Covid-19 News

    UK still denies the use of IVERMECTIN!!

    UK is on a suicide trip now with topping 9000 CoV-19 cases today!!

    Vaccine failure deniers!

    Free mason B.Jonson is the new Stalin of UK and murders his population by

    not allowing the use of IVERMECTIN!

    Quote from Mark U

    Every single person - every one - said they were ill with Covid like symptoms around the late spring of 2019.

    The New York cases April 2019 were identified as corona. But never which virus!! My wive had a similar infection - same time - in Japan that was very long lasting > 3 weeks. So this only happens with corona. I guess this was the CoV-19 test run that failed.

    So ask your relative to do an antibody test with a doctor he trusts.


    Quote from Fm1

    Of patients who were hospitalized, half ended up having some type of post-COVID-19 condition.

    Thanks to criminal FM/R/J doctor not giving them Ivermectin.

    Quote from Fm1

    More post-COVID-19 symptoms were also discovered in women than men during the study

    Notably

    Same for vaccination. Woman have about 4 x more complications with spike protein.

    Quote from Ahlfors

    It would suffice a dead solenoid ...

    The biosafety at Wuhan may have been compromised by nepotism..according to WeChat

    a marriage made in virology..perhaps ..

    Chinese academia may be less merit based than Western academia..


    but Wang Yanyi was only the boss of WIV since 2018..

    but a member of ZhiGong since 2010

    gathering non-party voices to support the party


    possibly there was no rigorous analysis of hazards implemented ever..

    in the Wuhan bat party

    https://www.sixthtone.com/news…e-seeks-patent-on-us-drug


    @Several articles widely circulated on social app WeChat have accused Wang Yanyi, the institute’s director-general, of having a weak academic background and ascending to her post through nepotism at a relatively young age. Some suspect Wang was only picked to lead the institute because of her husband, who is an academician with the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the virology institute’s former director.


    A photo of Wang Yanyi, director-general of the Wuhan Institute of Virology. From @中华诗文学习 on Weibo

    A few days ago a Danish player the football Europe chapionship collapsed with a severe heart attack. Google is now full of fact checking and statements that he never had a corona vaccine. Unluckily some of his Milano team mates took the vaccine.

    Fact is: The Danish team didn't want to vaccinate ahead of their turn. The majority of the players got the shot at the place where they work. So let's hope he will recover!


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sp…ng-positive-Covid-19.html


    This is about how the FM/R/J mafia works and dominates all media. They just have forgotten to undo history...


    Here a sample answer from google given to show you about how they cheat the people:: In red the news date. The event happened 8 days later!! So google flags old messages with new content . This simply is fraud!



    Soccer-Inzaghi named new Inter coach to replace Conte ...

    https://www.reuters.com › article

    Diese Seite übersetzen

    03.06.2021 — Simone Inzaghi has been named the new Inter Milan coach on a two-year deal, ... as our new First Team Coach: the Italian manager has signed a two-year deal with ... has not received a COVID-19 vaccine, according to Inter Milan's director.


    Here the opinion of the Danish team boss: (Ahead of the event....)

    https://www.explica.co/danish-…vaccinated-all-teams.html


    The Danish soccer coach, Kasper hjulmand, criticized UEFA on Wednesday for not having provided vaccines to all the Eurocup teams, and takes as an example what the International Olympic Committee (IOC) did.

    Herein, we report the findings of our 5-year surveillance of SARSr-CoVs in a cave inhabited by multiple species of horseshoe bats in Yunnan Province, China


    Ben Hu, Lei-Ping Zeng, Xing-Lou Yang, Xing-Yi Ge1, Wei Zhang, Bei Li, Jia-

    Zheng Xie, Xu-Rui Shen, Yun-Zhi Zhang, Ning Wang, Dong-Sheng Luo, Xiao-

    Shuang Zheng, Mei-Niang Wang, Peter Daszak, Lin-Fa Wang, Jie Cui, Zheng-

    Li Shi


    CAS Key Laboratory of Special Pathogens and Biosafety, Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases of

    Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, China, Yunnan Institute of Endemic

    Diseases Control and Prevention, Dali, China, Dali University, Dali, China, EcoHealth Alliance, New

    York, New York, United States of America, Programme in Emerging Infectious Diseases, Duke-NUS

    Medical School, Singapore

    I'm missing something.
    - Are you saying because his team member received the vaccine, Christian must have?

    - I don't see where this statement is in your links "has not received a COVID-19 vaccine, according to Inter Milan's director."

    - I don't understand the date June 3rd Reuters talks about new coach. Are you saying this happened June 11th?

    Quote from ZenoOfElea

    Which Covid-19 restrictions really worked — and which ones really didn’t?


    Still, the variation has one potential upside: With the benefit of hindsight, experts told me we can begin to deduce whether certain interventions were more effective than others. It’s a start.


    The Vox article goes on to state :


    The one Covid-19 intervention that definitely worked was mask mandates

    The evidence on lockdowns may be dicey, but the science on masks is clear: They work. Even experts I spoke with who think harsh lockdowns may have been counterproductive say indoor mask mandates were clearly effective.


    “Indoor masking guidance was proven to be effective,” Amesh Adalja, senior scholar at the John Hopkins Center for Health Security, told me. “When you look at it all, I think that is probably going to be the one that shows the most effect. ... Most things can be done safely if people socially distance and wear a mask indoors in an unvaccinated setting.”


    The available research supports that conclusion. In a study published in March 2021, CDC researchers examined case and death rates at the county level after mask mandates were put into place and found the mandates were associated with slower transmission.


    “Mandating masks was associated with a decrease in daily Covid-19 case and death growth rates within 20 days of implementation,” they concluded, and the effect grew the longer the mandates were in place.


    An earlier study, published in June 2020 in Health Affairs, had reached the same conclusion. Its authors estimated that mask mandates had averted some 200,000 Covid-19 cases by mid-May; at the time, the US had counted less than 2 million cases, indicating that the mask mandates had a meaningful effect in slowing the virus down early in the pandemic.


    Note how Vox, like other articles before it, refers to the CDC and Health Affairs studies to support the use of masks. Like the other publishers, Vox just cannot bring itself to mention the actual percentage difference it made in rate of infection decrease : between one and two percent for any 20 day interval. Who in their right mind would wear a (common) mask for this kind of meagre effect? Then it gives lame excuses for how Texas, which ended their mask mandates early yet saw infections drop, was somehow an exception. Is the push for mask wearing some kind of psyop? How are mask - wearing Japanese and Koreans doing for their flu seasons? (Twice as badly as the US.) This despite the South Koreans having a flu vaccination rate of 85 percent for adults over 65. But I digress.

    It isn't even a difference, it is a drop in the growth rate -- with a background of coming out of the peak wave. Based on a rough estimate, they were measuring May (avg start date of masks?) vs June and beyond.

    Parents send face masks worn by children at school for lab analysis. Results show 'dangerous pathogens' on masks


    https://www.theblaze.com/amp/c…rous-pathogens-2653400782


    Exactly what gets collected on your face mask after hours of use? Many medical experts have claimed there are no health drawbacks to wearing face masks for long periods of time, as long as you regularly clean them or use a new covering each time you mask up.


    But Florida parents, who are concerned about children wearing face masks at school, discovered recently that face masks actually catch a host of bacteria, many of which are "dangerous pathogens."


    What are the details?

    The Gainesville parents sent six recently worn face masks to the University of Florida for laboratory testing. They discovered that face masks collect numerous bacteria that cause, in many cases, serious illnesses.


    The parents wanted the face masks tested "because they were concerned about the potential of contaminants on masks that their children were forced to wear all day at school, taking them on and off, setting them on various surfaces, wearing them in the bathroom, etc.," Rational Ground explained.

    We need to know what we are putting on the faces of our children each day. Masks provide a warm, moist environment for bacteria to grow," parent Amanda Donoho told Rational Ground.


    The tests, conducted by the University of Florida's Mass Spectrometry Research and Education Center, discovered that five of the six masks contained a host of bacteria and three of the masks were contaminated with "dangerous pathogenic and pneumonia-causing bacteria."


    The 11 "dangerous pathogens" found on the masks are responsible for illnesses that include:


    Pneumonia

    Tuberculosis

    Meningitis and Sepsis

    Food poisoning from E. coli

    Diphtheria

    Lyme Disease

    Urinary Tract Infections

    More from Rational Ground:


    Half of the masks were contaminated with one or more strains of pneumonia-causing bacteria. One-third were contaminated with one or more strains of meningitis-causing bacteria. One-third were contaminated with dangerous, antibiotic-resistant bacterial pathogens. In addition, less dangerous pathogens were identified, including pathogens that can cause fever, ulcers, acne, yeast infections, strep throat, periodontal disease, Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, and more.

    The tested masks were new or had been freshly washed. They were worn by children ages 6-11 attending in-person school, while one was worn by an adult. Unworn masks and a T-shirt worn by one of the children were used as controls.


    "No pathogens were found on the control," Rational Ground noted.


    What do doctors say?

    Dr. Patrick Grant, a microbiologist at Florida Atlantic University, said last year that unwashed face masks do, indeed, accumulate harmful bacteria.


    "It's very common that we will eat and then put our mask back on and if we are sweating a little we are creating a really nice soup for this bacteria," Grant said.


    However, infectious disease specialist, Dr. Rossana Rosa, said the risk of pneumonia transmission, for example, due to accumulated infected particles on a face mask is nonexistent.


    "The way bacterial pneumonia tends to develop is through aspirating — or breathing in — contents into the lungs. So, in terms of wearing a mask, the respiratory droplets you exhale that land on the inside of your mask that you then breath [sic] back in will not give you bacterial pneumonia," Rosa explained. "If you have phlegm, you should find a way to safely spit it out. That way you aren't at risk of breathing in large amounts of mucus or saliva into your lungs, which is how bacterial pneumonia develops."


    What is less clear, as the concerned Florida parents indicated, is the transmission risk when school children are taking off and putting on their face masks multiple times per school day to eat and drink. With the accumulation of harmful bacteria, the chances of falling sick would theoretically increase.


    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's latest guidance recommended that students continue wearing face masks through the 2020-21 school year.

    What we now know about the efficacy of China’s Covid-19 vaccines


    https://qz.com/2018838/what-we…arm-sinovac-vaccines/amp/


    China’s leading Covid-19 vaccines secured their first emergency authorizations outside the country late last year, and were soon in use across the world. Adding together doses administered in China and overseas, they may be the most widely used Covid-19 vaccines globally.


    But late-stage trial results that began to trickle out last year confirmed early concerns that the protection they delivered wasn’t as good as that conferred by the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.

    The Chinese shots differ from the novel approach used by Moderna and Pfizer, which deploy messenger RNA (mRNA), genetic material that gives cells the instructions for mounting defenses against the coronavirus. Meanwhile Sinopharm and Sinovac developed inactivated Covid vaccines—using a neutralized version of the coronavirus to generate immunity.


    But before we delve into their respective efficacy data, here’s a refresher on what efficacy means with respect to Covid-19 vaccines.


    What is the difference between vaccine “efficacy” and “effectiveness”?

    Efficacy refers to the extent to which a vaccine reduces Covid-19 cases in a trial compared to the rate in a control group.

    The Chinese shots differ from the novel approach used by Moderna and Pfizer, which deploy messenger RNA (mRNA), genetic material that gives cells the instructions for mounting defenses against the coronavirus. Meanwhile Sinopharm and Sinovac developed inactivated Covid vaccines—using a neutralized version of the coronavirus to generate immunity.


    But before we delve into their respective efficacy data, here’s a refresher on what efficacy means with respect to Covid-19 vaccines.


    What is the difference between vaccine “efficacy” and “effectiveness”?

    Efficacy refers to the extent to which a vaccine reduces Covid-19 cases in a trial compared to the rate in a control group.

    If a vaccine’s efficacy rate is 80% it doesn’t mean 20 out of every 100 people who get the jab will get a symptomatic case of Covid-19. Instead it means there will be 80% fewer such cases compared with the control group. So if , say, 1% of a control group of 1,000 unvaccinated people develops Covid-19 over a certain number of months, that means 10 people will get ill. With an efficacy rate of 80%, only 2 people should get sick.


    But that’s not the only way to look at efficacy—there’s also efficacy against contracting a severe case, or against hospitalization for Covid-19. Shao Yiming, a researcher at the Chinese Centers for Disease Control, this month drew a distinction (link in Chinese) between protecting against infection, most likely referring to a positive but largely asymptomatic case, and against disease, ie an illness with one or more symptoms. The focus of vaccination in China is to “prevent people from getting ill [because of Covid-19], but not from getting infected,” said Shao.


    Meanwhile, effectiveness refers to how the vaccines hold up in real life, in conditions and among populations that often differ significantly from those in trials.


    The Sinopharm vaccines’ efficacy

    China National Pharmaceutical Group, or Sinopharm, developed two vaccines, both via its subsidiary China National Biotec Group (CNBG).

    Sinopharm said its BIBP vaccine, developed via subsidiary Beijing Institute for Biological Products, had an efficacy rate of 79% in a brief statement in December. But it only published interim results for its trials of both its shots last month, after the vaccine had secured World Health Organization emergency approval. That approval paves for more widespread acceptance, and for its distribution via Covax, a World Health Organization effort to share vaccines more equitably.


    According to the World Health Organization factsheet for the BIBP vaccine, its trial was not “designed and powered” to show efficacy against severe disease in people with comorbidities, or older than 60, which is wording that is not included for the fact sheets for the Pfizer, Astra-Zeneca, Moderna, or SinoVac vaccines.


    Sinopharm’s other vaccine, developed via a Wuhan unit and not listed for emergency use by the WHO, has an efficacy rate of around 73%.


    The SinoVac vaccine’s efficacy data

    SinoVac, the maker of the CoronaVac vaccine that’s being used in Indonesia, Brazil, and Chile, among other places, delayed the release of its trial data several times, before finally sharing the results from the trials on some 25,000 participants in February. It was approved by the WHO this month.

    A Hong Kong review of its trial data showed an efficacy rate of around 62% while Brazil’s Butantan Institute, which tested the vaccine on frontline health workers, showed an an efficacy of 51% against mild disease and 100% against hospitalization. Smaller trials in Turkey and Chile showered higher rates of protection against mild disease.


    Fresh doubts about China’s vaccines

    New waves of Covid-19 cases in places with a high per capita level of Sinopharm or SinoVac vaccinations have raised concerns that the vaccines have lower real-world effectiveness than officials may have been hoping.

    In the case of Chile, home to about 19 million people, that appears to have contributed to a consistently high new case count in recent months that was also fueled by a rush to reopen over the Christmas holiday season.


    An April study from the University of Chile put the effectiveness of a single dose of Covid-19 vaccine at 3% for protecting against symptomatic infection, based on an examination of seven million vaccinated people.


    It’s unclear what the breakdown of Sinovac and Pfizer shots was for the people who had only had one dose in the study, but given Chile’s order history, and judging by the breakdown among people who got two doses, it’s likely most of these were SinoVac vaccinations. Of the 4 million people in Chile who had received two doses, 93% of them had SinoVac’s CoronaVac jab. Two weeks after the second dose of either vaccine, overall efficacy was at around 54%, the university said

    In tiny Seychelles, home to less than 100,000 people, some 60% of the population was fully vaccinated, but there was a surge in cases in May that forced fresh shutdowns. Of those with two doses, 57% got the Chinese vaccine while the rest got the Astra-Zeneca shot. More than a third of new cases were among the fully vaccinated, but the government hasn’t provided a breakdown for Sinopharm and Astra Zeneca among these cases.


    Meanwhile Bahrain, which vaccinated about half its 1.6 million people with the Sinopharm vaccine but nevertheless battled a spike in cases starting in May, the government is offering a booster shot of the Pfizer vaccine to more vulnerable people, and the United Arab Emirates is doing the same. Officials in Bahrain have said, however, that the new cases were mostly among the unvaccinated.


    In Uruguay, however, the government said this month that its vaccination campaign with the Sinopharm vaccine had reduced deaths by 95% and intensive care admissions by 92%, in addition to reducing Covid-19 infections by about 60% in the country of 3.5 million.

    The biggest test of China’s vaccines may well come at home. After a slow start, the country has ramped up its domestic inoculation rate in recent weeks, with the Delta variant first seen in India contributing to a flare-up in the southern city of Guangzhou. China is now vaccinating 20 million people a day and has delivered 900 million doses so far, or enough to cover a third of its population.


    Correction, June 17: In the efficacy section, the article earlier stated 1% of 1,000 as 100. It should of course be 10.


    Same story here, unfortunately... :(


    https://www.reuters.com/world/…nation-dozens-2021-06-17/

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.