Quote from RobertBryant

VAERS analysis.

I lost the reference for the VAERS article.

After a long search I found it..

perhaps it was buried by a google algorithm and a few paid fact checkers.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Scott-Mclachlan-2/publication/352837543_Analysis_of_COVID-19_vaccine_death_reports_from_the_Vaccine_Adverse_Events_Reporting_System_VAERS_Database_Interim_Results_and_Analysis/links/60dc44c9a6fdccb745f48fc7/Analysis-of-COVID-19-vaccine-death-reports-from-the-Vaccine-Adverse-Events-Reporting-System-VAERS-Database-Interim-Results-and-Analysis.pdf?_sg%5B0%5D=o7HBpXKUFYJTZ9mGmEpMAX5xBNaW69D_zpDm5R2fzZlV0VM_TXbCQKdT5NaOLqD8JqK_t9Z1rzDdXwj6SGmqJg.8vzNSAjj2nd7UApjOJgHJSu88jQs9715sZzG8Tdt9clH1LMYK-BDsMHyOzf1bvaMQzMWdzOmt12wMgyq4dPRLg&_sg%5B1%5D=lQJOxv2Vj0TPiWXq5AP4gRxf9mrFYgG-EtxNZki04SuHCI-EVyqtMGfob8yYKmscJt4NX9lEgG2R01bn_7y8w5b4Ggv7EW3MwvYphEwyPmH0.8vzNSAjj2nd7UApjOJgHJSu88jQs9715sZzG8Tdt9clH1LMYK-BDsMHyOzf1bvaMQzMWdzOmt12wMgyq4dPRLg&_iepl=

"

During early May television reports, such as one made by Tucker Carlson on FOX News11,

suggested we should consider the number of adverse event and death reports being recorded in the VAERS database for COVID vaccines when deciding whether young and healthy people who are not otherwise at risk from COVID-19 should even receive these medications. Tucker asks a number of simple but relevant questionsin regards to the social, political and potentially legal coercion being used to promote the taking of COVID vaccines:

“How many people have died after taking COVID vaccines?”,

“what are the potential risks from taking these vaccinations?” and

“what do we really know about the potential risks from taking these vaccinations?”....

In any event, the questions being asked here are those

which are normally asked of any new medication.

They are important and necessary and should not be waved away

simply by virtue of an application of the term ‘vaccine’.

Self-titled fact checkers and journalists in the mainstream media immediately discredited Carlson’s ..

They imputed that VAERS was a breeding-ground for anti-vaccine misinformation

and pointed to the twitter posts of generalist doctors as vaccine experts
that rejected Carlson’s VAERS death claims by claiming all the deaths were coincidence

and asserting unproven facts about ongoing death rates,

and without also pointing out that the same expert in a subsequent post acknowledges that VAERS data was used to identify the clotting issue with the J&J vaccine (McCarthy, 2021).

It is incredible to decry VAERS as rubbish self-reported nonsense when that data suggests something that goes against your particular views, while also suggesting
it provides data that was relevant or helpful in other circumstances....

Quote from Fm1

he way in which its causative virus first emanated remains unclear.

Well there is a natural way...to Covid19,,

That retracted email seems a bit innocuous..

Just Daszak thanking Fauci/Morens..for being staunch .

It seems to say

“ that we,he + Fauci et al were working in collaboration with the Chinese at Wuhan lab”

Later on in the year Fauci/Morens co-authored a philosophical paper.

It’s conclusion was bit waffly

“Emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases are epiphenomena of human existence and our interactions with each other, and with nature. As human societies grow in size and complexity, we create an endless variety of opportunities for genetically unstable infectious agents to emerge into the unfilled ecologic niches we continue to create. There is nothing new about this situation, except that we now live in a human-dominated world in which our increasingly extreme alterations of the environment induce increasingly extreme backlashes from nature.”

And

“It should force us to begin to think in earnest and collectively about living in more thoughtful and creative harmony with nature, even as we plan for nature’s inevitable, and always unexpected, surprises.”

I guess that’s the reason for those rows of bat cages at Wuhan,

“Living in creative harmony with nature” and finding more about the

“Enigma of Host switching”.. I guess Fauci was too humble to mention

the significant collaborative work in Wuhan ,

and left it to the Chinese to take the praise.

Redacted Fauci Info Comes to Light - Deep State Rabbit Hole

The public has a right to know what the FBI tried to hide about Dr. Anthony Fauci, because the redactions weren't made for security reasons.

deepstaterabbithole.com

Emerging Pandemic Diseases: How We Got to COVID-19

Infectious diseases prevalent in humans and animals are caused by pathogens that once emerged from other animal hosts. In addition to these established…

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Quote from RobertBryant

I guess my wife got off lucky with two months of mild neutropenia

and a day off from work,,

I think she was a bit unlucky to have one day off work. It is quite common but I have to say of those I know taking the vaccine it has happened to only about 10%.

However not sure she was unlucky with the neutrophenia.

Sub-clinical neutropenia would not normally be tested - so although I know of no other cases anecdotally, I note that transient neutropenia is a known very common side effect of the AstraZeneca vaccine from phase 1/2 data:

DEFINE_ME

Safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2: a preliminary report of a phase 1/2, single-blind, randomised controlled trial

Unsolicited adverse events in the 28 days following vaccination considered to be possibly, probably, or definitely related to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were predominantly mild and moderate in nature and resolved within the follow-up period (appendix 1 pp 12–15). Laboratory adverse events considered to be at least possibly related to the study intervention were self-limiting and predominantly mild or moderate in severity (data not shown). Transient haematological changes from baseline (neutropenia) were observed in 25 (46%) of 54 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group compared with three (7%) of 44 participants in the MenACWY group.

Also seems that slightly lower total WBC and lymphocyte counts are a thing after standard flu vaccination, perhaps as side effect of raising an immune reaction:

Haematological changes associated with influenza vaccination in people aged over 65: case report and prospective study - PubMed

Blood count abnormalities are a recognized feature of many viral infections and immunizations but little is known about the haematological effects of influenza…

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Blood count abnormalities are a recognized feature of many viral infections and immunizations but little is known about the haematological effects of influenza vaccination. We report a 67-year-old patient who developed thrombocytopenia and severe neutropenia 3 weeks after she was vaccinated against influenza. The case led us to study prospectively the blood counts of 70 people aged over 65 before and after they received influenza vaccine. There were no significant changes in the levels of haemoglobin, neutrophils, monocytes, eosinophils or platelets after vaccination, but the total WBC counts (mean +/- SD, 6.86 +/- 1.52) and lymphocyte counts (1.69 +/- 0.61) were significantly lower at 4 weeks than at baseline (7.22 +/- 1.60 [P = 0.02] and 1.86 +/- 0.62 [P = 0.001] respectively) and in four subjects the lymphocyte count fell to below 0.7 x 10(9)/l. Since influenza vaccine does not contain live virus, its haematological effects presumably relate to the host immune response rather than to viral replication.

Finally here is a systematic review of neutropenia following vaccines (from 2016). Not sure its quality since this is not peer reviewed. But I note the COVID vaccine phase 2/3 trials did test for neutropenia.

(PDF) Neutropenia as an Adverse Event following Vaccination: Results from Randomized Clinical Trials in Healthy Adults and Systematic Review

PDF | Background: In the context of early vaccine trials aimed at evaluating the safety profile of novel vaccines, abnormal haematological values, such... |…

www.researchgate.net

Conclusions: It is important to include ANC and other haematological tests in early vaccine trials to identify potential safety signals. Post-vaccination neutropenia is not uncommon, generally transient and clinically benign, but many vaccine trials do not have a sampling schedule that allows its detection.

Quote from RobertBryant

Self-titled fact checkers and journalists in the mainstream media immediately discredited Carlson’s ..

They imputed that VAERS was a breeding-ground for anti-vaccine misinformation

and pointed to the twitter posts of generalist doctors as vaccine experts
that rejected Carlson’s VAERS death claims by claiming all the deaths were coincidence

and asserting unproven facts about ongoing death rates,

and without also pointing out that the same expert in a subsequent post acknowledges that VAERS data was used to identify the clotting issue with the J&J vaccine (McCarthy, 2021).

It is incredible to decry VAERS as rubbish self-reported nonsense when that data suggests something that goes against your particular views, while also suggesting
it provides data that was relevant or helpful in other circumstances....

Display More

Thanks for this link. Let us then ignore self-titled fact-checkers and consider Tucker Carlson's analysis (BTW he is not exactly a known scientist, or even somone with known analytic skills) for ourselves? Here is Wikipedia's link on his education:

Carlson was briefly enrolled at Collège du Léman, a boarding school in Switzerland, but says he was "kicked out".^[52] He attained his secondary education at St. George's School, a boarding school in Middletown, Rhode Island, where he started dating his future wife, Susan Andrews, the headmaster's daughter.^[53] He then went to Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, graduating in 1991 with a BA in history.^[32] Carlson's Trinity yearbook describes him as a member of the "Dan White Society", an apparent reference to the American political assassin who murdered San Francisco Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk.^[54][55][56] After college, Carlson tried to join the Central Intelligence Agency, but his application was denied, after which he decided to pursue a career in journalism with the encouragement of his father, who advised him that "they'll take anybody."^[32][57]

Anyway we can treat his analysis just as we would anyone else's (even a Nobel Prize winner - as you know they make mistakes too!). Perhaps you can improve on my post commenting when you originally posted? I'd welcome a critique.

I can also resolve the confusion in the passage quoted above about VAERS easily enough - have a look at the stated by CDC strengths and weaknesses page copied into my post (and linked). Given this new information (well, presumably new information to the person making that comment) it is not at all incredible.

Finally some context. There are two other systems recording vaccine safety information (BEST and CMS) which are complementary to VAERS. For some reason you don't hear much about them from anti-vaxxers. I sometimes think that serious honest anti-vaxxers have some specific mental inability to assimilate context because if they did many of the standard concerns expressed about VAERS data would just go away.

Of course vaccines do have side effects, and we should expect side effects from COVID vaccines. It is just that to work out what they are you need to look at all of the evidence carefully.

I'm glad that people other than anti-vaxxers are doing this, so that they can identify likely signals that are real. If you look at the vaccine safety information now you will find quite a lot of serious side effects that have been identified in addition to the well known pericarditis (mRNA vaccines) and atypical blood clotting (AstraZeneca vaccine). Look at the detailed safety summaries fro each vaccine  linked off-of this page.

EDIT. I've juts found a great resource for anti-vaxxers. they probably have not looked at it because of a general distrust of CDC - but it is really good with lots of juicy COVID vaccine nasty possible but not yet indentified as causal effects all in one place:

Initial Results of Near Real-Time Safety Monitoring COVID-19 Vaccines

This page describes the Initial Results of Near Real-Time Safety Monitoring of COVID-19 Vaccines in Persons Aged 65 Years and Older

www.fda.gov

THH

Quote from Wyttenbach

This will only hold for the fools that got the gen therapy (vaccinated themselves ..). These fear monger people will have to spend their whole fortune for weekly boosters soon... Until they die from a simple cold due to immune deficiency.

This is my last warning. The only people in danger are the ones that got the gen therapy as they do not follow the science. They just believe in their self elected science templates like Fauci, that never have studied any science.

Here a study has been made among young with long Covid and normal young with no covid. Result: Both groups did report the same symptoms over the duration of the study...I do not say that there is no long Covid as I know some very rare cases. But as said very rare cases!

Greeting from Israel 4000 infection after vaccination....

I hope you know the difference between magnitude and quality. The most recent papers all show the gent therapy generated antibodies are of poor quality and also the T-cell memory.

May be once you should fully read the paper linked above I commented too.

Even a faint infection is enough. But with your room cleaning woman knowledge you cant even guess what the papers says.

Display More

Quote from Wyttenbach

>90% of all UK people have antibodies. But less that 90% are vaccinated...

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplep…latestinsights#antibodies

This implies that also 90% of the un-vaccinated have antibodies...

Dear undergrad: This term has originallybeen given by big pharma. You can complain by Roche OR Pfizer.

Vaccine is marketing only! For dummies like you.

Display More

Quote from Wyttenbach

Normally you do this with a crippled virus and then it's called a vaccine. With Delta it is enough to go to some crowed places - with not mask of course - to catch it the soft way.

As linked above: A soft infection is enough for good immunity: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-24377-1

Statement 1)

Collectively, these results indicate that SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses are long-lasting over 10 months in COVID-19 convalescent patients although SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody response may decrease.

2)

Considering preserved polyfunctionality and proliferation

capacity of SARS-CoV-2-specific memory T cells, the current

data indicate that memory T cells contribute to protective

immunity against re-infection even 10 months after the primary

infection.

Key statement:

3) Therefore, we compared long-term (≥200 DPSO) T cell memory between the

asymptomatic and symptomatic groups. We could not find a

significant difference in the number of IFN-γ spots between the

two groups (Supplementary Fig. 8). In addition, when we

performed subgroup analyses of the asymptomatic/mild group

and moderate/severe/critical group, we found no significant

differences in the number of IFN-γ spots or the frequencies of

AIM+ cells among T1 (31–99 DPSO), T2 (100–199 DPSO), and

T3 (≥200 DPSO) in either group (Supplementary Fig. 9). From

these results, we conclude that SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell

memory is successfully maintained regardless of the severity of

COVID-19.

For the cure::

You can be 10000% sure that Ivermectin works best as never in the live time of modern medicine more money has been spent to hide a drug from the public...

These cricket brains are not aware that the 100% negative logic is 100% confirming too!

Display More

Everyone - if anyone thinks there are important points in Wyttenbach's 3 posts above not already answered could they highlight them? I don't want to keep repeating the same things, but on the other hand there might be points made That have not been properly considered.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Background deaths are typically a very high proportion.

I still miss your comparison of flu vaccine deaths vs. CoV-19 vaccine deaths from VAERS.

Would be enlightening for you. I also allow you to exclude all age > 65 from the statistics, that had fist symptoms > 24 hours after the jab.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Those thinking ivermectin has very strong evidence all believe this conspiracy theory, and it is really necessary to believe it to maintain ivermectin is very effective.

We are not thinking: WE are using it and it works. See Uttar Pradesh, the best example! 1000x better than vaccines. But your buddies don't like real data as this cannot be faked as usually done in an RCT study.

Quote from THHuxleynew

I sometimes think that serious honest anti-vaxxers have some specific mental inability to assimilate context because if they did many of the standard concerns expressed about VAERS data would just go away.

WE only know about your early dementia so far and your reading disability. But you can perfectly repeat what your FM buddies tell/e-mail you. Why should we listen to /read all fake you post?

VAERS is the true picture as it is impossible for the mafia to block entries. We know that all western healthcare is 100% undermined by the FM/R/J/B mafia and that we now have to organize privately to stay healthy. So only fools will listen to you!

When will you comment on Uttar Pradesh & Ivermectin ??? Dementia?? Did you forget it???

IVERMECTIN SAVES INDIA

#IndiaFightsCorona COVID-19

www.mygov.in

Only the state of Kerala is missing all targets: This state (> 50% of India cases) is now hijacked by the vaccine mafia and had to reintroduce lock downs. On Kerala official/media pages you find Pfizer/Moderna commercials everywhere and people are forced to vaccination as they cannot enter a shop without a vaccine passport.

Now central government comes in. May be asking for bribes too...

Never in human history a small "cricket brain" group called Free masons & rotary ever had the power to intentionally kill 10'000ds of peoples live just for personal profit. Humanity since one year is a victim of the FM/R death cult sects members.

India is far away for most and the south (Kerala) is a poor state so the FM/R/J/B mafia is now what once has been called the Anti Christ. But some member here have fun with this group....

" serious honest anti-vaxxers "

there's that rhetoric again... for those who lack coherent argument

but are skilled in Ascolian statistics..

which is why I maintain a bluescreen... but some FUD slips through ..like delta

Repeat after me.......seasonality, it easy

Boris Johnson: Lockdowns, Not Vaccination Program, is What Improves UK COVID-19 Numbers

Boris Johnson: Lockdowns, Not Vaccination Program, is What Improves UK COVID-19 Numbers

Boris Johnson recently went on record that the key to successfully lowering COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, and deaths are lockdowns, which he

trialsitenews.com

Boris Johnson recently went on record that the key to successfully lowering COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, and deaths are lockdowns, which he states are “overwhelmingly important.” That’s right; he is on record that the reductions in numbers, hospitalizations, and deaths haven’t been achieved by the vaccination program nearly as much as by authoritarian-minded lockdowns.

Listen for yourself—some wisdom from Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister for the United Kingdom.

The UK has experienced three major pandemic waves, the first starting in April 2020, where there weren’t vast numbers of cases but extraordinarily high numbers of deaths. For example, from late March through early May, the average number of new cases in a day (based on a seven-day average) ranged from 1,000 to over 5,000 at least once, and this was the second most deadly period in the UK’s pandemic, with some days having over 1,000 UK deaths per day.

The second wave started around October 2020 and essentially ran through until February 2021 (the most devastating period thus far). Then, a third Delta-driven wave began in June with a fairly fast turnaround and decline in July. Technically, the UK is still in this third wave, with the most recent seven-day average number of new daily cases at 25,471. Fortunately, the death rates have gone way down since that first spike in March 2020. By August 3rd, the seven-day average for new deaths stands at 83.

The BBC reported Scotland is easing up on a number of pandemic-era rules, for example. The UK’s lockdowns have been tough but effective if Johnson is correct.

57.9% of the UK population has been fully vaccinated, while about 70.3% have received at least one jab. The spread of the Delta variant was looking to become the latest major emergency as over 50,000 cases were reported by July 17th, 2021. Breakthrough infections were looking ever more real as the next crisis of the vaccinated. But now Nature reports that mysteriously the cases are on the wane. No one is quite sure why as of yet.

Surprise dip in UK COVID cases baffles researchers

Daily recorded infections have more than halved since mid-July. Few researchers anticipated such a sharp decline, and they are now struggling to interpret it.

Surprise dip in UK COVID cases baffles researchers

Daily recorded infections have more than halved since mid-July. Few researchers anticipated such a sharp decline, and they are now struggling to interpret it.

www.nature.com

I feel the this doctor from somewhere writes in convinced there is a conspiracy to suppress ivermectin posts have been answered already many times.

There is something about the repetition though - even I find myself thinking - well - that sounds a problem - maybe there is no smoke without fire.

Cutting through the repeated stuff I'd like to recommend this nice reflective review of how doctors assess evidence, the role of (and difficulty doing good) systematic reviews, commenting on what changed with COVID:

How COVID broke the evidence pipeline

The pandemic stress-tested the way the world produces evidence — and revealed all the flaws.

www.nature.com

Also a before COVID reflection on why doctors and research scientists have such differing attitudes towards medical treatments (drug or otherwise).

An Epidemic of Unnecessary Treatment

Long after research contradicts common medical practices, patients continue to demand them and physicians continue to deliver.

www.theatlantic.com

Here is a legal perspective on doctor's off-label prescribimg particularly referencing HCQ early in the pandemic - when it was very popular:

The enhanced danger of physicians’ off-label prescribing during a public health emergency

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The enhanced danger of physicians’ off-label prescribing during a public health emergency

As far as the specific evidence for Ivermectin:

(1) The lower quality trials are (bound) to be biased positive. Even the lower quality RCTs are similarly biassed as shown spectacularly by Elgazzar. Do read the detailed critique's of it. I'm not saying it was deliberately fraudulent, thought it was certainly plagiarism, but anyone with that amount of chaos and error in what they publish cannot be relied upon and it is only human that when there is chaos positive results get selected.

(2) There is then the question of how to do a good quality meta-analysis of the evidence. We can see how not to do it - the reviews that include all studies are doomed to positive error. Then there is a lot of skill and science in how to do a good meta-analysis. My fave vaccine blogger Hilda Bastian actually does research into what makes a better or worse systematic review. It is not easy to do a good review.

(3) I cut through this by taking the most pro-ivermectin (in terms of authors) of the reviews: Bryant et al. Their review also has the merit of having decent methodology. This has lead authors from the pro-ivermectin FLCC and BIRD pressure groups. So it is going to be as good as it gets for ivermectin. It finds no positive effect for any of the outcomes except mortality. Its findings for mortality are swayed by two large reviews: Elgazzar and Niaee which are high risk of bias (looked at objectively) but which are scored low risk by the FLCC/BIRD team. Now they may be right or wrong with Niaee, but they were spectacularly wrong with Elgazaar based on what we now know. Although the data problems would never be analysed by a systematic reviewer, a proper analysis of whether each RCT includes all relevant information is essential . Elgazzar fell on that count. Thus more careful systematic reviewers (there were these) ruled out Elgazzar as high bias before the specific appalling details of that study came to light. That is strong motivation for ruling out other similar high bias studies. Others did this. Bryant et al did not.

(4) Having done this - taking all of the rest of the Bryant et al working as is, we get a negative result for ivermectin.

(5) Does this mean we know ivermectin does not work? No. It means we have no evidnece it does work.

(6) Is ivermetin being ignored or discriminated against? Far from it. Two big high quality randomised interventional studies (PRINCIPLE in Uk and ACTIV-6 in the US) are testing ivermectin as a priority (they are designed to test multiple drugs, but ivermectin comes first). We should get preliminary results from PRINCIPLE by the Autumn.

(7) In terms of a priori information about ivermectin. (a) The golden hamster evidence on reduction of symptoms (but not viral load) was dramatic, that motivates interest in it as an immunomodulator that might help with COVID, but not as a prophylactic. (b) The anti-viral effect in vitro was at levels much higher than that found from safe doses. In vitro evidence is not so strong, you can argue that somewhere in the budy it gets concentrated enough, etc, but there is no goos evidence of that. So overall the a priori evidence for ivermectin as prophylatic is mildly negative.

(8) The epidemiological arguments for ivermectin as prophylactic naively sound very impressive, but are completely bust when looked at carefully, as I've shown here recently. Using cross-country comparisons for ivermectin a stretament is juts very very difficult - such evidence is very low quality because of all the confounders.

(9) Since we now have lots of RCTs, we do not need the lower quality evidence in any case.

It would make it more interesting, and easier, to consider real evidence for drugs, if people thought a bit before posting random anti-vax pro-ivermectin stuff that does not advance things because it is so obviously full of holes.

Just because TSN posts rubbish about ivermectin repeatedly, and a number of other people have made mistakes on the positive side, does not mean we should not look carefully at it. personally I am interested in whetehr it could have useful immunomodulatoy effect. That is the area of drug therapy that I feel is most important since COVID does such very nasty things to our immune systems. Surely we can go on finding cleverer drugs (dexamethazone is a first step) to help with this?

THH

Quote from Fm1

57.9% of the UK population has been fully vaccinated, while about 70.3% have received at least one jab.

But > 90% have anti bodies. Same thing in most countries that vaccinate already infected people and claim vaccines success...

Only fools kill themselves with a RNA gen therapy that is not needed for anybody healthy age <65. And please do an antibody test prior to your safety shot. IF you already had CoV-19 then your are at least 40x better protected than with and therapeutic shot....

Please THHuxleynew stop promoting/posting external FUD sent by your buddies. Only an idiot will read it.

Quote from Fm1

Boris Johnson recently went on record that the key to successfully lowering COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, and deaths are lockdowns, which he states are “overwhelmingly important.” That’s right; he is on record that the reductions in numbers, hospitalizations, and deaths haven’t been achieved by the vaccination program nearly as much as by authoritarian-minded lockdowns.

Listen for yourself—some wisdom from Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister for the United Kingdom.

FM1 - this post, as I'm sure you realise, is way off beam.

Boris is a politician and saying this to answer critics who think he has been careless not locking down early enough, and also his back-benchers who think any lockdown is an assault on divine right to be a COVID super-spreader (they are nearly that bad). And, as all know, Boris is profoundly unreliable - he will say whatever sounds good with no regard to truth.

Look at my post up above - it took me some time to do it and is interesting - comparing UK pre and post vaccination IFR from the ONS survey. Post vaccination it is down to < 10% of rate it was pre-vaccination.

Can I ask - you know that headline is false - I'm sure - and no-one would normally take Johnson comments as that blogger does - why did you post it? There is a lot of uncertainty in the figures but such blatant distortions do not help.

THH

Quote from Fm1

Surprise dip in UK COVID cases baffles researchers

Daily recorded infections have more than halved since mid-July. Few researchers anticipated such a sharp decline, and they are now struggling to interpret it.

No - that is half untrue I'm afraid (I wish it were true).

Daily recorded cases have halved - but cases are not infections.

Reasons (and it is true no-one is quite sure which are correct):

(1) Increasing vaccination + school holidays + young adults increasing natural immunity mean R is now < 1. Antibody levels are now very high in UK.

(2) Schools being on holiday make for a dramatic drop in testing of the cohorts mots likely to be infected (children)

(3) People are testing less after the political signalling, and general feeling in the Uk, that COVID is mostly beaten.

The latest infection info (a week ago) was up 20% on two weeks ago. But, that info is historic, and I have hopes that this week's info - out in two days - will be no higher than it was last week signalling infections now level. We need them to drop over the summer vacation if possible.

So, everyone is waiting with baited breath for this.

THH

Quote from Wyttenbach

But > 90% have anti bodies. Same thing in most countries that vaccinate already infected people and claim vaccines success...

Only fools kill themselves with a RNA gen therapy that is not needed for anybody healthy age <65. And please do an antibody test prior to your safety shot. IF you already had CoV-19 then your are at least 40x better protected than with and therapeutic shot....

Please THHuxleynew stop promoting/posting external FUD sent by your buddies. Only an idiot will read it.

gene therapy - no - please stop using incorrect terms?

>90% have antibodies. look at the detailed graphs i posted from ONS giving 1st vaccination dose, 2nd vaccination dose, and antibody status for different age cohorts in the population and how this changes with time.

You can see that we now have high antibody positivity which is nearly all because of vaccination. You are using historic vaccination figures, and ones that include children, which is why you get it wrong. However, people less than 25 who have a higher infection rate now have quite a bit of natural antibody protection on top of vaccination, and 16-17 year olds, no vaccination, still have some protection.

The data (historic and current) in the interactive Figure 4 modeller is really interesting.

It shows how successful the vaccination program has been in the UK (and how relatively bad US is, not because of lack of distribution, but because of muhc larger vaccine hesitancy in all age groups). Even though the US allows 12-17 vaccination, which UK did not until 2 days ago (we still don't allow 12-15) the US has much lower overall rates than the UK.

thus in the UK now we do not need a lockdown, or mask mandates (though there is still some uncertainty, and most of the population would like mask mandates on public transport: our political masters are anti-mandate so we do not have them most places).

Quote from THHuxleynew

FM1 - this post, as I'm sure you realise, is way off beam.

Boris is a politician and saying this to answer critics who think he has been careless not locking down early enough, and also his back-benchers who think any lockdown is an assault on divine right to be a COVID super-spreader (they are nearly that bad). And, as all know, Boris is profoundly unreliable - he will say whatever sounds good with no regard to truth.

Look at my post up above - it took me some time to do it and is interesting - comparing UK pre and post vaccination IFR from the ONS survey. Post vaccination it is down to < 10% of rate it was pre-vaccination.

Can I ask - you know that headline is false - I'm sure - and no-one would normally take Johnson comments as that blogger does - why did you post it? There is a lot of uncertainty in the figures but such blatant distortions do not help.

THH

Display More

I'm glad you asked, you notice I preferences the article with my opinion so I'm sure you know I disagree with BJ. All I see on this thread is fanatics posting. I'm one, vitamin D, vaccines or ivermectin. All are needed but no one here wants to admit that the sun is the driving force of this pandemic. Not one of you clowns have notice just how active the sun has become over the last 4 months coincidinding with the rise and fall of infections. It's the most active period in the last 4 years. Mutations started last year in early July in the UK whick coincided with a large CME and the delta showed it's ugly face after a large CME in mid December, also the northern hemisphere saw an immediate drop in cases beginning the 1st of January. As I have said I am working on a model, my very first attempt at this so I'm doing on the job training and other than being off by a few days the results have so far been pretty accurate. Again Thomas I'll ask, would you like to know what I see happening over the next 3months? It looks pretty nasty early but good things will happen before the Xmas season!

one way to show how many people were already infected before vaccination is to look at the original variant IFR for the UK of around 0.75% and the number of deaths before vaccination started, 70,000.

That gives 9.3 million infections out of a whole population of 66 million (all figures here are UK not England, is in my previous pots with lots of numbers). England population is about 80% of UK, so not a lot of difference, and no expected difference in IFR.

You can see that before start of vaccination we had only 15% or so infection-driven antibodies. The high death rate after vaccination started before we had most high risk groups vaccinated implies maybe another 15%.

That is 30% of population max with non-vaccination-first infections - who suffer that high IFR. exact figures here are quite difficult to do.

Quote from Fm1

Again Thomas I'll ask, would you like to know what I see happening over the next 3months? It looks pretty nasty early but good things will happen before the Xmas season!

I'm happy for anyone to make predictions. Clear ones if possible.

I'd just point out that in the UK, because we have no 5-15 year old vaccination, schools being on holiday will make a big difference. So starting from September onwards we will get an up-tick in infections due to spread in schools. there is also an effect from colder weather from october. those two things together make October/November look worse.

But we really cannot tell yet how much high vaccination rate (it is still happening) will improve things.

Quote from THHuxleynew

I'm happy for anyone to make predictions. Clear ones if possible.

I'd just point out that in the UK, because we have no 5-15 year old vaccination, schools being on holiday will make a big difference. So starting from September onwards we will get an up-tick in infections due to spread in schools. there is also an effect from colder weather from october. those two things together make October/November look worse.

But we really cannot tell yet how much high vaccination rate (it is still happening) will improve things.

So you admit that Covid is seanonal

Quote from Fm1

All I see on this thread is fanatics posting.

I try not to be a fanatic - if you feel there is any question I am only showing one side - say what it is?