Covid-19 News

this was an update on nature.com October 28th

fur-farm animal can spread the coronavirus

The small fox-like animals called raccoon dogs (Nyctereutes procyonoides) can be infected with SARS-CoV-2, and can spread it among themselves.

Conrad Freuling at the Friedrich Loeffler Institute in Greifswald–Isle of Riems, Germany, and his colleagues deliberately infected nine raccoon dogs with the new coronavirus (C. M. Freuling et al. Emerg. Infect. Dis. https://doi.org/ffzf; 2020). Six began shedding the virus from their noses and throats several days later. When three uninfected animals were put in cages next to the infected animals, two got infected. None of the animals became visibly sick, but some were slightly lethargic.

These findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 could spread undetected in fur farms in China, where more than 14 million raccoon dogs live in captivity. The coronavirus that caused the pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome in 2002–2004 was also isolated in raccoon dogs, and could have first jumped to people from the canids.

Fm1 You are a mine of incredibly relevant new data strengthening the validity of our ANTI-Bat approach......please keep going your posts are invaluable in our fight against corporate IGNORANCE. Long live our scientific revolution!

PS -there is no way any mRNA derived or any other vaccine can give lasting immunity=and the worst thing is that Big Pharma is aware of this too - its all fake, fake, fake - all they are interested in is $$$$!

Quote from Dr Richard

Fm1 You are a mine of incredibly relevant new data strengthening the validity of our ANTI-Bat approach......please keep going your posts are invaluable in our fight against corporate IGNORANCE. Long live our scientific revolution!

Thank you sir. What troubles me the most is we can't convince the skeptics on even this obscure thread never mind a global media. Another is this N439k pathway. A vaccine is going to release antibodies that have no way to identify the virus, causing a Bradykinin unregulated response. I believe this is what happens with long haulers to a lesser extent. Inform your friends, go to social media and get the word out because it's not in the interests of the global media to bring lifesaving information to you. They will follow the WHO word!

an outpatient study of another repurposed drug

Fluvoxamine may prevent serious illness in COVID-19 patients

https://medicalxpress.com/news…llness-covid-patients.amp

Fluvoxamine is used commonly to treat obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), social anxiety disorder and depression. It is in a class of drugs known as selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), but unlike other SSRIs, fluvoxamine interacts strongly with a protein called the sigma-1 receptor. That receptor also helps regulate the body's inflammatory response.

Scientists Discover "Hidden" Gene In COVID-19, May Add To Unique Biology: Report

https://news.google.com/articl…=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen

The research team identified a new overlapping gene - ORF3d - in the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 that has the potential to encode a protein that is longer than expected.

They said ORF3d is also present in a previously discovered pangolin coronavirus, indicating the gene may have undergone changes during the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 and related viruses

Quote from Wyttenbach

Do you agree that doctors have the right to kill people without giving them the known working drugs?

If, in the best judgement of these doctors, the drugs do not work, then they have moral obligation not to give them. If it turns out you are right and they are wrong, that is a tragedy. But it not a moral issue. You say these are "known working" but they are not known to these doctors. Doctors cannot be held morally responsible for disagreeing with you, or for being ignorant of the facts. Contrary to what some people have said here, there has no censorship of information regarding any drug. Every drug discussed here has also been discussed in the mass media and the medical literature, in detail. All points of view have been published. If doctors disagree with you, I suppose that is because they understand medical science better than you do. I expect they are right, but I do not know enough to judge.

As I have often said, one of the important lessons of cold fusion is that experts are usually right, and amateurs like you, or experts outside the field are usually wrong. Many people unfamiliar with the details of the history of cold fusion might have the impression the opposite is true, but I know the details and that is not the case.

Another important lesson is that you should not try to judge complex technical issues unless you know a great deal about them.

Quote from JedRothwell

If, in the best judgement of these doctors, the drugs do not work, then they have moral obligation not to give them. If it turns out you are right and they are wrong, that is a tragedy. But it not a moral issue. You say these are "known working" but they are not known to these doctors. Doctors cannot be held morally responsible for disagreeing with you, or for being ignorant of the facts. Contrary to what some people have said here, there has no censorship of information regarding any drug. Every drug discussed here has also been discussed in the mass media and the medical literature, in detail. All points of view have been published. If doctors disagree with you, I suppose that is because they understand medical science better than you do. I expect they are right, but I do not know enough to judge.

As I have often said, one of the important lessons of cold fusion is that experts are usually right, and amateurs like you, or experts outside the field are usually wrong. Many people unfamiliar with the details of the history of cold fusion might have the impression the opposite is true, but I know the details and that is not the case.

Another important lesson is that you should not try to judge complex technical issues unless you know a great deal about them.

In long ago times I might agree but in the 80s large medical practice became the norm and most affiliated and sponsored by big pharma. Reps delivering the latest miracle. Doctors lively hood depends on making the right corporate decisions, and politics has a huge grip on medical divisions since this pandemic has begun. Maybe the average doctor can't be held responsible but the FDA the CDC and the WHO and the people responsible for setting up some of these trials that killed patients by overdose and I'll use he VA study as an example. You are one of the sheep being led to slaughter and you'll be saying ok doc!

Quote from Fm1

You are one of the sheep being led to slaughter

Isaiah 53.7 .. a lamb to the slaughter..

normally a young animal was the sacrifice

but Jed is no spring chicken.

plenty of old sheep are on statins..yes the average doctor can not be held responsible. Sie wissen nichts

Quote from JedRothwell

All points of view have been published. If doctors disagree with you, I suppose that is because they understand medical science better than you do.

I guess you still believe Lancet that published outraging corrupt bullshit about HCQ?! Or take Statins when doctors say you have to do so, albeit some well informed people do know that this fake illness is based on scientific fraud. But the profit is never ending 100'000 millions so far and in Europe they just lowered the limit for needing it, despite not a single central Europe country shows any correlation between infarct and high LDL!

99% of all doctors have no true knowledge. They neither understand chemistry nor physics nor anything relevant to the application of drugs except a list of symptoms they the once hammered in their head to pass the examination.

Normal doctors are on the same intellectual level as a plumber.

But > 90 % of the leading doctors are in Rotary some - the most corrupt - are free masons. So it is clear who they serve. OF course they serve you but not an average American!

More evidence that, despite being maligned, censored, banned, and suppressed by

Big Tech/Media/Pharma and governmental bureaucracies, HCQ works --

Peak Prosperity - 11/12/2020

It doesn't have to be this way.

Quote from Wyttenbach

I guess you still believe Lancet that published outraging corrupt bullshit about HCQ?!

No, as I said, I cannot judge. I have not read the reports and I do not know enough about biochemistry or medical science to judge. Let me repeat what I said. Please read it this time, instead or responding with an irrelevant strawman argument. I said:

All points of view have been published.

Everything that you and others have said here has been published in the mass media and the technical literature. There has been no censorship. People who understand these issues have seen both sides. If doctors pick one side, but you think the other is right, that does not make the doctors morally reprehensible. It means they have made a mistake. Without knowing about the subject I doubt that you are a medical genius better informed the doctors treating patients, but I wouldn't know.

Let me remind you that any doctor in the U.S. is authorized to use any drug "off label" for some purpose it is not intended for. So any doctor can use these drugs whatever the FDA or the Lancet say. Not only that, but malpractice suits have been banning in the case of COVID-19 life threatening illness.

YOU have dragged me into the discussion. You have made my (nonexistent) opinion the issue, and declared -- with no evidence -- that I agree with the Lancet. Which I have not read, and would not understand. This is classic strawman argument. An attempt to change the subject.

Hannibal Spotsburys are not confined to the UK..

Quote from Lou Pagnucco

More evidence that, despite being maligned, censored, banned, and suppressed by

Big Tech/Media/Pharma and governmental bureaucracies, HCQ works --

On the contrary, evidence in favor of HCQ has been published extensively, and promoted by many people, including the President of the United States. It is incredible to me that you call this censorship.

Quote from JedRothwell

On the contrary, evidence in favor of HCQ has been published extensively, and promoted by many people, including the President of the United States. It is incredible to me that you call this censorship.

I could list hundreds of videos and articles disparaging HCQ, but suffice it to say that

just yesterday Big Tech was deleting an HCQ video I was about to download - and it

is still MIA. Also note, Peak Prosperity cannot even mention HCQ verbally, lest they

run afoul of the GoogleYoutube AI censor. Additionally, even prestigious websites like

Medcram have been censored. Eventually Big Tech's AI will be able to read screen shots

and censor any screen that favorably depicts HCQ.

Quote from JedRothwell

On the contrary, evidence in favor of HCQ has been published extensively, and promoted by many people, including the President of the United States. It is incredible to me that you call this censorship.

There has been odles of censorship of physicians speaking out on Big Tech platforms, and of course "failure to cover" by CNN. The latest results of HCQ show it alone can end this pandemic.

As for censorship you can give it the name "Fact Checking" or let the "AI do it", but no matter which way it has been ruthless, vile and a danger to mankind. A hundred thousand lives (worldwide) maybe could have been saved -- but much worse is censoship. Censorship opens the door for the purveyors of truth to do whatever they want (who at this point are all aligned obviously -- big media and big tech both are aligned with big pharma). That is how you can have 1 million people in concentration camps, and nobody is none the wiser because it isn't a story in the media so it can't be something to discuss or of importance. Yet we have people yelling about how we have to lock people down and flatten the curve, or people attacking people over not wearing a mask... It is hysteria, it's ugly, and the scariest thing is the people who are hysterical will tell you they have science on their side.

The attendant lies at this point are so large, so utterly obvious that most people have stopped even talking about it. We've started lying to ourselves.

The best example is HCQ, where people say "well I'm not an expert" or "if it really worked we would be using it at national scale, so it can't work." If anyone actually read science, they would see this drug has a massive effect and they would be motivated to advocate for it.

Quote from JedRothwell

As I have often said, one of the important lessons of cold fusion is that experts are usually right, and amateurs like you, or experts outside the field are usually wrong.

usually, is agreed.... But I would always be careful with this judgement, especially if one is calling him/herself an EXPERT.

Innovation often happens when you think out of the box and not follow the "herd" or agree with all the ,sometimes, self called experts. Critical thinking and challenging dogmas must be allowed.

Historical example, the paradim shift from geo- to helio centric beliefe in the middle ages.

Covid-19 vaccines may have potentially unpleasant side effects

https://news.google.com/articl…=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen

The vaccine, and likely most others, will require two doses to work, injections that must be given weeks apart, company protocols show. Scientists anticipate that the shots will cause enervating flu-like side effects — including sore arms, muscle aches and fever — that could last days and temporarily sideline some people from work or school. And even if a vaccine proves 90 percent effective, the rate Pfizer touted for its product, 1 in 10 recipients would still be vulnerable. That means, at least in the short term, as population-level immunity grows, people can't stop social distancing and throw away their masks.

Interesting article about BIONTECH and some background information

https://www.derstandard.at/sto…ger-im-kampf-gegen-corona

Interesting to know would be, if the "investors" are among the first to take this vaccine. So far no single product sold, so still in debt, but company values more than Lufthansa or Commerzbank.

Safety and efficacy of inhaled nebulised interferon beta-1a (SNG001) for treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial

https://www.thelancet.com/jour…-2600(20)30511-7/fulltext

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection carries a substantial risk of severe and prolonged illness; treatment options are currently limited. We assessed the efficacy and safety of inhaled nebulised interferon beta-1a (SNG001) for the treatment of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.