The Pfizer vaccine is broadly targeted. It protects and Alpha and Delta remarkably well. It protects against all variants better than the experts hoped in 2020,
We just linked a paper that shows Pfizer vaccinated have higher viral load than unvaccinated!
Why do you repeat your nonsense?? In your place I would prepare my body the way we say since more than one year. IF you just believe in what you say then you will be a victim soon (I hope not!).
sounds like an expert talking.. dr JR
Yes. As I said, that is according to Ashish Jha. He is an expert.
What something pls be specific "what" tells you.. could it be JR?
"Something tells me" is an idiom meaning "I have a feeling" or "my intuition tells me." Perhaps it is an American idiom and you have not heard of it. Or, perhaps you have heard of it and you are being an ass by nitpicking and pretending you do not understand.
One doctor said that there is “about one in a million chance of death for a child under 19 from COVID”. This is false. In reality over 500 young people had died of the virus in the US when she made her claim,
All of these real children had chemo or an other severe disease. So what you say is FUD!
Show us the section result of a healthy child killed by CoV-19!
Sixteen children who received the placebo got the disease, while zero children who received the vaccine got the disease.
Unlucky children. They now have to wait for a good natural protection that is up to 40x better for children.
CDC study of 121 young people who died of COVID-19 found that 25% were healthy.
CDC is a FM/R/XXX/B mafia information source. Of course CDC shows no section results of the about 30 CoV-19 killed children. They have just been reported as anecdotal healthy...
All sections so far done on CoV-19 victims did reveal serious preconditions.
CDC is a totally unreliable source of information that is not following the art. Obviously
CDC is run by product managers not by health professionals.
UK is much better! Israel even more.
Reality::
see bottom
Israel killed about 30 people age 20..29 with vaccines so far...more are coming...
nd you are being an ass by nitpicking
pharmacists 'nitpick ' drs... like "did you check for psychotropic interaction or "did you check GFR?"
its called attention to details
details help patients to live
some entitled drs respond with "ass" or similar
perhaps you are a drs parrot JR..something tells me
I would not give Pfizer vaccines to anyone less than 5 yrs old even if they had had Covid
engineers pay attention to detail too ..Oct 2017 Mizuno report editting phase
"
Can these red changes be put in the final report?
Section 2.6
In a usual test, the input power of the blower is 5 W, so the wind speed is 4 m/s. Since the air outlet sectional area is 8.2 × 10−3 m2, air volume of about 3×10-2m3/s passes through the interior of the box. Since the volume of the box is 0.21 m3, if the air volume by the blower is 0.03 m3, the air in the box is replaced every ~7 seconds.
In a usual test, the input power of the blower is 5 W, so the wind speed is 4 m/s. Since the air outlet sectional area is 4.4 × 10−3 m2, air volume of about 1.6×10-2m3/s passes through the interior of the box. Since the volume of the box is 0.21 m3, if the air volume by the blower is 0.03 m3, the air in the box is replaced every ~13 seconds.
please be more specific in your nonexpert generalisations
Display MoreTypical vaccine terrorist statement. These guys use a pointless study from 2020 to compare apple with tomato risk....see:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33251499/
No common variables. Just a fake argument. Of course many people in ICU die from a thrombosis as they get no proper treatment and the vessels collapse.
The difference is:: Healthy - gen therapeutic people die from blood disorder hemorrhagic shock, Myocarditis and deep vein thromboses (Astra). Not from any induces thrombosis....
You compare deaths from driving a car with deaths from hit by a car...
The paper: https://www.medrxiv.org/conten…08.24.21262415v1.full.pdf
Natural infection protects 7x better than 2x Pfizer....7.13-fold (95% CI, 5.51 to 9.21)
increased risk for symptomatic disease.
Sorry everyone. I'm going to have to take a short break from here, because this post makes me very angry.
W, you are either very stupid (clever people can be that too) or very deceitful. And you are dismissing a lovely piece of work.
That study which you rubbish is beautiful in the way that it uses self-controls - I thought there was no way you could get something as good as an RCT using whole population info. In fact this is better than an RCT! Maybe you are too much of an idiot to understand why it precisely quantifies vaccine and COVID risks. We have never on this thread got anything like that level of certainty as to what are the real (very very small, as it turns out) dangers of the vaccines. From reliable whole population data.
I have no idea about what you mean about apple and tomato risk. Perhaps you are a fruitcake? This compares risks within a month of a vaccine, with risks within a month of a COVID test. it looks specifically at the things - blood clots, heart disease - that have been highlighted as possible vaccine AEs. It is super-reliable - because it compares each persons risk of dying of that cause shortly after the vaccine, with their risk of dying of the same thing in a short window before, or some time after.
Thus it exactly captures vaccine side effects. With 30 million people fully documented (the UK can do that with integrated healthcare) even tiny risks can be seen.
It is a very clever study, and answers something I thought anti-vaxers like you above all were interested in - what precisely are the VAERS event type risks from the vaccines?
Perhaps you don't like it because the answers are not what you want?
Repetition of silly VAERS graph
It is been explained multiple times why VAERS event numbers now are much higher than they were previously, and why this does not mean risks are higher. Anyway now we have really good ways to calculate exact risks - and you can see they are very very low for vaccines, 10s of times higher for COVID, only considering the most common vaccine side effects.
Natural infection protects 7x better than 2x Pfizer....7.13-fold (95% CI, 5.51 to 9.21)
This does not make me angry, it is just silly.
Sure, if you get COVID once, with no protection you are protected a lot from getting it again.
But again if you are vaccinated, then get COVID once (with much less risk) you are even more protected from getting it again...
Ummm - and your point is ? 
What are self-controlled case studies?
https://sccs-studies.info/index.html
There are some possible errors: specifically long COVID effects could increase the risk of adverse events quite some time after the COVID test making the self-control (half of it) artificially high and therefore underestimating the COVID risks. That would at most be a factor of 2.
You can see from the specific per week IRRs that such an affect is not likely large in comparison with the signal, and in any case they have done quite a lot of consistency checks (I have not looked in detail at all of them).
I am really excited about this study method. Once you see it, it is obvious, but it was not at all obvious to me before I read that paper! I just did not consider this.
Here are the limitations of self-controlled case studies - all irrelevant for the usage here of vaccine or COVID safety:
http://www.medicine.mcgill.ca/epidemiology/hanley/c609/material/Tutorial.pdf
1. It requires that the probability of exposure is not affected by the occurrence of an outcome
event. (it is not, much - possible long COVID effects would make for underestimate of COVID risk. But this can be checked - same for vaccine risks - by comparing before and after control intervals)
2. For non-recurrent events the method works only when the event risk is small over the
observation period. (it is)
3. It does not produce estimates of absolute incidence, only estimates of relative incidence. (We get absolute values from known whole population statistics)
4. It requires variability in the time or age of the event: if all events were to happen at
exactly the same age, then the method would fail. (trivial)
And here are the advantages:
1. It is based only on cases, and provides consistent estimates of the relative incidence.
2. It controls implicitly for all fixed confounders, that is to say, confounders that do not vary
with time over the observation period, such as variables relating to genetics, location,
socio-economic status, gender, individual frailty, severity of underlying disease, etc.
3. Age or temporal variation in the baseline incidence can be allowed for in the model.
4. Under certain circumstances it can have high efficiency relative to the retrospective
cohort method from which it is derived by conditioning.
Sorry everyone. I'm going to have to take a short break from here, because this post makes me very angry.
Don't break ... just do as I did and block the mafia-obsessed W.
. just do as I did and block
THH posturing is one reason I have a blue screen... its being extended to others.. maybe time to close this thread... back to LENR
covid has 27 proteins in addition to spikey.. cause for optimism
questions for the FDA,,
top comment
"
Scott Gottlieb FDA director resigns and becomes a member of Pfizer's board of Directors
Stephen Hahn replaces Gottlieb and then resigns to become Moderna's chief medical officer
Nice happy little family that the FDA and pharma have"
Lighthearted Covid history
in an Essex accent.. Russell Brand....not Alan smith
Individual-level data on 43 338 COVID-19-positive patients (8682 with the delta variant, 34 656 with the alpha variant; median age 31 years [IQR 17–43]) were included in our analysis. 196 (2·3%) patients with the delta variant versus 764 (2·2%) patients with the alpha variant were admitted to hospital within 14 days after the specimen was taken (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2·26 [95% CI 1·32–3·89]). 498 (5·7%) patients with the delta variant versus 1448 (4·2%) patients with the alpha variant were admitted to hospital or attended emergency care within 14 days (adjusted HR 1·45 [1·08–1·95]). Most patients were unvaccinated (32 078 [74·0%] across both groups). The HRs for vaccinated patients with the delta variant versus the alpha variant (adjusted HR for hospital admission 1·94 [95% CI 0·47–8·05] and for hospital admission or emergency care attendance 1·58 [0·69–3·61]) were similar to the HRs for unvaccinated patients (2·32 [1·29–4·16] and 1·43 [1·04–1·97]; p=0·82 for both) but the precision for the vaccinated subgroup was low.
This gives us firmer information about the relative risk of alpha versus delta variant. It is not entirely straightforward, because the delta sub-cohort here was younger. That is adjusted for. Still there could be errors, e.g. younger patients more likely than elder ones to attend emergency care for given level of disease.
If you take it at face value it says delta is 2.2X more severe than delta [95% CI 1.32-3.89]
Alpha itself is 1.5 (?) X more severe than original COVID.
W - this data is all based on young patients (median 31 years) - the ones you said could not get COVID severely?
We should be getting much better data on delta as time goes on.
Re posturing, and break. RB and W can block me. I can block them. That would make this thread in microcosm what happens in social media where people talk to an echo-chamber of like-minded people only. Not for me. I just wish RB and W were a bit more coherent in their arguments. Navid I think feels that no-one here will listen to his one true truth. It is silly - there is a difference between listening and agreeing. I listen to what Navid posts, I think it is poisonous propaganda combined with weird conspiracy theory.
Here is some more posturing.
The "mRNA vaccines are going to kill us all" strand here I find less poisonous - it is a fair question - just on balance very wrong and full of misinformation. The uncertain long-term dangers of mRNA vaccines are very low. The uncertain long-term dangers of COVID are substantial. The "mRNA vaccines will not work long-term" strand here is correct - but no-one has expected current mRNA vaccines to work long-term. They are a short-term fix. It is easy to change the vaccines so they induce whichever bits of immunity we think is best. That technology is one of the things that gives me great hope for the future, in spite of variants. The "we should be free, COVID is a scare story designed to shut down the economy" strand is complex. What I dislike is the politicisation of a really difficult issue: do we do more harm by shutting down or masking etc, reducing rates, or by opening up and increasing rates. We have seen many cases where shutting down early leads to less harm overall. We have also (and will have for many years) the bad effects of major shutdowns on our children. I don't think it is simple to make that choice. Personally the only part of it I am clear about is freedom. What is my right not to wear a mask or to go into a crowded indoor place without being vaccinated when weighted against children's lives blighted, or grandparents dying 20 years too soon?
I'm sorry that RB here and perhaps others feel what I write as above is posturing. It won't alter what I write. Mostly, I do this for myself because I am fascinated by the combination of science and politics, and because every now and again (like that neat self-control case study FM1 first posted) I learn something really cool that is new. Obviously, I am not a medical doctor or research scientist, not an epidemiologist. Making sense of a lot of diverse information that has not been properly understood is for me the greatest and most fun challenge whatever the field, in this case though I don't have the background to evaluate the molecular biology stuff (not sure even the experts there have much of an idea most of the time, and I guess RB cannot do this, because he has not been able to come to any definite conclusions), I can evaluate all the risk stuff and the epidemiology - it is just lots of applied probability theory with a few twists. I'm sure many here are the same.
Interesting that with best efforts everyone still makes a lot of mistakes. (I blame only the ones who make mistakes for political reasons). My guess (see below) is that we need to shift now to treating COVID more like severe Flu - with the proviso that as a society if we have stretched hospitals we need to educate people in habits (including masks on public transport) that reduce Flu transmission when it has high risk. Many Asian countries have done this.
It is interesting that the UK scientists are still divided about how much extra transmission we will get from schools. The government has done all it can to maximise school transmission. No masks, no drive to improve ventilation in schools, no vaccination for 12-15 year olds (that will not prevent transmission but will surely reduce it by at least 50%). I wonder a bit how much the division here is political, rather than scientific. Do you want to do your best to reduce rates - in which case obviously you need masks in school and lots and lots of attention to increasing ventilation - or do you reckon there is no point in trying to do that, and anyway it is good to maximise the infection rate - get everyone immune?
Politics is funny. With the vaccine and delta we are now in the place everyone thought we would be at the start. No point trying to control the epidemic (it is too infectious) and only strategy is to go for herd immunity. So which way we go now is at the margins killing a few more people in the one hand, or having a bit more freedom and maybe getting the coming fifth wave over and done with quicker on the other. The big complication is the winter and hospitals. Our hospitals struggle to cope with normal winter demand due to other respiratory viruses. COVID on top of that makes things worse. Which means that a best for everyone strategy might be to get rates up as high as possible now to reduce rates in January and February when we expect Flu to be worse than usual.
One final factor to consider is that as time continues we will gte better at managing COVID. We will have a few more of the vulnerable vaccinated (and we can use those boosters). We will have effective at-home treatments. The key political issue is overflowing hospitals - which result in wall to wall tv coverage - rather than death statistics - which after a year of them no-one really cares is it 100 or 300 per day (it sounds callous, but that is the way we work). So politically any home treatment that keeps people out of hospital is very very important. As are Flu jabs (mine is booked for late September). Though no-one has a clue how well they will work this year.
I'm not sure anyone really knows how much infection we need to have immunity from that (if it is good enough and there are no new variants) reduces infection rates. The modellers just plug in guestimates. No-one can know for sure because we have little accurate data on delta transmission, and working out transmission is such a complex thing.
Sage (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) says it is still difficult to work out whether schools are drivers of transmission, or simply reflecting the spread of the virus in the communities where they are located.
But if cases continue to rise, scientific advisers say the more pupils and teachers that contract Covid-19, the more schools and education will be disrupted.
And it warns of the "subsequent consequences for parents and carers, and the wider workforce implications".
In Scotland, where pupils returned to school in mid-August, a third of new cases are in the under-19s.
The consensus statement from a sub-group of Sage continues: "Schools will represent a high proportion of remaining susceptible individuals and it is highly likely that exponential increases will be seen in school-attending age groups after schools open."
It says vaccination will also have made "almost no difference in these population groups over the summer holidays", and when schools reopen, measures in place to limit the spread of the virus will be "much reduced" compared to the spring and summer.
Pupils and staff will no longer be recommended to wear masks in secondary schools in England, although they are still advised in Scotland.
Under new rules, aimed at keeping more children in school, pupils who are close contacts of positive cases will also no longer have to isolate when term starts.
Secondary school pupils across the UK will be asked to take two rapid tests before term starts, to see if they have the virus, and twice-weekly tests at home after that.
Kevin Courtney, joint general secretary of the National Education Union, said the Sage report was a rebuke to Education Secretary Gavin Williamson.
"Next to nothing has been done to prepare for the possibility of large numbers of cases which will lead to lots of education disruption as children and staff have to isolate because they are positive - or stay off because their Covid symptoms go on longer.
"It is perfectly clear to education professionals that the current safety requirements for schools and colleges are not sufficient to prevent a rise in cases come September," he said.
Last week the government in England said it would provide around 300,000 carbon dioxide monitors to schools next term to help improve ventilation and lessen Covid outbreaks, but Mr Courtney says they will only diagnose a problem "not solve it".
Mike Tildesley, professor in infectious disease modelling at the University of Warwick, told the BBC that schools reopening in September would have an impact on mixing patterns in other walks of life.
"It remains to be seen what effect that has on cases and hospital admissions," he said.
"We will need to monitor that during September.
"And we need to be prepared for the fact that hospital admissions will start to rise - not just from Covid but from other respiratory viruses too, like flu."
But he said vaccines put the country in a much better place than before, although booster campaigns might still be needed.
Re RB conspiracy theory - FDA and mRNA companies have conflict of interest.
I agree, in the US and some other places, this might be an issue. There is obviously always a danger of decisions being slightly biassed towards friends.
But this is not so true in the EU and many other regulatory domains, and they all come up with similar recommendations. The regulating panels have mechanisms to detect and deal with overt conflicts of interest. The research on mRNA risks and benefits continues everywhere, I can't see it being suppressed. It is worth distinguishing between the merits of the current vaccines, and the merits of the mRNA technology. And Pfizer/Moderna have offered to productionise a better delta-specific vaccine.
That, I think, is the one big mistake governments are making. We need a delta-capable mRNA vaccine ready to distribute, so that the next variant that is worse than delta, and which will be closer to delta than original COVID, can be properly covered. Maybe the idea is that if we leave this longer we will get a better vaccine? Dangerous policy.
U.S. reports world's first deer with COVID-19
CHICAGO, Aug 27 (Reuters) - The U.S. government said on Friday it had confirmed the world's first cases of COVID-19 in deer, expanding the list of animals known to have tested positive for the disease.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture reported infections of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in wild white-tailed deer in the state of Ohio, according to a statement. There were no reports of deer showing symptoms of infection, the USDA said.
"We do not know how the deer were exposed to SARS-CoV-2," USDA spokeswoman Lyndsay Cole wrote in an e-mail to Reuters. "It’s possible they were exposed through people, the environment, other deer, or another animal species."
The USDA has previously reported COVID-19 in animals including dogs, cats, tigers, lions, snow leopards, otters, gorillas and minks
Worldwide, most animal infections were reported in species that had close contact with a person with COVID-19, according to the agency.
The USDA reported last month that white-tailed deer populations in Illinois, Michigan, New York, and Pennsylvania were exposed to SARS-CoV-2, based on a study that analyzed serum samples from free-ranging deer for antibodies to the disease.
The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine collected samples from the infected deer in Ohio from January to March as part of ongoing studies, the USDA said. The samples were presumed to be positive for COVID-19 in university tests, and the cases were confirmed at USDA's National Veterinary Services Laboratories, according to the statement.
We just linked a paper that shows Pfizer vaccinated have higher viral load than unvaccinated!
Why do you repeat your nonsense?? In your place I would prepare my body the way we say since more than one year. IF you just believe in what you say then you will be a victim soon (I hope not!).
If you give me some idea of where that is I will have a look at it. It is not on this page. I've seen work that shows nasal swabs similar in vax/non-vax infections. That does not mean progression of virus beyond nose to body where it does harm is as easy. It also does not mean no protection from infection - study after study has shown significant (e.g. 50%) overall protection from spreading due to fewer infections. Study after study has shown strong protection against hospital admission and death. People care about both. Governments care about hospital admissions.
If you give me some idea of where that is I will have a look at it. It is not on this page. I've seen work that shows nasal swabs similar in vax/non-vax infections. That does not mean progression of virus beyond nose to body where it does harm is as easy. It also does not mean no protection from infection - study after study has shown significant (e.g. 50%) overall protection from spreading due to fewer infections. Study after study has shown strong protection against hospital admission and death. People care about both. Governments care about hospital admissions.
Look at a Vietnam study, I believe. They found viral load much higher in vaccinated than unvaccinated, I'll try and find it
Eric Clapton Appears Frustrated With Covid-19 Vaccine on New Song ‘This Has Gotta Stop’
“This has gotta stop/Enough is enough/I can’t take this BS any longer,” rocker sings on chorus
In what appears to be his latest salvo against Covid-19 vaccinations and the lockdown, Eric Clapton has surprise-released a new single, “This Has Gotta Stop,” with an accompanying animated video that also addresses climate change disaster.
A bluesy shuffle, “This Has Gotta Stop” appears to reference some of the medical issues that Clapton said he experienced after receiving an AstraZeneca vaccination earlier this year with what he claimed were “disastrous” results: “My hands and feet were either frozen, numb or burning,” he wrote at the time. As he sings in “This Has Gotta Stop,” “I knew that something was going on wrong/When you started laying down the law/I can’t move my hands, I break out in sweat/I wanna cry, I can’t take it anymore.” In the chorus he sings, “This has gotta stop/Enough is enough/I can’t take this BS any longer.”
Written by Clapton, the song features drummer Sonny Emery and longtime Clapton bassist Nathan East, and backup singer Sharon White, and was produced by Simon Climie, another part of Clapton’s team. A spokesperson for Clapton said there were no plans at the moment for a full album to follow.
The video includes images of people turned into marionettes or staring zombie-style at their phones; politicians or government officials addressing crowds; and others holding signs that say “Liberty” and “Enough Is Enough.” It also includes an illustration of Jam for Freedom, the anti-lockdown UK street-performer group that Clapton supports, as well as imagery of a world on fire from environment disaster.
Starting with “Stand and Deliver,” his recent collaboration with Van Morrison, “This Has Gotta Stop” ties in with Clapton’s recent and controversial comments about the pandemic lockdown. In July, Clapton announced he would “not perform on any stage where there is a discriminated audience present.” Clapton’s U.S. tour, which is confined to mostly indoor arenas in the South, is scheduled to start Sept. 13 in Fort Worth, Texas, before wrapping up Sept. 26 in Florida
Not his best but the message is clear
Look at a Vietnam study, I believe. They found viral load much higher in vaccinated than unvaccinated, I'll try and find it
Found it
Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Delta Variant Among Vaccinated Healthcare Workers, Vietnam
Abstract
Background: Data on breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant infections are limited.
Methods: We studied breakthrough infections among healthcare workers of a major infectious diseases hospital in Vietnam. We collected demographics, vaccination history and results of PCR diagnosis alongside clinical data. We measured SARS-CoV-2 (neutralizing) antibodies at diagnosis, and at week 1, 2 and 3 after diagnosis. We sequenced the viruses using ARTIC protocol.
Findings: Between 11th–25th June 2021 (week 7–8 after dose 2), 69 healthcare workers were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. 62 participated in the clinical study. 49 were (pre)symptomatic with one requiring oxygen supplementation. All recovered uneventfully. 23 complete-genome sequences were obtained. They all belonged to the Delta variant, and were phylogenetically distinct from the contemporary Delta variant sequences obtained from community transmission cases, suggestive of ongoing transmission between the workers. Viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020. Time from diagnosis to PCR negative was 8–33 days (median: 21). Neutralizing antibody levels after vaccination and at diagnosis of the cases were lower than those in the matched uninfected controls. There was no correlation between vaccine-induced neutralizing antibody levels and viral loads or the development of symptoms.
Interpretation: Breakthrough Delta variant infections are associated with high viral loads, prolonged PCR positivity, and low levels of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies, explaining the transmission between the vaccinated people. Physical distancing measures remain critical to reduce SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant transmission.
Funding: Wellcome (106680/B/14/Z and 204904/Z/16/Z).
https://assets.publishing.serv…Technical_Briefing_20.pdfAnd you are dismissing a lovely piece of work.
Yes excellent FUD! They tried hard to fake the public! May be you are confused that it took only a few minute to debunk it!
Sure, if you get COVID once, with no protection you are protected a lot from getting it again.
But again if you are vaccinated, then get COVID once (with much less risk) you are even more protected from getting it again...
THH FUD logic. As UK data shows:: https://assets.publishing.serv…Technical_Briefing_20.pdf
Death risk for people age < 50 from delta is 0.03%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Far lower than from any flu. OH yeahhh! Damn long Covid.......fearrrrrrrrrrr fear!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Data also shows a vaccine gives you 50% protection from death = 2x better than unvaccinated....
May be eating apples has the same effect as a vaccination for age < 50....
Scott Gottlieb FDA director resigns and becomes a member of Pfizer's board of Directors
Stephen Hahn replaces Gottlieb and then resigns to become Moderna's chief medical officer
Nice happy little family that the FDA and pharma have"
Thanks for this. These people know no shame are of Göbbels/Mengele type. Just the US public has to know that they are cattle and FDA (CDC) is junk - staffed with (FM/R/J/B) fascist mafia members.
Individual-level data on 43 338 COVID-19-positive patients (8682 with the delta variant, 34 656
I know you are obliged (Spiegel and other journals posted it too.) to bring this outdated fake study from your Oxford vaccine friends. It is 1000% outdated when you look at the bulletin 20 above. See comment above.
You should look for better FUD!
If you give me some idea of where that is I will have a look at it. It is not on this page.
Go back to school an learn how to read. I said figure 12 in bulletin 20. Ask your mother what "12" means.
