I’ve spent several holidays in Uttar Pradesh, and frankly, I’m a little envious at my friend’s staff count, but as she explains, although it looks a bit exploitative to a Westerner, she is very much doing them a favour... It’s a big step up the ladder from subsistence farming
I think the rest of Uttar Pradesh is trying to spam the forum. You really have no idea how many locals we ban,
9,969 Fully Vaccinated People Contract COVID-19 In Massachusetts, 106 Dead
Nearly 10,000 residents in Massachusetts have now been diagnosed with COVID-19 despite being fully vaccinated against the virus and over 100 of them have died, according to state data on breakthrough infections.
The Massachusetts Department of Public Health published its new data Tuesday. According to the department’s COVID-19 dashboard, the state reported 9,969 confirmed COVID-19 infections involving people who are fully vaccinated. Among the overall breakthrough cases, 2,232 were recorded in the last week.
The data also showed that 106 fully vaccinated people died after suffering a breakthrough infection. The median age of fully vaccinated patients who died of COVID-19 was 82.5 years. As per the data, the deaths represent only 0.002% of more than 4.3 million fully vaccinated residents in the state.
There were also 50 new breakthrough hospitalizations over the past week, bringing the state’s total of immunized residents hospitalized to 445.
Overall, Massachusetts has recorded a total of 682,240 infections and 17,743 COVID-related deaths since the start of the pandemic.
Despite the figures, the state’s health officials emphasized that the three COVID-19 vaccines circulating in the U.S. are effective against preventing coronavirus-related hospitalizations and deaths.
“Breakthrough cases in Massachusetts are incredibly low, and those hospitalized or who have died are even lower,” department officials said in a statement, as reported by NBC Boston. “All available data continues to support that all three vaccines used in the US are highly protective against severe disease and death from all known variants of COVID-19. The best way to protect yourself and your loved ones is to get vaccinated.”
Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, previously said that breakthrough infections are “rare.” However, the health agency does not record infections that do no result in hospitalizations or death.
Additionally, an outbreak in Provincetown, Massachusetts, suggested that the total number of breakthrough cases is higher than reported. In the outbreak, state health officials reported 470 cases, with at least 350 involving fully vaccinated residents.
Health officials found that the Delta variant caused most of the infections during the outbreak. Both vaccinated and unvaccinated patients were found carrying high levels of the virus, suggesting an increased risk of transmission, as reported by The New York Times.
The delta variant of COVID-19 is more contagious for children. Is it making them sicker, too?
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Delta is more contagious and it's tearing its way across the South.
But doctors are not yet certain whether kids are getting sicker with delta than with other variants.
Dr. Ashish Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health categorizes the likelihood that delta makes kids sicker as a "maybe."
Masks are helpful, experts say, particularly among children too young to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
At Texas Children's Hospital, there are more patients with COVID-19 right now than at any point in the pandemic. Tennessee is getting close to its all-time high of kids sick with COVID-19. And at Joe DiMaggio Children’s Hospital in Hollywood, Florida, the number of children needing treatment for COVID-19 jumped from 20 in June to 200 in July – and has topped 160 so far in August.
Delta is clearly more contagious than previous variants, and it's tearing its way across the South, said Dr. James Versalovic, the Texas Children's interim pediatrician-in-chief.
What's not clear is whether kids are getting any sicker with delta than with other variants.
"Right now, it's speculative," he said.
How do we slow spread of delta variant? Get vaccinated, experts say.
It's extremely difficult to show whether one variant is more virulent than another, said Dr. Rick Malley, an infectious disease specialist at Boston Children's Hospital.
There are so many factors that affect the seriousness of an infection, he said, including the health of the child, the care they receive and whether those at highest risk have been vaccinated.
"My guess is delta is not particularly more virulent in children than others," Malley said. But with so many adults infected, it stands to reason that more children and teens will catch it, too, he said.
That's why the handful of public health experts USA TODAY spoke with said it's crucial for everyone who can be vaccinated against COVID-19 to get the shots. The more the virus can be slowed down, the fewer children will catch it, the experts said.
"It has been shown time and time again in different settings. The vaccination rate of the eligible population is directly related to how much this virus can adversely impact kids," Malley said.
Masks are also helpful, he said, particularly among children too young to be vaccinated. Unmasked children in close contact with one another – such as in a classroom – could pass on the virus. "If left unmasked and interacting with lots of others, you could imagine a child could serve as an important vector of transmission," Malley said.
His hospital has not had an increase in cases, though he added, "I don't know if I should say 'yet.'"
Cases have been climbing again in Massachusetts, but more slowly than in the South. Vaccination rates in Massachusetts are relatively high: 64% are fully vaccinated and more than 73% are partially vaccinated.
Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, Tennessee, said the number of infections are rising in his state, where vaccination rates remain relatively low.
"The children's hospitals in our state are very busy," Schaffner said.
The best way to protect children too young to be vaccinated, he stressed, is to get everyone around them vaccinated. "If you live in a community where virus transmission is very low, schools are going to be quite safe," he said.
Schaffner said he is worried about what will happen when flu season starts this fall. Last year, masking and school closures essentially eliminated the flu, but he worries about the possibility of a "twindemic" this year.
He said the children he's seeing seem to have more fever and congestion than those treated during last summer's and winter's surges, he said. "We do think delta is maybe contributing to that."
But it's too soon to know whether they will have worse outcomes. "It is literally unfolding as we speak," Versalovic said. "We're going to be keeping a close eye on delta in children and adolescents."
'All of them': Tennessee health chief says children's hospitals will fill up as delta variant surges
Others were less convinced that delta is any different from its predecessors.
"I think kids are just being swept up in the firestorm raging in the South," said Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, also in Houston.
"In low vaccination areas like here in the South, it’s so transmissible – the community transmission or force of infection is like nothing we’ve seen – so everyone who is unvaccinated is at high risk of getting sick," he said.
Dr. Ashish Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, categorizes the likelihood that delta makes kids sicker a "maybe."
"It's not a slam dunk," he said.
Early studies looking at the alpha variant also indicated that it was likely more virulent than its predecessor, but it turned out not to be. "So we don't want to overreact," Jha said.
But arguably, if people carry a higher load of virus when infected with the delta variant – as they seem to – then the variant might also be more dangerous.
"The jury's out on this," Jha said. "We have to we have to get better data. But that may be contributing to what's happening."
Children under 12 are still not eligible for vaccination. Vaccine studies in kids were started later than in adults and older teens and are expected to be completed in the early fall.
9,969 Fully Vaccinated People Contract COVID-19 In Massachusetts, 106 Dead
That's good! Think of how many more there would be if they were not vaccinated. Probably thousands of dead, instead of 106. I expect those 106 people were very ill from other diseases or old age. That has been the pattern with fatal COVID breakthrough cases in vaccinated people. A bad cold might have killed them.
In Florida, 80 people die every day, nearly all unvaccinated. The population is 3 times larger, so that's about the equivalent of all vaccinated case mortality in Massachusetts every 4 days.
The stats show how effective vaccines and masks are:
Florida, 60% fully vaccinated, ~90 died yesterday
Massachusetts, 75% fully vaccinated, 10 died yesterday
As noted in the article:
“Breakthrough cases in Massachusetts are incredibly low, and those hospitalized or who have died are even lower,” department officials said in a statement, as reported by NBC Boston. “All available data continues to support that all three vaccines used in the US are highly protective against severe disease and death from all known variants of COVID-19. The best way to protect yourself and your loved ones is to get vaccinated.”
Horowitz: Why won’t our government even inform people about importance of vitamin D?
Imagine if rather than running out to buy worthless Chinese face diapers or toilet paper last March, there had been a mad rush to stock up on vitamin D. What would our hospitalization rate have been after the initial wave, and after the early science was clear about the efficacy of vitamin D, had government mailed out free vitamin D to every American (especially in nursing homes)? For a fraction of the cost of a shutdown, waning vaccines, remdesivir, and endless welfare, government could have offered free blood tests of everyone's vitamin D, C, and zinc levels and advised a plan to bulk up those levels?
Well, we have a new study that demonstrates a good number of hospitalizations could have been avoided. Government agencies that are censoring information on vitamin D can no longer say the same thing about the vaccines, given how Israel is now showing that the vaccine wears off and the country is preparing for the worst run on hospitals ever, despite nearly every adult having been vaccinated. And unlike the vaccines and everything else our government promoted and mandated, vitamin D comes with no risk, numerous other vital benefits, and empowers rather than controls people.
There is a misnomer that those promoting vitamin D for COVID somehow believe that all people have to do after getting the virus is to take vitamin D and they will suddenly get better (although there is evidence it works in the active form). That is obviously an easy straw man for those who oppose preventives and early treatment to knock down. In reality, while vitamin D is definitely important post-infection, it takes several months to bulk up one's level if it is deficient. A new study recently published in the International Journal of Clinical Practice demonstrates that had Fauci and Co. simply told Americans, especially the vulnerable, to take high doses of Vitamin D (like he does), most of the hospitalizations could have been avoided.
The meta-analysis of 23 published studies containing 11,901 participants found the following:
One who is vitamin D deficient was 3.3 times more likely to get infected with SARS-CoV-2 than one who is not deficient.
The serum vitamin D concentration, on average, was 20.3 ng/mL among all COVID19 patients but was 16.0 ng/mL among those with severe cases. It's recommended that one's levels be at least over 40.
"The chance of developing severe COVID-19 is about five times higher in patients with vitamin D deficiency."
A total of 84% of COVID patients in the study were either deficient or insufficient in vitamin D.
In other words, whether your vitamin D level is 15, 30, or 50 will make all the difference in terms of getting a mild, moderate, or severe case of the virus, or perhaps getting it at all. How is it that, to this very day, there is no effort to inform people about such a painless, cheap, and effective fix?
Anecdotally, an ICU doctor in Missouri told me she is the only doctor in her hospital who checks vitamin D levels of COVID patients and indeed she also finds that almost all of those in the ICU have levels below 20.
Dr. Ryan Cole, a Mayo Clinic-trained pathologist who has given lectures to Idaho lawmakers on the intersection of vitamin D and this virus, believes it's almost as if vitamin D was created for this virus. Here is the science behind those numbers:
"Though D is called a vitamin, it is actually a pro hormone responsible for up to 5% of gene activity and protein production in the human body," said Cole, the owner of the largest independent laboratory in Idaho. "Every nucleus in every cell of our body, including our infection-fighting white blood cells, has a D receptor which activates or inactivates countless genes and their signals. D activates our innate immune response (our first line of defense against pathogens), including our neutrophils, macrophages, and natural killer cells, causing them to make peptides with antiviral activity. D also inhibits the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines (those responsible for hyper immune reactions in COVID). When D is deficient, pathways may be turned on, but in the absence of the pro hormone D signal, can't be easily turned off. D is consumed during an infection, so if one goes into an illness without reserves, they are more susceptible to poor outcomes."
In other words, people who are D deficient can mount an immune response to the virus, but lack the immune regulation to ramp down the response when necessary, which causes the uncontrolled cytokine attack on the lungs that we've seen all too often among those in hospitals.
Cole believes that most Americans need much more supplementation than the medical establishment is willing to admit. He believes that with adequate vitamin D, often supplemented by magnesium for those who have absorption issues, it's very difficult to have a cytokine storm, which is the main complication from this virus. Indeed, a Mayo Clinic study found that intubation was rare among those with vitamin D levels over 30. Overall, there have been nearly 100 studies linking low vitamin D levels to worse outcomes for patients with COVID. And again, this is just one supplement. When you add other supplements plus other preventives and early treatment to the equation, a proactive approach to boosting one's immune system is a game-changer against this and many other ailments.
Therefore, inquiring minds should want to know, why won't our government publicize this information and even actively works to discourage or censor these ideas? They claim all these other drugs don't have enough data behind them (which was never an impediment to them promoting remdesivir), but what about vitamin D? Is that not safe either? Dr. Fauci himself toldDr. Kari Hjelt in an email obtained through FOIA that he takes 6,000 IUs of vitamin D a day. Given that the medical establishment has told us the daily value is just 800 IUs, I doubt most people take anywhere near 6,000 IUs. Given the lopsidedly positive data behind COVID outcomes with high vitamin D level, why wouldn't Fauci divulge this secret in every public interview?
"Well, shut up and get the vaccine," will likely be the response. But the latest trends with the virus have demonstrated that even if one is pro-universal vaccination, there is still a need to boost the immune system. Fauci has already said that everyone will need a booster, and the FDA just approved it for the immunocompromised. But these are the people who needed an effective vaccine the most. What is the endgame if the first shot wears off and they are given the same shot again against an ever-mutating virus? Where is the backup plan?
Israel, which has nearly every adult vaccinated and is now giving a third dose to those over 50, is expecting more critical care cases in the hospital than ever before. According to the Times of Israel, the Israeli Health Ministry is bracing for 2,400 critical care cases, double the number they had during the winter peak. But for whom? Those under 12?
We've come full circle when people are being barred from living a functional life unless they show proof of having been vaccinated. But we already know from the CDC that the vaccine does not stop transmission, a vaccinated person carries the same viral load, and now evidently even the personal protection wears off. Yet, given the data on vitamin D levels, if we are going to suspend the Constitution anyway, wouldn't it be more scientific to ask for proof of vitamin D levels and require people to bump their levels over 35 or so? That in itself would do more to stop transmission than this vaccine, based on the preponderance of scientific literature on both the vaccines and vitamin D.
It's become clear that even in the best-case scenario, if the vaccines are not downright causing viral immune escape, they are certainly not more beneficial than a partial solution. That safe and cheap alternatives have not been endorsed is shocking, and that vitamin D is included in that orchestrated information blackout is most revealing of all.
Dr. Ashish Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health categorizes the likelihood that delta makes kids sicker as a "maybe."
You gotta love that guy! That's what a scientist should say. Even better: "I don't know yet. Nobody knows."
What's not clear is whether kids are getting any sicker with delta than with other variants.
"Right now, it's speculative," he said.How do we slow spread of delta variant? Get vaccinated, experts say.
It's extremely difficult to show whether one variant is more virulent than another, said Dr. Rick Malley, an infectious disease specialist at Boston Children's Hospital.
His hospital has not had an increase in cases, though he added, "I don't know if I should say 'yet.'"
Good again! Well said. It frustrates the public when scientists say stuff like that, but it gives me confidence they know what they are talking about. Or, I should say, they know that they do not know what they are talking about yet, and they are not pretending they do.
William Randolph Hearst once sent Percival Lowell a telegraph asking him to write an editorial:
IS THERE LIFE ON MARS CABLE THOUSAND WORDS PREPAID
Lowell sent back:
NOBODY KNOWS NOBODY KNOWS NOBODY KNOWS NOBODY KNOWS NOBODY KNOWS NOBODY KNOWS NOBODY KNOWS NOBODY KNOWS NOBODY KNOWS . . .
. . . repeated 500 times.
Dr Ashish Jha is a Great Reset sell out. He's a national lampoon. He gets away with it because of his good guy aura.
Horowitz: Why won’t our government even inform people about importance of vitamin D?
That's a dumb question. Answer: Because it is not well established, and if it turns out vitamin D does no good in the treatment of COVID, the government researchers who recommended it would be hauled before Congress and pillaried in the mass media. Heck, they are pillaried even when they give rock-solid, 100% good advice such as: Wear a mask. Get vaccinated.
The government does recommend vitamin D milk, and the CDC recommends vitamin D, especially for children:
The CDC reports that researchers do not agree on what the optimum uptake of vitamin D should be. They should say that. We want them to tell us when the experts are not sure, or when they don't agree. Since the experts do not agree about vitamin D and COVID, the CDC should take no position.
https://www.cdc.gov/nutritionreport/99-02/pdf/nr_ch2b.pdf
QUOTE:
Still, what constitutes the optimal intake of vitamin D remains a matter of some disagreement. Current recommendations from the Institute of Medicine (1997) call for 200 international units (IU) [5.0 micrograms (µg)] of vitamin D daily from birth through age 50, 400 IU (10 µg) for those aged 51–70 years, and 600 IU (15 µg) for those older than 70 years. According to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture 2005) older adults, people with dark skin, and people exposed to insufficient UV B radiation should consume extra vitamin D from vitamin D-fortified foods or supplements. The American Cancer Society Guidelines on Nutrition and Physical Activity for Cancer Prevention echo this recommendation (Kushi 2006). Some experts say that optimal amounts for all adults are closer to 800–1000 IU (20–25 µg) daily (Vieth 2007; BischoffFerrari 2006; Dawson-Hughes 2005). The tolerable upper intake level for vitamin D is 2000 IU (50 µg) per day in North America and in Europe; however, some scientists are calling for an upward revision (Hathcock 2007; Vieth 2006).
What more do you want them to say? "Ignore the advice of experts. Take vitamin D because some people think it might work, even though others don't. You are on your own, bro! Hey, just do whatever some anonymous person on the internet recommends. Heck, do what Trump recommended, and drink disinfectants. It's all good."
At Texas Children's Hospital, there are more patients with COVID-19 right now than at any point in the pandemic. Tennessee is getting close to its all-time high of kids sick with COVID-19. And at Joe DiMaggio Children’s Hospital in Hollywood, Florida, the number of children needing treatment for COVID-19 jumped from 20 in June to 200 in July – and has topped 160 so far in August.
Delta is clearly more contagious than previous variants, and it's tearing its way across the South, said Dr. James Versalovic, the Texas Children's interim pediatrician-in-chief.
Pediatric RSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) is "running like wildfire" through the south right now. Normally it is a winter time disease, but this year it has come early. Much speculation as to why it came so early, and why it is hitting harder than normal.
So how many of these children are in the hospital as a result of being sickened by RSV, but tested positive after admission (all children are tested), and then classified as a "patient with COVID"? It takes a brave soul to challenge the narrative nowadays, but here is one:
Horowitz: Are children in the hospital for RSV, not COVID, BECAUSE of lockdowns? – Politico Fire
Dr Ashish Jha is a Great Reset sell out. He's a national lampoon.
I am relieved to hear you think so! That is proof he is reliable.
(In programming terms: The truth value of your assertions is inverted. It is a built-in function. X always converts to NOT X. There is a different built in function for Mark U. and Wyttenbach. Assertion X ==> (goes to) Word Salad imaginary Science.)
Display MoreOne who is vitamin D deficient was 3.3 times more likely to get infected with SARS-CoV-2 than one who is not deficient.
The serum vitamin D concentration, on average, was 20.3 ng/mL among all COVID19 patients but was 16.0 ng/mL among those with severe cases. It's recommended that one's levels be at least over 40.
"The chance of developing severe COVID-19 is about five times higher in patients with vitamin D deficiency."
A total of 84% of COVID patients in the study were either deficient or insufficient in vitamin D.
In other words, whether your vitamin D level is 15, 30, or 50 will make all the difference in terms of getting a mild, moderate, or severe case of the virus, or perhaps getting it at all. How is it that, to this very day, there is no effort to inform people about such a painless, cheap, and effective fix?
Anecdotally, an ICU doctor in Missouri told me she is the only doctor in her hospital who checks vitamin D levels of COVID patients and indeed she also finds that almost all of those in the ICU have levels below 20.
It is possible that Vit D helps against COVID. But the figures above are correlation, not causation. In all cases there good reasons to expect causation the other way round. Vit D deficiency is highly correlated with measures of social deprivation and poor health which are highly correlated with increased COVID infection and poorer outcomes. Also severe infection can reduce Vit D.
All of which makes it not easy to know whether boosting Vit D actually improves any of these outcomes.
Dr Ashish Jha is a Great Reset sell out. He's a national lampoon. He gets away with it because of his good guy aura.
"Dr. Ashish Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health categorizes the likelihood that delta makes kids sicker as a "maybe.""
If Dr Jha is selling out then I would be expecting more for my money than him saying a "maybe".
Dr. James Versalovic "Right now, it's speculative," he said.
Presumably another sellout.
So how many of these children are in the hospital as a result of being sickened by RSV, but tested positive after admission (all children are tested), and then classified as a "patient with COVID"? It takes a brave soul to challenge the narrative nowadays, but here is one:
Well, if they test positive for COVID, surely that means they have COVID? A COVID test would not accidentally come out positive because the patient has RSV, would it?
Perhaps you -- or the author -- means they got COVID from the hospital? Nosocomial infections. That is what the author seems to be saying: "Now, it doesn’t take a genius to realize that a large number of kids who come to the hospital for RSV in the South will wind up getting COVID in the hospital." I wouldn't know about that, but I think the author should check to see how many other patients are getting nosocomial COVID, and how many RSV pediatric patients have been in hospitals with no COVID patients. There have not been many pediatric COVID cases until recently.
The author also says: "Thus, the 'experts' rejected God’s gift of partial immunity from COVID . . ." That gift is also known as severe illness, long haul disability, or death. God's gift indeed! Not your Christian god though. More like Thanatos.
It would not take a brave soul to assert that a positive COVID test really means the patient has RSV and not COVID, which seems to be what this says. That would be a confused soul.
Get your 2nd mRNA vaccine dose
The Scientist: What would you say were the most important findings from this study?
BP: First . . . as had been reported by others, this Pfizer mRNA vaccine indeed induces a very robust neutralizing antibody response and a very robust antigen-specific CD8 T cell response. And, importantly, these responses were most pronounced after the secondary immunization—[they were] barely detectable after the primary immunization.
[Second] is there was a strong transcriptional signature . . . that we induced by vaccination. . . . Now, this signature occurred very quickly after the secondary vaccination, within one day. . . . In the world of T cells and B cells, one day is a very short time, but in the world of innate immunity, one day feels just about right. . . . Consistent with this, there was an increase in . . . a certain type of myeloid cells [a kind of innate immune cell] that we . . . called the Cluster 8 . . . and it looked like monocytes and some myeloid [dendritic cells]. This population was quite unique in the following way: it expressed high levels of transcription factors that induce interferon-stimulated genes, yet very low levels of transcription factors that induce inflammatory cytokines.
What was fascinating was that the frequency of this cluster was increased 100-fold one day after the secondary immunization compared to the frequency one day after the primary immunization. . . . This was a fascinating behavior of the innate immune system because it showed an adaptive kind of behavior. . . . It was exactly like how a memory T cell or a memory B cell would respond.
We saw that there was strong correlation between the frequency of these cells (Cluster 
and interferon-gamma. . . . The fact that these cells express lots of interferon-stimulated genes means that perhaps they have some antiviral property. In other words, they might engender or imprint an antiviral state that could occur after Pfizer vaccination—broad antivirals that are not simply against the SARS-CoV-2 against which the vaccine was made, but perhaps against other viruses.
The Scientist: What would you say are the primary limitations of this study?
BP: One is that everything we’ve analyzed has been confined to the blood. And, of course, the blood is a very useful organ, but the draining lymph nodes and some of the tissues like the respiratory tract. . . . [and] the lung would be really important to look at. So we’re planning a follow-up study, where we could collect some lymph node samples, fine-needle aspirates, from humans who get this vaccine, as well as collect some bone marrow.
And - don't forget that BCG vaccine dose!
Only ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will provide answers to whether BCG reduces the incidence and severity of COVID-19 through its cross-protective effects. The phase III randomized clinical trial ACTIVATE (NCT03296423) confirmed that recent vaccination with BCG in elderly (>65 years) protects against new infections. In this trial in which 198 elderly people participated, it was demonstrated the difference between the incidence of new infections after placebo vaccination (42.3%) and BCG vaccination (25.0%), being most of the protection against respiratory tract infections. Furthermore, vaccinated individuals took longer to get infected (16 weeks) than the ones vaccinated with placebo (11 weeks). Further statistical analysis indicated a 79% decreased on the risk of acquiring at least one new respiratory infection in a 12 months period for BCG vaccinated group. These benefits were suggested to be mediated by pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as IL-10 TNFα and IL1-β, and therefore associated with the induction of trained immunity. Supporting this view, all BCG vaccinated patients showed an increased proinflammatory pattern after a second stimulation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with heat-killed C. albicans or LPS, although insufficient data was obtained in order to correlate the effect (16). The study concluded that BCG vaccination is safe, as recently reported by the same group (17), and can protect the elderly against infections. The study also suggests that BCG vaccination may be able to protect health workers or vulnerable individuals against SARS-CoV-2 virus infection, although larger and specific studies are needed to assess BCG protection against COVID-19.
We will get a decent answer in 2022 from BRACE as to whether BCG vaccine protects people from COVID
BRACE | College of Medicine and Health | University of Exeter
The ramblings of of madman.
It's your mirror . You child do not ever understand what you linked! It's the CoV-19 anti body statistics = historic data of infections and vaccination. We linked/discussed this already 4 weeks ago.
With zero the Zeus46 invented under reporting was 3x. With alpha 6..8x and now with delta anywhere between 10..20x.
This only says that 10-20 x more people than the PCR+ had contact with delta, alpha,zero and could successfully fight it of without needing a PCR test. Sad for Roche, or the vaccine terrorist that now have lost 1 billion Indians that no longer need a vaccine
Only in your fantasy this is under reporting...
Can you with your primary school math see the difference between 311 and 60 or are these number just very close ??
I think E-cat forum is a better place for people like you
With mRNA tech we have the ability to make and produce these new better therapies or vaccines very quickly.
Oh yes you could quickly kill some 50'000 people with the RNA gen therapy and now where it fails - just 6 months after application this greatest of the greatest technologies requires booster number III and soon booster IV. Despite a recent paper did show that boosters do not improve the immune response...
But honestly I start to hope that all idiots start to kill themselves with this gen therapy what is one quick path to save the climate. In cancer therapy 1/3 of the patient with the gen therapy are killed much earlier than without....
Well, if they test positive for COVID, surely that means they have COVID? A COVID test would not accidentally come out positive because the patient has RSV, would it?
Perhaps you -- or the author -- means they got COVID from the hospital? Nosocomial infections. That is what the author seems to be saying: "Now, it doesn’t take a genius to realize that a large number of kids who come to the hospital for RSV in the South will wind up getting COVID in the hospital." I wouldn't know about that, but I think the author should check to see how many other patients are getting nosocomial COVID, and how many RSV pediatric patients have been in hospitals with no COVID patients. There have not been many pediatric COVID cases until recently.
The author also says: "Thus, the 'experts' rejected God’s gift of partial immunity from COVID . . ." That gift is also known as severe illness, long haul disability, or death. God's gift indeed! Not your Christian god though. More like Thanatos.
It would not take a brave soul to assert that a positive COVID test really means the patient has RSV and not COVID, which seems to be what this says. That would be a confused soul.
I think what Shane means is that they have a typical v mild case of COVID, and a real case of RSV.
That is obviously possible. But...
Unless the doctors are incompetent, or uncaring, they will be trying very hard to work out whether the illness if COVID-induced, or is RSV-induced, or both. Both COVID and RSV can easily be tested - and doctors will know both are quite likely.
RSV is a very unlikely cause of death for children > 2 years
Researchers at the University of Utah have shown there are approximately 42 deaths annually associated with RSV in the United States, and of those deaths, the majority are in infants and young children that have complex preexisting chronic conditions.
“The news is very good for parents and their babies,” says Carrie Byington, M.D., professor of pediatrics at the University of Utah and the study’s principal investigator.
In most children, RSV will present with cold symptoms such as a runny nose, cough, wheezing, and mild fever. It can often lead to bronchiolitis (a swelling of the airways which makes breathing difficult) and pneumonia. In babies younger than six months, these conditions may require hospitalization. “Although RSV is one of the most common causes for infant hospitalizations, we can support infants through this infection. Most hospitalizations will be 2-3 days with infants expected to recover fully,” Byington said.
Most babies can handle the virus and these symptoms, but those at higher risk for serious complications include very premature babies with lung disease and those born with heart problems or immune deficiencies.
In addition of those 42 deaths nearly all are children < 10 years of age (because it is caught early and children get immunity)
THH
But honestly I start to hope that all idiots start to kill themselves
projection?
Navid - that is not an attempt at wit - it is hardly a joking matter!
because he is anti-vax.
You are silly child - I'm fully vaccinated. But I can forgive you as you are one of the most untalented spin doctors that must eat the hard bred of LENR forum just for mercy...
I'm anti RNA gen therapy that is a known experimental cancer patient killer...
Pfizer does not need anyone to tell them, because they developed the whole thing with their own money.
How many bottles of Whisky did you have??? Pfizer did develop zero of this vaccine. It came from Biontec....
His objections to the Pfizer and Moderna shots have to do mostly with their expedited approval process and with the government’s system for tracking adverse reactions. Speaking as a doctor, he would probably recommend their use only for those at highest risk from COVID-19. Everyone else should be wary, he told me, and those under 18 should be excluded entirely.
This is obviously THH's anti vaxx definition. No being 100% for killing healthy children that have 0 risk too.
Take Wyttenbach for example, he admitted his children ignore his odd theories, and rushed to get vaccinated.
Quite wrong: I explained them that the Pfizer crap is a no go. So they had Moderna. They just did it in the fringe believe to be able to travel freely ....
Well . . . I care because these people are a gigantic petri dish producing new and possibly more dangerous variants.
No cancer patients on immuno suppressive drugs are the real danger. Record 17 mutations in a single patient with > 100 day CoV-19...
The real risk is big pharma no allowing early treatment for boosting vaccine sales.
You are silly child - I'm fully vaccinated.
Glad to hear that. Which vaccine, if I may ask? I remember you posting that healthy people < 65 years of age would be so unlikely to die from COVID that vaccination was not worthwhile. And also that vaccines that targeted specific proteins or sub-units were too selective for safety. No? I'm trying now to think of an approved vaccine that does not target only a small subset of the COVID surface viral protein sequence. So it would be great to have your expert advice on this backed by deeds not words.
THH
9,969 Fully Vaccinated People Contract COVID-19 In Massachusetts, 106 Dead
This is a pretty high death rate. JedRothwell , Zeus46, THHuxleynew already can't await these funerals....
CH death rate is now below 0.1% for unvaccinated of course...
But good news below:
The median age of fully vaccinated patients who died of COVID-19 was 82.5 years.
How do we slow spread of delta variant?
Please no! Let it go through and properly treat the few severe cases. A natural infection is 40X better for the younger than any crap RNA gen therapy!
he number of children needing treatment for COVID-19 jumped from 20 in June to 200
This is one more confirmation for the 10x higher spreading factor! No 4th wave just broader spreading less mortality among unvaccinated = more free and stable vaccination.
