold or COVID produces millions of times more of these spike proteins, over your entire body, for a week or more.

Quote from RobertBryant

The spike protein is neurotoxic, and it impairs DNA repair mechanisms.

If that were true, a cold would impair DNA repair mechanisms. The effect would be approximately a million times larger.

Quote from RobertBryant

Suppression of type I interferon responses results in impaired innate immunity.

This is nonsense, for the reasons given above.

Quote from RobertBryant

Highlights

From paper:: . Finally, we find that there are 27 times as many reports for COVID-19 vaccines as would be expected if its adverse reactions were comparable to those from the flu vaccine.

Table 1 lists a number of symptoms in VAERS that can be associated with inflammation of or damage to various major nerves of the body,
particularly those in the head. Strikingly, COVID-19 vaccines represented from 96 to 98% of the reports in the year 2021 related to each of these debilitating conditions. There were nearly 100,000 cases of nausea
or vomiting, which are common symptoms of vagus nerve stimulation or damage (Babic and Browning, 2014). 14,701 cases of syncope linked to COVID-19 vaccines represented 96.3% of all cases of syncope, a
well-established feature of vagus nerve dysfunction (Fenton et al.,2000).

What happened to the lab-leak hypothesis? - UnHerd

Why is the lab leak theory being swept under the rug? Nothing it appears, to do with the science:

We think we know why people feel so threatened by Viral. After all we are not lab-leak extremists and we have also been attacked by those who are. But by taking down credible moderate voices, our critics within the scientific establishment are polarising the issue and casting the lab origin hypothesis as one that is only championed by anti-science or uninformed groups. As Professor Jonathan Haidt of New York University has pointed out, on social media these days it is common for activists to spend a lot of time criticising moderates on their own side of an argument.

The Chinese authorities have made it clear that any discussion of a possible lab leak is — in their view — xenophobic bullying. “The lab leak theory is totally a lie concocted by anti-China forces for political purposes, which has nothing to do with science,” said China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman on 10 June. (Although they also argue that a lab leak of Covid from US laboratories should be investigated.) This stance from the Chinese government puts universities and scientific journals in a tough spot because of their increasing dependency on Chinese funding and patronage.

Science funders are embarrassed to note that, as Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University has recently documented, some of the funding that went into collecting and manipulating bat viruses in Wuhan came from the West, so better to let that sleeping dog lie. Virologists are worried that fingering a lab leak will affect their flow of grant money or result in more oversight and regulation of virology research. One scientist told us that: “If we investigate and expose an error on the part of scientists, then the public will no longer trust science.” As if choosing to deliberately not uncover a possible error would make people trust science more.

Science journalists generally see their job as cheerleading for scientists, not investigating them, so have largely refused to engage with the evidence for a lab leak. Some environmentalists would prefer the episode to be a cautionary tale about the destruction of rainforests. The issue has rapidly become partisan with Republicans largely driving the calls for an investigation. Bipartisan efforts and proposals to investigate the origin of Covid — a pandemic that has taken the lives of more than a million Americans — have proceeded at a glacial pace. Many younger commentators see blaming a Chinese lab as more racist than blaming Chinese eating habits for some reason (despite the fact that no bats or pangolins were found to be sold in Wuhan markets in the years leading up to the pandemic). And so on.

In short, there is a confluence of vested interest that results in a lot of motivated reasoning. It is hard to find anybody, with the exception of a few fringe media outfits, who is being paid as part of their day job to investigate the possibility of a lab leak without fear or favour. The people who have persisted in keeping the lab-leak hypothesis alive, against staunch opposition by some virologists and the media, are doing it in their spare time and at their own expense — as are we.

Is this relevant to 'Cold Fusion' aka LENR, Lattice Confinement Fusion, LEC, Fusion Diode, Nano Ball Lightning

CMNS energy technologies

OR

Is this more about traditional 'Hot Fusion'?

Quote from Previous post

The large field enhancements in the nanogaps of hydrogen-absorbing transition metals observed in this study can potentially be utilized for various energy applications, such as hydrogen storage, sensing, and nuclear fusion.

DOI:10.3390/nano9091235Corpus ID: 201829708

"Lightning-Rod Effect of Plasmonic Field Enhancement on Hydrogen-Absorbing Transition Metals"

Norihiko Fukuoka, K. Tanabe, Published 30 August 2019

Physics, Materials Science, Nanomaterials

Abstract

The plasmonic enhancement of electromagnetic field energy density at the sharp tips of nanoparticles or nanoscale surface roughnesses of hydrogen-absorbing transition metals, Pd, Ti, and Ni, is quantitatively investigated. A large degree of energy focusing is observed for these transition metals in the microwave region, even surpassing the enhancement for noble metals according to the conditions. Pd, for instance, exhibits peak field enhancement factors of 6000 and 2 × 108 in air for morphological aspect ratios of 10 and 100, respectively. Metal surfaces possibly contain such degrees of nano- or micro-scale native random roughnesses, and, therefore, the field enhancement effect may have been unknowingly produced in existing electrical and optical systems. In addition, for future devices under development, particularly in hydrogen-related applications, it is desirable to design and optimize the systems, including the choice of materials, structures, and operating conditions, by accounting for the plasmonic local energy enhancement effect around the metal surfaces.

Source
Semantic Scholar is an artificial-intelligence backed search engine for academic publications developed at the Allen Institute for AI and publicly released in November 2015. It uses advances in natural language processing to provide summaries for scholarly papers.

[PDF] Lightning-Rod Effect of Plasmonic Field Enhancement on Hydrogen-Absorbing Transition Metals | Semantic Scholar

For future devices under development, particularly in hydrogen-related applications, it is desirable to design and optimize the systems, including the choice…

www.semanticscholar.org

·Your connection to this site is secure

Solid State Atomic and Fusion Energy,

The typical noble metals Au and Ag are considered as plasmonic supporters for excitation of hybrid plasmonic modes in bowtie dimers.

In November 1911, Marie Skłodowska-Curie was weeks away from being awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. She received her first Nobel in 1903 for Physics, and the new award meant that she was the first person ever to receive two Prizes. She remains the only person to be recognized in two different sciences. Though her extraordinary work as a scientist should have been all anyone cared about, it seemed that many were preoccupied with her personal life.

Pierre Curie died in 1906, leaving Marie as a widow. A few years later, she became romantically involved with physicist Paul Langevin, who had been a doctoral student of Pierre’s. Though Langevin was separated from his wife, they were still technically married. The relationship caused troubles in the Langevin home, but that was nothing compared to what was about to spill over into the public eye.

Curie, Langevin, and about 20 other scientists were invited to an elite, invitation-only conference in Brussels in the fall of 1911. During this time, love letters between Curie and Langevin had been given to members of the media by Langevin’s wife, who portrayed Curie as an evil homewrecker.

When Curie returned home to France after the conference, she was greeted by a mob that surrounded her house and terrified Curie’s daughters, who were only 7 and 14 years old at the time. Curie and her daughters temporarily moved in with a friend until the scandal died down.

Albert Einstein—who had just recently been introduced to Curie at the Brussels conference—was disgusted by the media’s actions, prompting him to write this letter to his new friend:

"Highly esteemed Mrs. Curie,

Do not laugh at me for writing you without having anything sensible to say. But I am so enraged by the base manner in which the public is presently daring to concern itself with you that I absolutely must give vent to this feeling. However, I am convinced that you consistently despise this rabble, whether it obsequiously lavishes respect on you or whether it attempts to satiate its lust for sensationalism!

I am impelled to tell you how much I have come to admire your intellect, your drive, and your honesty, and that I consider myself lucky to have made your personal acquaintance in Brussels. Anyone who does not number among these reptiles is certainly happy, now as before, that we have such personages among us as you, and Langevin too, real people with whom one feels privileged to be in contact. If the rabble continues to occupy itself with you, then simply don’t read that hogwash, but rather leave it to the reptile for whom it has been fabricated.

With most amicable regards to you, Langevin, and Perrin, yours very truly,

– Albert Einstein, November 23, 1911

.

P.S. I have determined the statistical law of motion of the diatomic molecule in Planck’s radiation field by means of a comical witticism, naturally under the constraint that the structure’s motion follows the laws of standard mechanics. My hope that this law is valid in reality is very small, though."

Quote from Fm1

Vaccines lacking any significant efficacy but our alphabet agencies continue to approve. Payed for by your tax dollars. Total insanity!

NOP: Payed = bribed by Pfizer/ Moderna!

Quote from Shane D.

In short, there is a confluence of vested interest that results in a lot of motivated reasoning.

Read the Fauci e-mails how they made the virus. All journals/News networks are in the FM/R/JF/B mafia's hands...

Katsuaki Tanabe's research while affiliated with Kyoto University and other places

Field Enhancement in Metal Nanogaps

Chapter

Jan 2022

Katsuaki Tanabe

In the previous chapters, we discussed the plasmonic field enhancement factors on planar and spherical surfaces and also at sharp tips of nanoparticles or nanoscale surface roughnesses of hydrogen-absorbing transition metals.

Quote from JedRothwell

Sustained compared to what? It only lasts a day or two. It occurs only in one small part of your arm muscle tissue. The common cold or COVID produces millions of times more of these spike proteins, over your entire body, for a week or more.

Jed continues to say this, despite being shown otherwise. Why? Maybe Jed himself doesn't know.

Sounding like a broken record here :

1) In those injected with mRNA, the spike protein is detected on exosomes four months after injection, in the blood. It is throughout the body. Both mRNA and spike are found in the lymph nodes 3 weeks after injection.

2)Spike antigen in the blood in the few days following vaccination is comparable to that found in the blood of acute Covid patients.

Cutting Edge: Circulating Exosomes with COVID Spike Protein Are Induced by BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) Vaccination prior to Development of Antibodies: A Novel Mechanism for Immune Activation by mRNA Vaccines

Severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes severe acute respiratory syndrome. mRNA vaccines directed at the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein…

www.jimmunol.org

Immune imprinting, breadth of variant recognition, and germinal center response in human SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination

During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, novel and traditional vaccine strategies have been deployed globally. We investigated whether antibodies stimulated by…

www.sciencedirect.com

Quote from THHuxleynew

Anyway RNA vaccines are not immunosuppressive, far from it, except inasfar as anything that tunes the immune system to respond to a new agent changes it. They do not suppress innate immune response.

How can you say this, when Pfizer's own data shows more sickness in the vaccinated within two weeks after vaccination, than the vaccinated?

Also there is the Denmark study that shows the mRNA injection is associated with higher all cause mortality than the Adenovirus vector vaccines. Either the latter is improving overall health, or the mRNA injection is decreasing health, or perhaps both. Unfortunately no non vaccinated group was utilized to get more insight into what is going on.

Randomised Clinical Trials of COVID-19 Vaccines: Do Adenovirus-Vector Vaccines Have Beneficial Non-Specific Effects?

Quote from Mark U

Randomised Clinical Trials of COVID-19 Vaccines: Do Adenovirus-Vector Vaccines Have Beneficial Non-Specific Effects?

Live virus vaccines have a high benefit. Take an active TB vaccine. It will lower your CoV-19 risk much more than any gene therapy sold by Pfizer/Moderna...

Quote from Mark U

How can you say this, when Pfizer's own data shows more sickness in the vaccinated within two weeks after vaccination, than the vaccinated?

(I haven't read details of any preceding posts.)

Bit of a time-skew difference, no?

Any vax-reactions are likely to occur soon after the jab. Let's say (argumento) a linear ramp down from 0 to 28 days.

Vax-PROTECTION ramps UP linearly from 0 to max at 14 days .. and then lasts for .. 6 months? A year? Longer? (And this should be applied to the strain for which it was developed, not all the variants.)

Pfizer and Moderna start counting the official results at 14 days.

So a comparison of vax-reaction over 2 weeks vs vax-not-yet-protected over two weeks is .... irrelevant?

Quote from Alan Fletcher

Pfizer and Moderna start counting the official results at 14 days.

Because of immune suppression that finally forces infects in about 1.5% of all "vaccinated" with CoV-19. Far more (5x) than unvaxx...

Current gen therapy is not a vaccine. Do not believe big pharma fairy tales. The induced immune memory is the same a from an acquired allergy - thus very very narrow. E.g. Pfizer crap gives you a negative protection from Omicron....

Quote from Alan Fletcher

So a comparison of vax-reaction over 2 weeks vs vax-not-yet-protected over two weeks is .... irrelevant?

Pharma would love to have you believe it is irrelevant, but it is not. That is because assessing true risk/benefit from a vaccine must include all time - from the injection of the vaccine to years afterwards. The FDA / pharma cheats by both ignoring the 2 week risk interval after vaccination and also the long term risk interval. They cheat in the latter by vaccinating the control group within months.

As a recent and blatant example of such cheating, look at how Pfizer conducted the study to get the ever-so-willing FDA to approve the Covid injection for children from 6 months to 4 years. A doctor gives her assessment :

Dr Clare Craig on why the FDA should NOT have granted vaccine approval for babies 6 months upwards.

Dr Clare Craig explains why the FDA should NOT have granted approval for roll out in the 6 month to 4 yr old children cohort This trial should have been deemed…

rumble.com