Covid-19 News

    Quote from Zeus46

    People shouldn’t mass ingest favipiravir due to its teratogenic potential… But people should mass ingest ivermectin despite its teratogenic potential.

    You are a genius! Do you also have some data for humans. should be easy for you to get as more than 4'000'000'000'000 have been taken also among woman.... Drinking 7 liter of water will kill you....


    Quote from THHuxleynew

    "Dr. Anthony Fauci told the BMJ that as a government employee he was required by law to put his name on the patent for the development of IL-2 and was also required by law to receive a part of the payment the government received for use of the patent. He said that he felt it was inappropriate to receive payment and donated the entire amount to charity."

    If she wants me to believe the claim she's making here, she needs to disprove this.

    So Fauci admits he is cheating his employees and sets his name on the papers/patents despite having no clue about the research his fellows do.

    For repetition. Fauci has no science degree. He has no clue of virology at all. He is just running a lab as a deputy of the mafia. He has been selected to do so because he is a subordinate and devoted mafia member.

    Fauci completed a medical school, what is graduate college level science only. He also never did practice any medicine, so he has no experience at all.

    Here is THH avatar #2 - the empathetic one...


    Quote from Wyttenbach

    We already have some 10'000 kids with severe nervous system disorder alone in Europe

    I share your anguish that so many of our young people - the Europeans of the future - have such debilitating illness. Even one child suffering from MS is a personal tragedy for them and their parents and nothing I write here can mitigate that. I can also sense your distrust of the medical establishment, and perhaps - shared by so many - a fear of needles. You feel that with this disease burden so self-evident from numbers in databases, there will be yet more adverse consequences to come of these medics interfering in children's lives and subjecting them to treatments involving needles and substances containing genes. I understand the care with which you review the information, and your own concern about COVID, together with the relief that you must feel believing that at your age, and for another two years, the risks of COVID are less than the risks of this treatment for you personally, and therefore you can stay clear of needles, or indeed any other medical or surgical devices that might penetrate your body.

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    You are a genius! Do you also have some data for humans. should be easy for you to get as more than 4'000'000'000'000 have been taken also among woman.... Drinking 7 liter of water will kill you....


    So Fauci admits he is cheating his employees and sets his name on the papers/patents despite having no clue about the research his fellows do.

    For repetition. Fauci has no science degree. He has no clue of virology at all. He is just running a lab as a deputy of the mafia. He has been selected to do so because he is a subordinate and devoted mafia member.

    Fauci completed a medical school, what is graduate college level science only. He also never did practice any medicine, so he has no experience at all.

    Fauci attended Regis High School, a private Jesuit school in Manhattan's Upper East Side, where he captained the school's basketball team despite standing only 5 ft 7 in (1.70 m) tall.[9][10][2] After graduating in 1958, Fauci attended the College of the Holy Cross, graduating in 1962 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in classics with a pre-med track. Fauci then attended medical school at Cornell University's Medical College (now Weill Cornell Medicine) where he graduated first in his class with a Doctor of Medicine degree in 1966.[6] He completed an internship and residency in internal medicine at the New York Hospital-Cornell Medical Center (now Weill Cornell Medical Center).[2]


    After completing his medical residency in 1968, Fauci joined the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as a clinical associate in the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases's (NIAID) Laboratory of Clinical Investigation (LCI).[11] He became head of the LCI's Clinical Physiology Section in 1974, and in 1980 was appointed chief of the NIAID's Laboratory of Immunoregulation. In 1984, he became director of the NIAID, a position he still holds.[12] Fauci has been offered the position of director of the NIH several times, but has declined each time.[13]


    Fauci has made important scientific observations that contributed to the understanding of the regulation of the human immune response and is recognized for delineating the mechanisms whereby immunosuppressive agents adapt to that response. He developed therapies for formerly fatal diseases such as polyarteritis nodosa, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, and lymphomatoid granulomatosis. In a 1985 Stanford University Arthritis Center Survey, members of the American Rheumatism Association ranked Fauci's work on the treatment of polyarteritis nodosa and granulomatosis with polyangiitis as one of the most important advances in patient management in rheumatology over the previous 20 years.[16][17][18]


    Fauci has contributed to the understanding of how HIV destroys the body's natural defense system, progressing to AIDS. He has outlined the mechanisms of induction of HIV expression by endogenous cytokines.[18] Fauci has worked to develop strategies for the therapy and immune reconstitution of patients with the disease, as well as for a vaccine to prevent HIV infection. His current research is concentrated on identifying the nature of the immunopathogenic mechanisms of HIV infection and the scope of the body's immune responses to HIV.


    In 2003, the Institute for Scientific Information stated that from 1983 to 2002, "Fauci was the 13th most-cited scientist among the 2.5 to 3.0 million authors in all disciplines throughout the world who published articles in scientific journals."[2] As a government scientist under seven presidents, Fauci has been described as "a consistent spokesperson for science, a person who more than any other figure has brokered a generational peace" between the two worlds of science and politics.[9]

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    Thanks very much Mark. That is useful context. It does not answer the two questions we need to evaluate whether this policy is good or bad:

    How shifty!

    Jed declared "Government researchers never get one dime from their discoveries".

    I disagreed with him, saying they get royalty money.

    You then chimed in to say my assertion was false.

    And now, rather than saying you were mistaken, you make it into an issue about whether such profiting is good or bad! Please.

    The truth of the matter is that conflicts of interest abound in our government institutions, and the more people know of them on a case by case basis, the better.

    These Institutions are all too adept at self protecting and self serving, sometimes at the expense of the public whom they are entrusted to serve.

    I'm happy to admit that I was wrong on the general question - you got me there - and admitted that when someone else raised this issue of employee incentive streams.


    However - I want to point out that the way the matter was summarised by you (and others) is misleading. Thus:


    Re the HIV stuff - Fauci was obliged to take money - but gave it to charity

    More generally - the up to £150,000 includes 0 - the most common case. This is a small employee incentive payment for developing any novel medical device.


    I feel that I was morally correct, though technically not correct, because these details do not correspond to the type of incentive that would skew decisio


    The case in point was the Moderna vaccine. Next post.


    I

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    1966.[6] He completed an internship and residency in internal medicine at the New York Hospital-Cornell Medical Center (now Weill Cornell Medical Center).[2]


    After completing his medical residency in 1968, Fauci joined the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as a clinical associate in the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases's (NIAID) Laboratory of Clinical Investigation (LCI).[11] He became head of the LCI's Clinical Physiology Section in 1974,

    A fast career for somebody that only sells the work of his comrades. Finishing internships is the same you do here to get the approval to practice as a doctor. So without any specific knowldge in biology, chemistry, math he became head of an institute.


    That's what we said. Fauci never practiced, never did attend any higher education (medicine is no higher education) !



    Quote from Zeus46

    People shouldn’t mass ingest favipiravir due to its teratogenic potential… But people should mass ingest ivermectin despite its teratogenic potential.

    Fapiriavir (avigan) is teratogen (mutagen) of the worst case and affects males too.


    Ivermectin alone is no danger but as the FUD linked above shows:

    The results revealed that administration of ivermectin or verapamil at 6th through 15th day of gestation did not significantly altered fetal development. While, co-administration of ivermectin and verapamilclearly disturbed fetal development as indicated from abnormal feto-maternal attachment and a significant decrease in fetal weights and numbers. Furthermore, co-administration of both drugs induced a significant increase in resorption sites, post-implantation loss and external, visceral and skeletal abnormalities.


    This is why in western states with over medication you must check all cross reactions with drugs you intake. Famous is the inference of blood thinners with Ivermectin!

    Moderna Vaccine (Phase 1 trials)


    mRNA-1273 was generally safe and well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with that seen in prior Moderna infectious disease vaccine clinical studies. The sole incidence of a grade 3 adverse event in the 25 µg and 100 µg dose cohorts was a single participant at 100 µg who experienced grade 3 erythema (redness) around the injection site. To date, the most notable adverse events were seen at the 250 µg dose level, comprising three participants with grade 3 systemic symptoms, only following the second dose. All adverse events have been transient and self-resolving. No grade 4 adverse events or serious adverse events have been reported.


    New Docs: NIH Owns Half of Moderna Vaccine
    New documents suggest that the National Institute of Health (NIH) owns half the key patent for Moderna’s controversial COVID vaccine and could collect half the…
    childrenshealthdefense.org


    Fauci’s infusion made Moderna CEO Steve Bancel a billionaire and further enriched Fauci’s mentor and co-investor Bill Gates. It may also explain why Fauci publicly announced he was “encouraged” by Moderna’s catastrophic Phase 1 clinical trials despite the fact that 20% of the high dose and 6% of the low dose groups of super healthy volunteers had Grade 3 “severe or medically significant” reactions following vaccination. Those results would have spelled DOA for any other medical product. After getting the abysmal news, Bancel and four other Moderna executives immediately dumped more than $89 million in stock and Fauci was forced to make his optimistic public assessment to save Moderna’s plummeting shares from death spiral.



    How did it turn out? As we know Moderna - like Pfizer - showed much better than expected efficacy.


    Comparing three Covid-19 vaccines: Pfizer, Moderna, J&J
    In some respects, it's easy to make direct comparisons between the three vaccines; in others, it's more complicated.
    www.statnews.com


    In the vernacular of vaccinology, shots that trigger a range of transient side effects in a lot of recipients are known as reactogenic.

    All of these vaccines — in fact, most if not all the Covid-19 vaccines that have reported data so far — fall into the reactogenic category. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, an expert panel that helps the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention set vaccination policies, advised hospitals early in the rollout that they might want to stagger vaccinations among employees in case some feel too unwell to work the day after being vaccinated.

    The most common side effects are injection site pain, fatigue, headache, muscle pain, and joint pain. Some people in the clinical trials have reported fever. With the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, side effects are more common after the second dose. Younger adults, who have more robust immune systems, reported more side effects than older adults.

    To be clear: These side effects are a sign of an immune system kicking into gear. They do not signal that the vaccine is unsafe. To date there are no serious, long-term side effects associated with receipt of these vaccines, which will be closely monitored as their use expands.


    There have been reports of severe allergic reactions to the mRNA vaccines. Both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines appear, on rare occasions, to trigger anaphylaxis, a severe and potentially life-threatening reaction. People who develop anaphylaxis must be treated with epinephrine — the drug in EpiPens — and may need to be hospitalized to ensure their airways remain open. The CDC says people should be monitored for 15 minutes after getting a Covid-19 shot, and 30 minutes if they have a history of severe allergies. J&J recently revealed that a single case of anaphylaxis has been reported in someone who received its vaccine.

    It will take time to come up with a firm estimate of how frequently this side effect occurs. The most recent data from the CDC suggest that anaphylaxis occurs at a rate of about 2.5 cases per one million doses given of the Moderna vaccine, and 4.7 cases per million doses of the Pfizer. Many of the people who have developed anaphylaxis have a history of severe allergies and some have had previous episodes of anaphylaxis.


    And the big one...

    Analysis by the EMA found 145 cases of myocarditis and 138 cases of pericarditis in 177 million doses of Pfizer given in the European Economic Area (EEA).

    1.6 / million doses


    It also found 19 cases of myocarditis and 19 cases of pericarditis out of 20 million doses of Moderna given in the EEA.

    1.9 / million doses


    The review found that five people had died as a result, but all has suffered from existing health conditions or were elderly.


    Moderna vaccine looks a good bet / Fauci's decision to invest FDA (not his own) money in it looks correct?

    Quote from Mark U

    Individual NIH scientists can patent their government funded work and collect up to $150,000 in royalties each year.

    You are right. See:


    Information for NIH & CDC Inventors | Technology Transfer


    That is a huge change from previous policies. That would not be a bribe. It is not an under-the-table payment in return for publishing false information about the efficacy of a drug, for example. A government researcher will not corrupt the process and destroy his or her reputation by publishing false information for $150,000.

    Report on blood clots from AZN vaccine.

    This UK sourced study is being reported today in The Guardian (which is left wing) and The Daily Mail (which is right wing) as well as other sources on the Internet.



    "Although extremely rare, a blood clot syndrome after the first dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine carries a high risk of death and can occur in otherwise young and healthy people, UK researchers have found.

    In those aged under 50, this blood clot syndrome occur in around one in 50,000 people who have received the vaccine, and that number falls to one in 100,000 in the over 50s, data suggests. But the risk of blood clots is much higher with Covid itself — research shows that more than a fifth of hospitalised patients with Covid have evidence of blood clots.

    Researchers examined the symptoms, signs and outcomes in 220 confirmed and probable cases who presented in UK hospitals between 22 March and 6 June.

    “It’s important to stress that this kind of reaction to the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is very rare,” said Dr Sue Pavord, consultant haematologist at Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and lead author of the analysis published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

    But for those who do develop blood clots, the results “can be devastating,” she added. “It often affects young, otherwise healthy vaccine recipients and has high mortality. It is particularly dangerous when the patient has a low platelet count and bleeding in the brain.”"

    Delta Troubles? Retrospective Study Led by nference & Mayo Clinic Reveals Pfizer COVID-19 Shot Only 42% Effective During July


    Delta Troubles? Retrospective Study Led by nference & Mayo Clinic Reveals Pfizer COVID-19 Shot Only 42% Effective During July
    A brand-new study indicates some possibly troubling news concerning COVID-19. Based on a study in preprint, a poor performance from
    trialsitenews.com


    A brand-new study indicates some possibly troubling news concerning COVID-19. Based on a study in preprint, a poor performance from Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine has appeared in the July data and could indicate Delta-driven trouble ahead. In sum, the July data produced by this Mayo Clinic and nference retrospective study suggests that Pfizer’s vaccine product known as BNT162b2 was only 42% effective against infection, which has led to some sources for White House officials to sit up and take notice. The study looked at the effectiveness of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines inside the Mayo Clinic Health System during the January to July period. Moderna’s vaccine was 86% effective against infection for the entire study period, and Pfizer’s was 76%. Yet in July, Moderna was 76% effective, and Pfizer declined to a troubling 42%. These findings were based on Minnesota data, and at least some suggest Delta was dominant at the time. Experts don’t know if this means that the vaccines are less effective over time, less effective against Delta, or perhaps another reason. Venky Soundararajan, a lead author of the study, notes that “Based on the data that we have so far, it is a combination of both factors—The Moderna vaccine is likely — very likely — more effective than the Pfizer vaccine in areas where Delta is the dominant strain, and the Pfizer vaccine appears to have a lower durability of effectiveness.” These study results are not yet peer-reviewed, and experts suggest no takeaways are possible until the study design, methodology, and data analysis are confirmed.


    Background of the Players

    The study was led by a team out of Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and a firm from Cambridge, Massachusetts, called nference. Founded in 2013, this venture has raised $145 million, according to Crunchbase. It has developed a powerful augmented intelligence software called nferXTM, which is used by Mayo Clinic to synthesize 100+ years of institutional knowledge and in the process generating significant real-world evidence, with insights to advance the discovery and development of diagnostics and therapeutics. Their software apparently has the ability to triangulate insights derived from public and proprietary datasets, working to curate both structured and unstructured data, empowering research units to attack major challenges in drug discovery expeditiously.


    Mayo Clinic is one of the most prestigious health systems in the world. For purposes of this retrospective study, the team evaluated individuals who underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing at Mayo Clinic and hospitals affiliated with the umbrella organization—the Mayo Clinic Health System. Hospitals or clinics included facilities in Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Wisconsin, and the home base of Minnesota.


    The Study

    This retrospective study involved the evaluation of 645,109 persons with at least one SARS-CoV-2 test via PCR. The investigators used the Mayo Clinic electronic health record (EHR) systems operating in different facilities across different states.


    Inclusion criteria included those 18 years of age or older, who received at least one dose of either Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 or Moderna’s mRNA-1273 after December 1, 2020, and on or before July 29, 2021. Additionally, participants couldn’t have any previous positive COVID-19 tests before the first vaccine jab. Moreover, the subjects couldn’t have received vaccines from different manufacturers. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the study team pared back the study count to those that met the protocol—it turned out they had left 119,463 who received BNT162b2 and 60,083 who received mRNA-1273.


    Thereafter, the study team utilized an elaborate yet exact matching procedure to “construct cohorts of demographically and clinically similar individuals who were unvaccinated, vaccinated with mRNA-1273 or vaccinated with BNT162b2,” the authors reported in the recent yet to be peer-reviewed paper on the preprint server medRxiv. After that, the team sought out to identify what they refer to as “matched triples,” including 1) one vaccinated; 2) one that received mRNA-1273, and 3) one who received BNT162b2 who match on a set of criteria including sex, race, ethnicity, state of residence, COVID-19 testing history, and date of vaccination.


    This approach produced 43,895 matched triples. They uncovered the following;


    ∙ 43,895 mRNA-1273 vaccinated individuals—35,902 were fully vaccinated


    ∙ 43,895 BNT162b2 vaccinated individuals—37,573 were fully vaccinated


    They then assigned dates and hypothetical vaccination for unvaccinated persons based on the actual dates of associated matched partners. So, for example, they applied a hypothetical initial vaccination date to a subject based on the data halfway between the actual first vaccination dates for the matched mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 vaccinated subjects.


    The team applied a series of other rules and criteria for matching scenarios that can be read in more detail in medRxiv. They followed with the generation of clinical outcomes as well as comparative analyses; defined clinical outcomes of interest; estimated the actual effectiveness of the vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and severe COVID-19; and assessed longitudinal effectiveness of the two vaccine products. Next, they went on to compare breakthrough infection incidence rates in the matched vaccinated cohorts and breakthrough infection-associated hospitalization, ICU admission, and mortality in the vaccinated matched cohorts.


    Finally, the investigators compared potential complications experienced by patients with breakthrough infections and assessed the longitudinal prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 variants.


    Pfizer and Moderna Products Have Differences

    Again, the study team found that the Moderna vaccine, mRNA-1273, performed superior to Pfizer-BioNTech as the overall results for the study period included 86% for Moderna versus 76% for Pfizer-BioNTech. While for effectiveness as measured against hospitalization, Moderna’s results were 92% versus Pfizer-BioNTech at 85%


    Of note, both vaccines demonstrated marked drops in effectiveness during July, which coincides with the spread of the Delta variant, especially in Minnesota, where it hit 70%. While Moderna still had decent effectiveness of 76% against SARS-CoV-2 infection, Pfizer dropped to 42%. Interestingly, the study results revealed comparable results in other states. For example, in Florida, those who were fully vaccinated with mRNA-1273 were 60% safer than those fully vaccinated with BNT162b2.


    The above percentages were based on preventing infection. But there is no hard data yet that either vaccine is substantially limited against Delta when it comes to the key measures of hospitalizations and deaths. Some experts expressed caution: “This is the kind of surprising finding that needs confirmation before we should accept its validity,” per Cornell virologist John Moore as reported in Yahoo News.


    Some other differences to consider between the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines include the fact that one (Moderna) is dosed higher than the other (Pfizer-BioNTech). And as reported by Caitlin Owens of AXIOS, a Cornell virologist named John Moore shared they use a different shot interval, writing, “There are a few differences between what are known to be similar vaccines …. None of these variables is an obvious smoking gun, although the dosing amount seems the most likely to be a factor.” Moore suggests that no one jumps to any conclusions until this study is further confirmed.


    AXIOS’ Ms. Owens was able to elicit a statement from Pfizer in association with the potential to the Delta variant. Interestingly, Pfizer spoke on behalf of Moderna as well, declaring that both “expect to be able to develop and produce a tailor-made vaccine against that variant in approximately 100 days after a decision to do so, subject to regulatory approval.”


    Study Limitations

    The study team acknowledges several issues or constraints that ultimately limit the findings here. They share that the study cohorts were not completely demographically representative of the entire American population, possibly limiting the generalizability of their findings.


    They point out that additional studies need to look at larger, more diverse populations from a range of health systems to have a more robust comparative analysis of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2. Moreover, of the initial matching done here, the conclusions must be further tested across the country while the authors acknowledge that other unknown risk variables could impact the study results. Of course, this study hasn’t been peer-reviewed as of yet.


    nference’s Dr. Soundararajan

    Dr. Soundararajan is Co-Founder and Chief Scientific Officer for nference, which did the research together with Mayo Clinic. He is both an entrepreneur and inventor, and his firm was called the “Google of biomedicine” by The Washington Post. Soundararajan has been key in building a “long-term strategic partnership with the Mayo Clinic’s Clinical Data Analytics Platform, enabling the automated de-identification, augmented curation, and commercialization of aggregated biomedical insights from nearly 9.8 million patient’s complete electronic health records.” The doctor has written over 50 articles and papers and has several dozen patents and patent applications under his belt. He got his PhD in Biological Engineering from MIT, “where he developed the first computational models for studying the evolutionary patterns of hyper-mutative viral pathogens at atomic resolution.” Soundararajan has done a fellowship in Genetics at Harvard Medical School and got his B.S. in Electronics and Communication Engineering at the Indian Institute of Technology at Guwahati, India

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    Facts don’t convince people


    People who support vaccination sometimes believe their own set of myths, which actually may stand in the way of getting people vaccinated. One such myth is that people respond to facts and that vaccine hesitancy can be overcome by facts.

    That is not necessarily true. Actually, knowledge alone rarely convinces people to change behavior. Most decisions are informed – or misinformed – by emotions: confidence, threat, empathy and worry are four of them.

    Yes. Other, less admirable emotions play an important role as well: mainly hubris, arrogance, stupidity and the Dunning Kruger effect.


    Anyone familiar with the history of cold fusion knows this to be true. Facts don't even convince many professional scientists. Many people are delusional. Many others have no idea how the scientific method is supposed to work. Some of the DoE cold fusion review panel members did not know as much about the scientific method as I learned in third grade elementary school. I am not exaggerating. It was shocking! I listed the specific errors they made on p. 43 here:


    https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJresponsest.pdf


    Many people in the mass media have said we should coddle people who will not be vaccinated. We should respect their point of view. Criticizing them might have the opposite effect, riling them up and making them even less likely to be vaccinated. Apparently they are such fragile snowflakes, they can't survive being told facts of nature. Sort of like Victorian brides who fainted upon learning how babies are made. (Supposedly. I doubt there were many . . .)


    I suppose doctors should coddle these pathetic idiots. Whatever works. I wouldn't know. I am glad it isn't my job to make them see the light. Insofar as it is my job to convince people that cold fusion is real, I try not to include arguments, opinions, politics, or non-scientific assertions in the main documents at LENR-CANR. But you cannot understand the subject without touching on politics. Ed and I decided to do that on one page, here:


    2004 DoE Review


    Obviously, we are no mood to coddle the DoE reviewers.


    When I encounter a person who refuses to be vaccinated in person, I would try to be polite and not argumentative. Only because I see no point to riling them up. There is no chance I can sway them with rational arguments, because they are immune to rationality and they know nothing about science, as you see from what they say. Why upset people to no purpose? Their own doctors and loved ones cannot persuade many of them. It is like trying to persuade a Creationist or flat-earth believer. I do not argue with or scold such people, but I don't pretend they have valid points, either. I am not going to lie, or pretend their concerns are anything other than ignorant nonsense. A few months ago I went to get my hair cut for the first time in 14 months by a barber, rather than my wife. The barber is an eccentric in his 40s. I have known him for some time. I asked, "Are you vaccinated?" He said "no, my body, my choice." I laughed and said: "You're crazy. In your line of work, getting close to people, you are risking your life." He wasn't pleased. We did not talk after that, and I did not press the issue, knowing it is hopeless. I didn't coddle him. I wouldn't hesitate to tell any of these people they are suicidal lunatics.


    This was before Delta. I wouldn't think of going back to the barber. Assuming he still among the living.


    Some of the fanatical Death Cult anti-vaxxers are actually violent. I guess I would refrain from telling them they are suicidal lunatics! Here is a video showing them threatening a doctor in Tennessee. This shows the depths anti-science ignorance prevalent in much of the U.S.:


    Dr. Sanjay Gupta: The term 'breakthrough infection' raises doubts about vaccines -- but it shouldn't
    In most cases, a "breakthrough" means a sudden, dramatic or important discovery. With Covid-19, however, the expression has been used to describe an infection…
    www.cnn.com

    Quote from ZenoOfElea

    "Although extremely rare, a blood clot syndrome after the first dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine carries a high risk of death and can occur in otherwise young and healthy people, UK researchers have found.

    In those aged under 50, this blood clot syndrome occur in around one in 50,000 people who have received the vaccine, and that number falls to one in 100,000 in the over 50s, data suggests. But the risk of blood clots is much higher with Covid itself — research shows that more than a fifth of hospitalised patients with Covid have evidence of blood clots.

    It would be good if they could develop a profile of people likely to have this problem. Assuming there are similarities among the patients. They could then avoid giving them the AstraZeneca shot. Or monitor them for an extra long time. If evidence of the blood clots or some related reaction shows up in the first 30 minutes, they could hold them in the clinics for an hour.


    In the U.S., they ask you to hang around for 15 minutes after getting a vaccine. Any vaccine, COVID or other. That's what a nurse told me. I don't recall waiting around after other vaccines, but apparently that's the procedure nowadays. On very rare occasions people have allergic reactions, or they faint. Most severe reactions occur soon after inoculation, if ever.


    Management of Anaphylaxis at COVID-19 Vaccination Sites | CDC


    Routine observation periods following COVID-19 vaccination*

    CDC currently recommends the following observation periods after vaccination:

    • 30 minutes for:
      • People with a history of an immediate allergic reaction of any severity to another vaccine or injectable therapy.
      • People with a contraindication to a different type of COVID-19 vaccine (for example, people with a contraindication to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines who receive Janssen viral vector vaccine should be observed for 30 minutes following Janssen vaccination).
      • People with a history of anaphylaxis due to any cause.
    • 15 minutes for: All other persons

    * Note: People may be observed for longer, based on clinical concern. For example, if a person develops itching and swelling confined to the injection site during their post-vaccination observation period, this period may be extended to assess for development of any hypersensitivity signs or symptoms consistent with anaphylaxis

    Case Report: Administration of Amniotic Fluid-Derived Nanoparticles in Three Severely Ill COVID-19 Patients


    Case Report: Administration of Amniotic Fluid-Derived Nanoparticles in Three Severely Ill COVID-19 Patients
    Rationale/Objectives: A human coronavirus (HCoV-19) has caused the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak worldwide. There is an urgent need to develop…
    www.frontiersin.org


    Rationale/Objectives: A human coronavirus (HCoV-19) has caused the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak worldwide. There is an urgent need to develop new interventions to suppress the excessive immune response, protect alveolar function, and repair lung and systemic organ damage. Zofin (previously known as Organicell Flow) is a novel therapeutic that is derived from the soluble and nanoparticle fraction (extracellular vesicles and exosomes) of human amniotic fluid. Here within, we present the clinical outcomes after Zofin treatment in three critically ill patients suffering from severe, multi-organ complications induced by COVID-19 infection. All patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, developed respiratory failure, and were hospitalized for more than 40 days.


    Methods: Zofin was administered to patients concurrently with ongoing medical care who were monitored for 28-days post-therapy. SOFA score assessment, chest X-rays, and inflammatory biomarker testing was performed.


    Main Results: There were no adverse events associated with the therapy. The patients showed improvements in ICU clinical status and experienced respiratory improvements. Acute delirium experienced by patients completely resolved and inflammatory biomarkers improved.


    Conclusions: Primary outcomes demonstrate the therapy was safe, accessible, and feasible. This is the first demonstration of human amniotic fluid-derived nanoparticles as a safe and potentially efficacious therapeutic treatment for respiratory failure induced by COVID-19 infection.

    FLCCC weekly update


    External Content youtu.be
    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.

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.