Covid-19 News

COVID-19 Vaccine Damage Bill – British Politician Proposes COVID Vaccine Compensation

COVID-19 Vaccine Damage Bill - British Politician Proposes COVID Vaccine Compensation

Despite growing uneasiness around the globe surrounding reports of adverse effects from COVID-19 vaccinations, TrialSite has found that few governments

trialsitenews.com

Despite growing uneasiness around the globe surrounding reports of adverse effects from COVID-19 vaccinations, TrialSite has found that few governments take decisive action in response to such concerns. In the UK, Sir Christopher Chope MP, Conservative, proposed the COVID-19 Vaccine Damage Bill for its second reading in the House of Commons on September 10, 2021. The measure would oblige the government to conduct an unbiased investigation into “disablement caused by COVID-19 vaccinations” and whether those who have reported serious side effects from the vaccine can access adequate compensation. He emphasized the necessity for transparency when publishing severe side effects.

Side effects are self-reported via the ‘yellow-card’ system

Previously, TrialSite reported on the UK Yellow Card System which allows the public to report potential side effects from coronavirus testing, treatment, medications, vaccinations, medical devices, and test kits. The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) will get the report.

On September 10, Sir Christopher Chope MP presented information extracted from the Yellow Card Scheme reports. “There have been 435 reports of major blood clots and low platelet counts, including 74 deaths. It shows that there have been 767 cases of inflammation of the heart, a condition that is almost unheard of in medicine on a normal day-to-day basis. It shows that there have been some 35,000 reports of menstrual disorder, and there are all sorts of other effects set out in the comprehensive report. Very worryingly, it says that there are 1,632 reports of deaths that have taken place shortly after vaccination.”

The MHRA records reports of possible adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in the UK in cases where a patient dies soon after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. As of the date of the second reading of the bill, these figures were:

524 reports related to Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine

1,064 reports related to the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine

16 reports for the COVID-19 vaccine from Moderna

28 reports with no brand name specified

The bulk of these cases included elderly people or those who had underlying medical conditions.

However, the MHRA states that Yellow Card data cannot be used to calculate side effect rates or compare the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines because a variety of factors can affect ADR reporting.

Data on deaths after vaccination as yet unreported

In the second reading of the Vaccine Damage Bill, Sir Christopher Chope told the Secretary of the State that if they want to increase vaccine confidence, they must be transparent about the adverse effects of vaccines with the public. The public must have the ability to inform themselves with official, factual publications regarding potential damages caused by vaccines rather than rely on self-reported data.

He stated that COVID-19 vaccines are causing far more harm to UK civilians than any previous vaccination program in history. “What is crucial is that if individuals do the right thing, they should not be denied access to compensation,” he added.

He inquired about the number of deaths reported in patients who have died since January 1, within (a) one month, (b) two months, and (c) three months of receiving a COVID-19 vaccination.

The response he got was “Data on the number of deaths reported of people who have died within one, two, and three months of having received a COVID-19 vaccination since 1 January 2021 is not available in the format requested.”

Public Health England (PHE) monitors the number of people who have been admitted to the hospital and died from COVID-19 despite receiving one or two doses of the vaccine, but the data has not been published yet. An observational study by the same body finds Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca vaccines are effective against Indian and UK COVID-19 variants.

A notable precedent: The Vaccine Damage Payments Scheme

If a UK resident incurs injury as a result of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, they may be eligible for financial assistance through the Vaccine Damage Payments Scheme (VDPS).

The Pearson Commission introduced the Vaccine Damage Payments Act in 1979 with regard to compensation for injury sustained as a result of vaccines. However, Sir Christopher Chope MP stated that “the Act makes provision of a maximum payment of £120,000 together with a threshold of 60% disablement. As a result, fewer than 2% of applications are successful.”

Sir Christopher Chope MP emphasized that immediate action is required to provide confidence to those who are already suffering. He stated that “Our hospitals have a large number of in-patients who are there only because they took the vaccine. It is causing a lot of angst for consultants across the country.”

During his speech, he did not disclose the sources he alluded to while making his allegations. In June 2021, the total number of occupied bed days, which is a measure of bed availability in a month, was 84% compared to 89% in December 2020, when the COVID-19 vaccination program started. However, none of the figures specify the number of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated persons.

Does this bill have a future?

The bill is not backed by a political party, and history shows this type of bill is unlikely to succeed to the extent that it is enacted in law. The debate around it, however, can prove an important testing ground, and a foundation for future bills and legislation.

The ideal approach, according to Sir Christopher Chope MP, would be to implement a no-fault compensation plan, which would eliminate the need for victims to establish fault and would automatically qualify them for compensation. This is similar to an agreement signed on February 17, 2021 between the World Health Organization (WHO) and Chubb Limited, in which the COVAX program aims to reduce the need for resort to the law courts, which can be a lengthy and costly process, by providing a no-fault lump sum compensation in full and final settlement of any claims. The bill’s next stage, the second reading, is scheduled for Friday, October 22, 2021.

Characterizing menstrual bleeding changes occurring after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

Abstract

Many people began sharing that they experienced unexpected menstrual bleeding after SARS-CoV-2 inoculation. This emerging phenomenon was undeniable yet understudied. We investigated menstrual bleeding patterns among currently and formerly menstruating people, with a research design based off our expectations that these bleeding changes related to changes in clotting or inflammation, affecting normal menstrual repair. In this sample, 42% of people with regular menstrual cycles bled more heavily than usual, while 44% reported no change, after being vaccinated. Among people who typically do not menstruate, 71% of people on long-acting reversible contraceptives, 39% of people on gender-affirming hormones, and 66% of post-menopausal people reported breakthrough bleeding. We found increased/breakthrough bleeding was significantly associated with age, other vaccine side effects (fever, fatigue), history of pregnancy or birth, and ethnicity. Changes to menstrual bleeding are not uncommon nor dangerous, yet attention to these experiences is necessary to build trust in medicine.

Teaser Increased bleeding can occur post SARS-CoV-2 vaccines; this study characterizes patterns to enable future hypothesis testing.

Quote from zorud

RESULTS Confirmed infection rates were ≈10-fold lower in the booster versus nonbooster group (ranging 8.8-17.6 across five age groups) and 4.8-11.2 fold lower in the secondary analysis. Severe illness rates in the primary and secondary analysis were 18.7-fold (95% CI, 15.7-22.4) and 6.5-fold (95% CI, 5.1-8.3) lower for ages 60+, and 22.0-fold (95% CI, 10.3-47.0) and 3.2-fold (95% CI, 1.1-9.6) lower for ages 40-60. For ages 60+, COVID-19 associated death rates were 14.7-fold (95% CI, 9.4-23.1) lower in the primary analysis and 4.8-fold (95% CI, 2.8-8.2) lower in the secondary analysis.

The main problem with such analysis is the fact that Pfizer induces CoV-19 (See also 4x higher infection rate among vaccinated only in UK due to spike antibody immune suppression) at a very high rate. So Israel still has a huge backlog (400!) of severely ill boostered individuals. We estimate that booster induced CoV-19 did kill 300..500 Israel people age 75+.

So all highly vulnerable have been killed/ill in advance. This leads to a strong correction of this rates.

The only thing I can tell. Wait 3-4 months and then lock at actual data. All statistics do shows you can delay death or speed it up by giving Pfizer crap never avoid it if you do not treat teh underlying illness....

Quote from Wyttenbach

I just made an overview among different US and EU states about waves and deaths.

States (NY, NJ, France) we high death rates for alpha had 50% lower death rate from gamma and 4x (8x) lower death rate from Delta versus (Alpha/gamma)

States with early (AUS,UK) lockdown did see just the opposite. Double death rate from gamma or delta. States with no measures like Florida had no difference between alpha/gamma and double the death rate from delta (despite 50% vaxx)

So what can we learn?

Nothing from that type of analysis.

Each country has a different history of timings/waves/fraction affected each wave. Determining factors are lockdowns, compliance, weather, housing, amount of prior infection immunity (e.g. how bad were previous waves, and which variant) etc, etc. As well as different vaccine timings, policy, vaccine hesitancy.

It is so difficult to quantify the different effects that comparison is meaningless.

THH

Quote from zorud

For those who might be interested in this and can read German, here is a comment from a different perspective.

No real news. They also confirm that masks do not work except >= FP95, what never has been excluded and also never has been ordered. They mention a brand new WHO (FM/R/X/B mafia) .. study that could show an effect. WHO is not trustworthy at all due to fact its 100% undermined.

Fact is the difference in the protection factor between cloth/surgical masks and FP95 is > 100x > 1000x for FP3. German FP2 mask are at best 10x (avg 4x) better that cloth or surgical.

This is test lab data linked some months ago.

The only correction is about gene manipulation nobody at all is interested in. This might happen but rarely.

So its more or less fake as its adds nothing new or corrects nothing of value.

Quote from Fm1

Despite growing uneasiness around the globe surrounding reports of adverse effects from COVID-19 vaccinations, TrialSite has found that few governments take decisive action in response to such concerns. In the UK, Sir Christopher Chope MP, Conservative, proposed the COVID-19 Vaccine Damage Bill for its second reading in the House of Commons on September 10, 2021. The measure would oblige the government to conduct an unbiased investigation into “disablement caused by COVID-19 vaccinations” and whether those who have reported serious side effects from the vaccine can access adequate compensation. He emphasized the necessity for transparency when publishing severe side effects.

Indeed I'm personally in favour of no-fault compensation schemes. After all, if we compensate vaccine side effects, we should also compensate the larger number of COVID side-effect (sic) sufferers. By deciding to take a vaccine people are reducing overall risk even if in a very small number of cases they are harmed.

THH

Quote from Fm1

However, Sir Christopher Chope MP stated that “the Act makes provision of a maximum payment of £120,000 together with a threshold of 60% disablement. As a result, fewer than 2% of applications are successful.”

Of course as 80% of all judges and lawyers on the courts are FM/R/X/M members. Here in Switzerland they also run all "private" helping networks for damaged people to early avoid cases... It's all well organized. Never waste a dime on cattle...

And now for something completely different

Dry Scooping – A Harmful Internet Fad

Don't get your health advice from TikTok. That is the somewhat obvious conclusion of a recent study looking at a new social media fad called "dry scooping".…

sciencebasedmedicine.org

Don't get your health advice from social media!

Ivermectin is the new hydroxychloroquine, take 6: Incompetence and fraud everywhere!

I've long been saying that ivermectin is the new hydroxychloroquine, so much so that I have to say now that ivermectin is no longer new, even as I speculate…

sciencebasedmedicine.org

An extraordinary detailed take-down of a number of pro-ivermectin studies. It is disturbing that many are not just bad science, but actually fraudulent. I found the bit about Niaee's data (the one other big highly poistive RCT that skewed Bryant et al meta-analysis positive) interesting.

And this. I don't like the polemic below (also in the link above), I prefer to let those peddling Wyttenfacts and the like damn themselves, by showing them false. it is the flip side of teh pro-ivermectin condemining mainstream science (e.g. those ivermectin trials) as designed to fail. Unlike that, this polemic has evidence.

I’ve often wondered why there has been such a flood of bad papers touting ivermectin as a “miracle cure” or “miracle preventative” for COVID-19 given that we didn’t see that for hydroxychloroquine last year. Don’t get me wrong. The evidence for hydroxychloroquine was not strong. Quite the opposite, it was incredibly weak. However, there didn’t appear to be any major fraud. There were plenty of small studies, bad studies, and the like, but no evidence of fraud except for, ironically enough, one study that linked hydroxychloroquine to dangerous and fatal cardiac arrhythmias, which briefly came close to fooling even me. (I expressed skepticism about the study but in retrospect not nearly enough and thereby learned a valuable lesson.)

Both drugs achieved a cult-like snake oil miracle cure status among antivaxxers, antimaskers, and ideologues, and for much the same reason: If there exists a miracle cure or preventative for COVID-19, then all the public health interventions that these activists hate (lockdowns, mask mandates, vaccine mandates) all become unnecessary. Business can go back to making money, and life can revert to near normal, all without pesky government interventions on behalf of public health or any collective action of any kind. The ideological motivation for promoting hydroxychloroquine (at least after the first wave of the pandemic had crested, while doctors still believed the Chinese experience and recommendations for the drug) has been the same for ivermectin. So it’s not surprising that ivermectin cranks are pushing back hard against the growing reports of fraud and incompetence behind the most commonly cited studies claiming that ivermectin is a potent treatment for COVID-19.

For instance, after the BuzzFeed report, one famous conspiracy site known for COVID-19 minimization, antimask and antivaccine propaganda, and conspiracy theories about the pandemic, defended Hector Carvallo and portrayed the BuzzFeed article and the work of Meyerowitz-Katz and Sheldrick as —you guessed it!—a conspiracy on the part of the “mainstream medical establishment” to “silence” the brave maverick doctors trying to cure COVID-19. Amusingly, Carvallo even quotes Arthur Schopenhauer:

He is confident that eventually, ivermectin will be widely used against COVID-19. “All truth passes through three phases,” he told BuzzFeed. “First it is ridiculed, then it is violently opposed, then it is accepted as self-evident. We are in phase two now.”

Yes, he’s quoting Arthur Schopenhauer. This is a quote that I laugh at, because those who quote it erroneously think that they have an unpopular “truth” that will go through these stages, forgetting that untruth or fraud will never make it past the second stage. In fact, here’s a variation of my retort:

All “fake medicine” truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed by the rationally inclined because it is ridiculous and based upon feelings, conspiracy theories, bad science, and pseudoscience instead of reality. Second, it is opposed by the rationally inclined. Third, the more complete the science and information that falsify it, the more vehemently it is embraced as “self-evident” by its non-rationally inclined believers.

I think we’re in the third stage now, given some of the other responses coming from ivermectin believers

I've changed my mind about ivermectin.

All those studies done so far were designed to fail. It is as if those scientists want us to stay in eternal lockdown - they manufactured FLCC with their false protocols (obviously failing) to make it appear they were not engaged in this fraud.

You can tell the so-called pro-ivermectin lobby is not genuinely pro-ivermectin:

(1) the trials the put on their website all have dosage levels at least 10X below the level expected to be potent from in vitro lab data

(2) some of the studies seem to have been set up with obviously fake data purely so that other scientists can call the whole lot fraudulent and so tarnish ivermectin by association

(3) when these set-up fraudulent trials are removed - the meta-analysis comes down negative. What a coincidence! It was all a careful setup to convince the world ivermectin does not work.

Ring your doctor NOW. Tell them to do trials at a realistic concentration (e.g. at least 4mg/kg/day (typically 240,000 mcg/day) over 3 days.

Ring up FLCC. Tell them you know they are part of the fraud. Expose their anti-ivermectin lies. See what they say when you show them the in vitro evidence on the required dosage needed for ivermectin to work, and ask them why they are not using it!

THH

The unvaccinated child superspreader effect in the Uk is getting bigger, and the overall infection rate going up a bit in England (60 to 1).

Eventually all those covid-ridden little brats (apologies to the very very few who get MIS-C, or some other COVID side effect, and die, whom I absolutely should not be saying nasty things about) will finish their COVID spreading activities - for 6 months at least - because they will have had COVID.

Or their parents could just jab them now (children are usually more willing than parents for this) and we could have a nice Christmas with a lot less COVID.

Except - nope - the parents can't. Below 12 where things are worst vaccination is not allowed. And close to 12 the vaccination rate, for obvious reasons, is very low.

THH

Quote from Wyttenbach

80% of all judges and lawyers on the courts are FM/R/J/M members.

Could you tell me the name of one of these so I can ask what FM/R/J/M means?

I'm thinking that Christopher Choke is onto something. Did you know that heart-and-lung replacement surgery has a high risk of death!

The doctors don't advertise this. They just like doing fancy operations. But PEOPLE DIE!

And do you know how much surgeons are paid? They are part of the Mafia.

I'm with Chris Coke (weird name for somone raising medical issues but still) we should have special compensation for all the victims of surgery side effects. especially those who die. Gold surgical knives, masks with filigree silver worked into the threads, friezes on the walls of shadowy surgical figures bearing down on intrepid patients could all be laid with our departed victims in special memorial tombs - as the Vikings, right about so many things, used to do.

Swedes & Italians Lead Study Indicating Long Natural Immunity Associated with COVID-19 Although Some Risks with Delta & Other Variants

Swedes & Italians Lead Study Indicating Long Natural Immunity Associated with COVID-19 Although Some Risks with Delta & Other Variants

A large team of Swedish and Italian scientists (microbiologists, virologists, immunologists, and others) sought to better understand natural immunity

trialsitenews.com

A large team of Swedish and Italian scientists (microbiologists, virologists, immunologists, and others) sought to better understand natural immunity associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection—that is COVID-19 illness. What is the longevity for immunity to COVID-19 following natural infection? The level of so-called durability of natural immunity and even vaccine-induced immunity is just now starting to be better understood. Led by the corresponding author Harold Marcotte with the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm Sweden the research team monitored SARS-CoV-2 specific immune response in convalescent COVID-19 patients up to 15 months after symptoms started. In this study funded by the EU-ATAC Consortium, the Italian Ministry of Health, the Swedish Research Council, SciLifeLab, and KAW the investigators determined that based on their observations the data implies that antiviral specific immunity, particularly among member B cells in COVID-19 convalescent patients is long-lasting, however, some variants raise concerns. For example, the researchers suggest that the highly transmissible Delta variant may partially evade the neutralizing activity of plasma antibodies.

Background

The study team worked on a previous study finding the longevity of SARS-CoV-2 adaptive immune response at up to 6 to 8 months. They report that previous research reveals that antibody and neutralizing titers are sustained at a significant level for at least half a year post-onset of infection. Specific memory B and T cells are maintained for at least up to 6 to 8 months.

The Study

In this latest study, the group of Italian and Swedish scientists followed the adaptive immune response in this same group of convalescent plasma patients for up to 15 months. The team tested specific antibody levels as well as neutralizing antibody titers against variants of concern.

The research team collected 188 serum or plasma samples from 136 mild-to-severe COVID-19 patients including 98 from Italy and 38 from Sweden. The study design factored in 108 negative controls as they compared the two cohorts to include measurement of plasma anti-RBD and anti-S antibody titers.

The Findings

The researchers declared that first after a peak day 15-28 post-infection the IgG antibody response and plasma neutralizing titers gradually lowered over time however stabilized after six months. Moreover, plasma neutralizing activity targeting G614 was continuously identified in 87% of the patients at month number 6 to 15 post infection.

They found that some variants raised concerns. For example, they found that the highly transmissible Delta variant, as well as Beta and Gamma “in plasma collected at early (15-103 days) and late (9-15 month) convalescence were 16-and 8-fold lower, respectively.”

Moreover, the researchers report that “SARS-CoV-2 specific memory B and T cells reached a peak at 3-6 months and persisted in the majority of patients up to 15 months.” However, they caution that “a significant decrease in specific T cells was observed between 6 and 15 months.”

Brief Conclusion

While antiviral specific immunity, particularly among B cells in COVID-19 convalescent patients is long-lasting, some variants such as Delta raise concern, given it can at least partially escape the neutralizing activity of plasma antibodies.

Limitations

The study had its limitations such as a small number of convalescent patients analyzed between 12 and 15 months. The study team precluded cell phenotyping and they couldn’t distinguish if T cells measured at earlier time points were effector or memory cells. The authors suggest that additional subjects and cell phenotyping could possibly help to represent improved longevity of the immune response development, endurance of memory B and T cells post natural infection, and overall impact of disease severity.

Note that this study was posted to the preprint server and hence hasn’t yet been peer-reviewed—the study should not be cited as evidence yet.

Funding Organizations

EU-ATAC–known as the Antibody Therapy Against Coronavirus consortium aims at developing passive immunotherapy against COVID-19. The Italian Ministry of Health is part of the Italian national government while the Swedish Research Council, a government agency in Sweden, also contributed to the study.

Also contributing funding was SciFiLab, a world-leading Swedish national center for large-scale research, representing one of the largest molecular biology research labs in Europe and the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation (KAW).

Lead Research/Investigator

Harold Marcotte, Ph.D., Professor Karolinska Institutet at Karolinska University Hospital; corresponding author

Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 up to 15 months after infection

Background Information concerning the longevity of immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) following natural infection may…

www.biorxiv.org

Nebraska Attorney General: Physicians Should be Allowed to Use Off-Label Ivermectin & Hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19

Nebraska Attorney General: Physicians Should be Allowed to Use Off-Label Ivermectin & Hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19

In what some might consider a bombshell breakthrough, the Attorney General of the State of Nebraska provided a legal opinion to the state’s Health and

trialsitenews.com

In what some might consider a bombshell breakthrough, the Attorney General of the State of Nebraska provided a legal opinion to the state’s Health and Human Services Department head. This just-released formal legal opinion suggests that the off-label use of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 is acceptable. The Attorney General’s conclusions: “Allowing physicians to consider these early treatments will free them to evaluate additional tools that could save lives, keep patients out of the hospital, and provide relief for our already strained healthcare system.”

This bombshell finding comes from a letter from Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, as well as James A Campbell, Solicitor General, and Mindy L. Lester, Assistant Attorney General to Dannette R. Smith, Chief Executive Officer, Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services.

Smith requested an analysis from the Attorney General’s Office to assess whether it was unlawful or otherwise subject to discipline under Nebraska law for a licensed health care provider, once informed patient consent has been obtained, to prescribe ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, or other “off-label use medications for the treatment of COVID-19.”

The HHS head was interested in this opinion, as the Health and Human Services Department, via the Division of Publish Health, enforces the Nebraska Uniform Credentialing Act or “UCA.”

The Attorney General provided a detailed, lengthy analysis to the Nebraska HHS lead, declaring the based on the available data, they “do not find clear and convincing evidence that a physician who first obtains informed consent and then utilizes ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine after COVID-19 violates UCA.” Of course, there are exceptions. The physician must A) secure informed consent, B) not deceive their patients, C) prescribe excessively high doses, or D) fail to check for contraindications or engage in other misconduct.

In this bombshell of a letter, the Attorney General brought up disturbing trends evidencing misinformation during the pandemic, questionable studies (such as the one in The Lancet about hydroxychloroquine), which were then retracted, and other evidence of misinformation targeting off label drugs. TrialSite has chronicled a number of these alarming observations ranging from top medical journals to leading mass media newspapers.

Call to Action: Follow the link to read the opinion in its entirety.

Nebraska Attorney General

Attorney General Doug Peterson - To serve the citizens of Nebraska and Nebraska's elected officials with fidelity to our U.S. Constitution, State Constitution,…

ago.nebraska.gov

FUD alert....!? According a bicycle technician (oncologist) , and a circuit board design teacher and a highly educated astrology follower Ivermectin does not work. Even worse: Only spelling its name makes you sick!! The only people that are immune from this new drug disease are the children of Uttar Pradesh as these use "chicken English" and spell it ikirmiki'n...

In memorial of Monty python.

We did expect more FUD as Pfizer and Merck and 3 more companies just announced new antivirals.

So I predict our forum clowns will tell us soon more funny things about ikirmiki'n...

Can someone tell the warriors, it's over, learn to live with it. Covid is endemic. Goodnight gentlemen, go Sox!

COVID Cases Dropping in North, South America, Health Agency Says

https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2021-10-13/covid-cases-dropping-in-north-and-south-america-regional-health-agency-says

BRASILIA (Reuters) -The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) said on Wednesday that COVID-19 cases are dropping overall in North America but remain high in the American Midwest, Alaska, and Canada's Northwest Territories, where infection rates are 10 times the national average.

Infections are also dropping across South America, though cases are up in the greater Caracas area of Venezuela, and in parts of Chile's southernmost regions.

In the Caribbean, Barbados is reporting the highest number of COVID cases and deaths since the pandemic started, with a five-fold increase in COVID infections over the last month, PAHO said.

The regional branch of the World Health Organization called for concerted action in the Americas to help every country reach the WHO's vaccination coverage target of 40% of their population by the end of this year.

So far, only nine countries in the region have vaccinated 50% of their people, while six - Jamaica, St. Lucia, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Haiti, Guatemala and Nicaragua - have yet to reach 20% vaccination coverage, according to PAHO.

Without concerted action to increase the vaccination rate and public health measures, it is possible that COVID-19 could become endemic in the region, PAHO Director Carissa Etienne warned in a weekly briefing.

Third dose booster vaccination is recommended, especially for people who have received the Sinovac Biotech and Sinopharm vaccines developed in China that studies have shown to provide less protection for young adults, PAHO assistant director Jarbas Barbosa said.

Booster vaccination should begin with those over the age of 80, followed by those over 60 years with prior medical conditions, and then young adults, he said. Using other vaccines is possible when the original doses are not available, he said.

(Reporting by Anthony Boadle; Editing by Jan Harvey)

Quote from THHuxleynew

Could you tell me the name of one of these so I can ask what FM/R/J/M means?

I know what the J means because I am having to constantly edit it out. Wytten keeps me busy. Too busy sometimes. If his mafia list grows any longer, I am going to move to a deserted island somewhere.

Quote from Fm1

Nebraska Attorney General: Physicians Should be Allowed to Use Off-Label Ivermectin & Hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19

I do not understand this. Physicians are already allowed to do this. That's Federal law.

Quote from Fm1

Without concerted action to increase the vaccination rate and public health measures, it is possible that COVID-19 could become endemic in the region, PAHO Director Carissa Etienne warned in a weekly briefing.

Can anybody please stop these crack pots?? It is virtually impossible to combine more nonsense into 1 WHO statement.

Science shows:: Currently only natural infection can give something like herd immunity. General vaccination, masking is the worst thing to do as it delays herd immunity.

Only wealthy rich with > 2 comorbidity should be vaccinated...or was it the other ways round - only poor that cannot afford Ivermectin treatment... ?!