Covid-19 News

    Quote from Navid

    The vaccine paradigm is breaking as 19th century tech


    Navid,


    I am not entering the debate about vaccines, but would like clarification on your stance. It is clear that you are dubious of "vaccines" however, that is somewhat a generic term. There are multiple types of vaccines that are categorically different.


    • Live-attenuated vaccines.
    • Inactivated vaccines.
    • Subunit, recombinant, polysaccharide, and conjugate vaccines.
    • Toxoid vaccines.


    Are you advocating that ALL "vaccines" are bad and should be avoided? I have not seen you distinguish nor really state what the theory is why a particular vaccine is so harmful.


    For instance the first two above, would seemingly be no different than if a person contracted the virus normally. The body creates the actual defensive mechanism, not the vaccine. The vaccine simply "triggers" the body's natural defense via introducing virus matter. The other two work via completely different mechanisms.


    So my question to you is : "Are you stating all vaccines are bad or only particular types"? And to be honest, I have not really read a theory on why "inactivated vaccines" would be so dangerous? It is hard to fathom that all the above vaccines would be lumped together as causes for the same maladies.


    It is hard to teach such advanced concept in blog posts - the material is out there and I don't mind sharing some material (PM me).

    But it is good to start from today.


    Today we have

    * 80% natural immunity to corona-virus from built-in systems-- whether that is (as shown by German research) -- T-cells that fight Cov19 or Natural Killer cells (especially in children which have 5x more!)

    * 0.005% death rate < 65 and 1-2% death rate > 80. Germany says roughly 0.15% death rate overall.

    * But now, with HCQ etc we have treatments that if applied programatically will drop the already low death rate. Very very very few, will die FROM Covid19 with treatment - they die because we let people move from a viral illness to a immune reaction

    * We are gaming the system by using "died with Covid" to scare monger and increase apparent death counts. Michael Levitt says 20% of people in some years may have died with Influenza Positive PCR - making the 2017 flu season a worse pandemic than covid19.


    Our bodies are naturally good at fighting the disease (evidenced by 80% immunity). We are being sold the need for mass vaccination right now, when it is clear that is a completely 100% wrong decision.


    Vaccines are not risk-free interventions.

    The last attempt at this situation was in the 2009 Swine Flu. They said there would be 35k Swine flu deaths in Germany!

    They called for mass vaccination. Germany bought 60million doses. The Germans refused vaccination. Very very few died.

    Yet, because of vaccination narcolepsy ruled Northern Europe 2000 cases.

    Germany had few narcolepsy cases due to low vaccination.


    This type of story is the history of vaccines. Every single vaccine has a history, as does the disease, as does the issues with it. Overall, we need a total review of all of the vaccine systems and with appropriate research we will find they are all failing.


    Finally, toxification is a much more serious issue (and vaccines are contributory) than infectious disease in modern health. Toxification could end civilization as we know it, and I literally and specifically can point you to why. You should already understand this if you want to talk about risk/benefits of vaccines.

    * 80% natural immunity to corona-virus from built-in systems-- whether that is (as shown by German research) -- T-cells that fight Cov19 or Natural Killer cells (especially in children which have 5x more!)

    * 0.005% death rate < 65 and 1-2% death rate > 80. Germany says roughly 0.15% death rate overall.


    Those figures are wrong.


    (1) High seropositivity rates are seen in some (heavily infected) populations:


    https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/…evidence/immune-responses

    The updated overview of the published findings of population-based sero-epidemiological studies in the general population and in blood donors in EU/EEA Member States are shown in Table 2. The majority of the EU/EEA Member States have still low levels of seropositivity in the general population, even without adjusting for test sensitivity and specificity. However, a recent study from a region Austria, which was highly affected, showed more than 40% seroprevalence of COVID-19 antibodies among its residents. Overall, with the current transmission patterns it is unlikely that population immunity levels reached by winter 2020-2021 will be sufficient for indirect protection.


    Thus in that population natural immunity (not to be confused with population immunity due to seropositivity) could be at max just under 60% and lies somewhere between 0 and 60%.


    (2) The seropositive IFR (i.e. ratio of people dying to people who are seropositive) has been well studied and now nicely converges to around 0.7%


    https://www.who.int/news-room/…g-mortality-from-covid-19

    Serological testing of a representative random sample of the population to detect evidence of exposure to a pathogen is an important method to estimate the true number of infected individuals [7,8,9]. Many such serological surveys are currently being undertaken worldwide [10], and some have thus far suggested substantial under-ascertainment of cases, with estimates of IFR converging at approximately 0.5 - 1% [10-12].


    Putting these together, if we suppose ALL of the high seroposivity populations have been infected that is around 60% of people immune without seropositivity. That is an overestimate, but let us suppose 50% of people are immune and never become seropositive.


    Then the effective whole population IFR you want is 0.35% (or higher, since we are using an upper bound for the "no seropositivity" immunity, and do not know its real level, which could be very low).


    This will vary in two ways:

    • It will go down (or up) where COVID exposure typically has much lower (or higher) than typical initial doses. It is very difficult to quantify the effect. We see it in higher than expected mortality amongst health and care workers without PPE, for example.
    • It will go down where population demographics are younger. the age dependence is strong - varying median population age by 6 years halves or doubles COVID death rate.


    THH

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    * 80% natural immunity to corona-virus from built-in systems-- whether that is (as shown by German research) -- T-cells that fight Cov19 or Natural Killer cells (especially in children which have 5x more!)

    * 0.005% death rate < 65 and 1-2% death rate > 80. Germany says roughly 0.15% death rate overall.


    Those figures are wrong.


    Those are the figures from Professor Sucharit Bhakdi http://www.mwgfd.de - so Professor T will have to argue with Germany. Good luck.


    To guide you like a baby, we said "built-in" systems -- seropositivity is not an sufficient test of the immune system. There are other tests that can be done.


    Argumentation without understanding is really there to create dispute and confusion . The board's job is not to try to give you an education. There are plenty of courses on immunology on youtube, and Dr. Been's lectures are good.

    Quote from Navid

    To guide you like a baby, we said "built-in" systems -- seropositivity is not an sufficient test of the immune system. There are other tests that can be done.


    Navid, please read carefully what I wrote, and you will see that i'm well aware of (and was bounding) the possibility of immunity without seropositivity. But it doe snot matter, IFR of 0.7% is measured now relative to seropositivity, and high seropositive populations show that there can't be that many people immune without seropositivity.


    You are reacting with your own ideas repeated, rather than actually reading something different.

    Quote from Navid

    Those are the figures from Professor Sucharit Bhakdi http://www.mwgfd.de - so Professor T will have to argue with Germany. Good luck.


    Don't discuss with an overwhelmed engineer that has no clue of medicine. 81% have a reasonable, immunity but if you, like in India or the Bronx, live with 5 persons in a single room all night, then you get more virus than your system can handle. The risk is high that this will also be the case for vaccinated people.


    I posted the 80% immunity already some weeks ago (Wyttenfacts.. by the dilettante ..). But if you know how to analyze statistical data you can find it. The bad news from the data is that we will need more than 90% efficiency for a vaccine as the virus is ultra contagious.


    90% will be big luck for a first vaccine as the Germans did show that a single antibody/Tcell reaction will no be enough to protect you. Lets hope such a vaccine produces a broad range of antibodies. (At least two sites of the virus must be attacked!)


    Currently we have in average 6% of the people that have CoV-19 induced immunity + 81% that have natural immunity. So we are close to the 90% target. In fact in Switzerland & Germany the mortality is now much below flu.


    There are about 2% of people (about 50% in Bangladesh!) with a genetic anomaly that fores a cytokine storm when they contain CoV-19 but protects from the flu!. I guess these should take the vaccine!

    BioNtech / Pfizer announce the completion of Phase 1 of a vaccine trial, with full results anticipated in October.


    Quote


    In a Phase 1 study in the U.S., at 7 days after a second dose of 30ug, BNT162b2 elicited SARS-CoV-2–neutralizing geometric mean titers (GMTs) in younger adults (18-55 years of age) that were 3.8 times the GMT of a panel of 38 sera of SARS-CoV-2 convalescent patients, and in older adults (65-85 years of age) the vaccine candidate elicited a neutralizing GMT 1.6 times the GMT of the same panel, demonstrating strong immunogenicity in younger and older adults.
    ...
    Assuming clinical success, Pfizer and BioNTech are on track to seek regulatory review of BNT162b2 as early as October 2020 and, if regulatory authorization or approval is obtained, currently plan to supply up to 100 million doses worldwide by the end of 2020 and approximately 1.3 billion doses by the end of 2021


    Press release: https://investors.biontech.de/…ly-data-lead-mrna-vaccine

    Preprint on Phase 1 trial : https://www.medrxiv.org/conten…101/2020.08.17.20176651v2

    Robert F Kennedy, Jr passionately warns of growing authoritarian control ushered in by the pandemic --

    Robert F Kennedy Jr in Berlin 28 aug 2020

    Excerpt: "5G ... allows these big data companies run by Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg and Jeffrey Bezos to harvest our data, to listen to your conversations on your cell phone -- They've always been able to do that, but there was no way for them to transport that data and subject it to analytics and then to monetize it and to sell it. Bill Gates today is building a city in Arizona, 80,000 people with a data center that will be able to take all of this data, the data on your Alexa ... Do you think Alexa is working for you? Alexa isn't working for you - she's spying on you. Your cell phone is spying on you. They have facial biometric systems. Your GPS ... Bill Gates brags that his satellites will be able to monitor every square inch of the planet 24 hours a day. And they have another innovation 'digital currency' and once they have digitized our currency and gotten rid of the cash economy, they have absolute control over us, because they'll be able to tax every transaction ...


    Also they'll be able to enforce obedience, because if your disobedient, they'll be able to shut down your bank account and starve you ... And many people argue that this pandemic was a 'plandemic' ... part of a sinister scheme. ... I don't have enough evidence. A lot of it feels very planned to me, but I don't know. But I will tell you this. If you create these mechanisms for control, they become weapons of obedience for authoritarian regimes, no matter how beneficial or innocent the people who created them. Once you create them, they will be abused - 100% guarantee they will be abused.


    And, all of the people who are out on the street now, who are arguing with this new imposition we see all around us of authoritarian control - of people being told 'Wear Your Mask' ... but, we know ... that we are not being dealt with honestly. We are being told "This is the science", but it's not - it's science because Tony Fauci and Bill Gates tell us it's science. We want to see the studies. We want to see the studies on hydroxychloroquine....on whether the lockdown is killing more people than the coronavirus. We want to see real science and real risk assessment ... My father told me when I was a child "People in authority lie" ... People in authority will abuse every power we relinquish to them. And, right now, we are giving them the power to micro-manage every bit of our lives...


    These government agencies are orchestrating obedience. It's not democratic ... it's a product of a pharmaceutical-drug driven biosecurity agenda that will enslave the entire human race, and plunge us into a dystopian nightmare, where the apocalyptical forces of ignorance and greed will be running our lives ..."

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    I posted the 80% immunity already some weeks ago (Wyttenfacts.. by the dilettante ..). But if you know how to analyze statistical data you can find it.


    Wyttenfacts justified by "if you can do lots of analysis the same way I do and read all of a link I posted two weeks ago you will agree with me" remain Wyttenfacts.


    Whereas my counter-claim is backed by hard evidence linked.


    If you know how to multiply, and read my links (which were linked in the message I made my claim) you don't need statistics:


    (1) 40% serology positive out of a badly COVID-hit population in Australia. (And there are other similar results). No way can a virus infect more than 80% of population in one season, so take this as 50% (of those infected) become serology positive. This is a lower bound, obviously it could be up to 100% of those infected become serology positive, which bumps the "true" IFR (calculated in step 3) up to 0.7%.


    (2) The ratio between deaths, and serology positive people in a population, is around 0.7% for typical western demographic profile (it will be lower for many third world countries where median age is younger - scale by X2 or divide by 2 for 6 year change in median age. Unlike the case fatality ratios, notoriously unreliable because cases are not well defined, this IFR is pretty consistent between many different places it has been calculated (we have seen various links about this - it was a topic of interest - i will trawl through the literature here again to check this only if anyone makes a serious challenge - otherwise I rely on the WHO summary link).


    (3) so the "true" IFR, the fraction of people dying of COVID in a population that ends up 100% infected, is at least 0.35%.


    I was not caviling about 80% immunity - which depending on how you define immunity will be true. So you defending that is a straw man. I was cavilling about the conclusion you reach from those figures of 0.15% IFR. That will be true in a much younger than typical population.


    UK : 41 years

    Germany: 47 years

    US: 38 years


    So Germany is in fact older than typical, we would expect higher IFR: 1.4%.


    Let us by all means look at the bit of this that is hard data: the ratio of deaths / serology positive individuals, in specific localities in Germany. As long as the serology testing is 100% or very carefully without bias sampled.


    As I've said before I'm not willing to watch videos for factual info - my time is worth more than that, and videos are much more likely to contain bias and PR than written accounts.


    Evidence with links please to show Germany is an outlier? I'm willing to think that HCQ prophylaxis, or something else, might give them a dramatically lower IFR than other countries.


    We have one German study from a locality with a festival spreading event which does show outlying low IFR:

    https://www.medrxiv.org/conten…101/2020.05.04.20090076v2


    But, this is a special case, not typical of normal epidemic infection, and so uncontrolled factors here are possible that would make this data not typical.


    Navid: I've laid out my argument again - perhaps in a way that is easier for you to understand, so that if you disagree with it you can make a reasoned objection. For example, you might claim the 40% serology positive was wrong, or the 0.7% ratio between deaths and serology positive was wrong.


    Actually, anyone could argue that better treatment (now) should be reducing mortality by at least 30%, probably nearly 50% from what it was early on in the epidemic. Such reductions in mortality are expected.


    THH

    It is OK that also dilettantes are allowed to spread their round table information they get from their friends.


    It's OK that they are not able to carefully read posts as this is a weakness of English texts, that are usually not very precise.


    Calling something a fact because it is written is also OK -- its written thus a fact it's on paper, but not something anybody knowledgeable in the field has to believe.


    Currently the immunity here in Switzerland/Germany is at about 90%, but a dilettante will never understand what immunity means. Nature is not absolute. Also a bullet proof vest is not totally bullet proof.

    The same happens in the press now where almost all writers are child level dilettantes. Currently they hype cases of re-infection. An absolute rare case, but also absolute naturally for people with a good immunity, but not a perfect one.

    If you have a good classic corona cross immunity then you will no doubt get CoV-19 with no, .. to mild symptoms that will stay for hours or at most 3 days. My wive did cough for weeks as she is more sensitive to all types of corona. She is a counter example. According German researchers you will need 2-3 faint infection to build up the additional patterns to get a full CoV-19 protection that will last at least 10-15 years.

    This is as said a potential problem for a vaccine. To be as effective as nature it has to force the expression of at least 2 new antibodies/T-cell types/patterns.


    Once more: I said Switzerland/Germany - for people with early dementia claiming being experts. Other parts of the world with less viral exchange may look totally different. A slum in India had almost 80% (PCR-) positive rate. But this is as anecdotal as the 7x excess mortality of New York that is just a snap shot. Currently many parts in the world have a large missing mortality, what indicates that most people that died where the ones that would have died sooner or later from a flu or classic corona or what ever virus.


    But here again you must know that e.g. Australia has 6x less flu cases that year. Did corona kill the spreaders? Was it the distancing? More healthy behavior?


    For most parts of Europe corona (CoV-19) is over! But it will not go away even with a vaccine until most people had their 2-3 weak infections and did build up their natural shield. The more you isolate the longer it will take.

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    Currently the immunity here in Switzerland/Germany is at about 90%,

    (1) define immunity

    (2) link to evidence using that definition and providing the 90% figure


    or (3)


    tag as Wyttenfact


    I'm not saying it is incorrect, just it depends what you mean by "immunity". If you use any normal definition it looks a bit high.


    Best wishes from a dilletante,

    THH

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    For most parts of Europe corona (CoV-19) is over! But it will not go away even with a vaccine until most people had their 2-3 weak infections and did build up their natural shield.


    Of course it will go away. That's the whole point of a vaccine. Why would anyone deploy a vaccine if it does not make the disease go away? Just for the fun of poking people? To implant mind-control chips?

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.