Covid-19 News

    Quote from Fm1

    In anticipation of the results from MOVe-OUT and the potential for regulatory authorization or approval, Merck has been producing molnupiravir at risk and expects to produce 10 million courses of treatment by the end of 2021,

    This - bringing Merck crap to market- will be the most outrages criminal act in big pharma history. Monoclonal cancer chemo sold as vaccination was just name cheating. But here they will go to kill 50% of the people by not giving them Ivermectin. Further they will cause millions of cancer cases just for private profit. Molnupiravir so far has failed in all studies. Why should it now behave else ??

    Quote from Fm1

    Dr. Monica Gandhi, an infectious disease expert at UCSF, said that especially with children between 5 and 11 set to become eligible for vaccines soon — a milestone nearly every expert is looking forward to — she believes the “end is in sight” as rates of immunity in the community continue to rise.

    What a criminal woman!!. Almost all kids here are already immune due to the no mask order!!!!!


    https://www.covid19.admin.ch/de/epidemiologic/case look at cases by age class age <=9 is done since one month now!

    Quote from Fm1

    Will pastors continue to champion the medical freedom cause or will organize efforts at the federal and state level convince them to embrace at least the official interpretation of the science of COVID-19 vaccination? Will the federal highly corrupt an money greedy government somehow turn this into a political private buddies profit issue, threatening the religious non-profit status of those church leaders that continue organizing and resisting

    Cleveland Clinic Groundbreaking Study: Intranasal Corticosteroids Lower Risk of COVID-19 Hospitalization, ICU Admission, & Death


    Cleveland Clinic Groundbreaking Study: Intranasal Corticosteroids Lower Risk of COVID-19 Hospitalization, ICU Admission, & Death
    Recently, investigators at the Cleveland Clinic participated in a groundbreaking initial study revealing that COVID-19 patients who regularly use nasal
    trialsitenews.com



    Recently, investigators at the Cleveland Clinic participated in a groundbreaking initial study revealing that COVID-19 patients who regularly use nasal steroid sprays, also known as intranasal corticosteroids (INCS), are less likely to develop severe COVID-19-related illness. Based on this preliminary observational study, the investigators reveal that regular use of the nasal spray lowers the risk of hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, and death. Published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice, co-investigator Dr. Ronald Strauss’ findings were praised by three world-renowned pulmonologists in the editorial in what is described as a “groundbreaking” study.


    Background

    A first of its kind, this study investigated the effects of INCS used when someone has COVID-19. The authors found that the “effect size of the association between INCS and COVID-19-related outcomes is similar to other Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—approved therapies such as remdesivir and systemic steroids.”


    With groundbreaking potential, the study findings demonstrate how a low-cost, widely available therapy could not only help save more lives but also reduce strains on local health systems.


    Of note, a prescription or oversight by a health care provider isn’t necessary with the use of INCS. Several issues must still be addressed, including further validation.


    Early Hypothesis

    Dr. Ronald Struss observed that the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen was exploiting fertile ACE2 receptor conditions in the nasal area to accelerate viral penetration and replication. An emerging body of literature already points out that intranasal steroids may reduce ACE2.


    As reported in Ohio News Time, Dr. Strauss met with select leadership within the Cleveland Clinic to discuss his hypothesis. A private physician, Strauss needed clinical, statistical, and data management support in addition to access to the health center’s databank of COVID-19 patients.


    The Study

    A study team was formed to tap into and study the database of 72,147 COVID-19 positive patients at the Cleveland Clinic. The team found that of that total, 10,187 (14.1%) of the patients were using steroid-based nasal spray before infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind COVID-19.


    Out of the 12,608 of the COVID-19 patients hospitalized, 2935 (4.1%) ended up in the ICU, and 1880 (2.6%) died during hospitalization.


    Compared with those patients not using nasal spray those using the inhaled product experienced lower risk for hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.78 [0.72; 0.85]), ICU admission (adjusted OR [95% CI]: 0.77 [0.65; 0.92]), and in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR [95% CI]: 0.76 [0.61; 0.94]).


    The authors report that the findings were replicated in sensitivity analyses where the authors excluded patients either using inhaled corticosteroids or those with allergic rhinitis. They discovered that “The beneficial effect of INCS was significant after adjustment for baseline blood eosinophil count (measured before SARS-CoV-2 testing) in a subset of 30,289 individuals.


    The study team found that patients using intranasal corticosteroids before COVID-19 diagnosis were 22% less likely to experience hospitalization and 23% less likely to be hospitalized and placed in the ICU. Those using the spray had a 24% less chance of death.


    Principal Investigator POV

    Dr. Strauss went on the record in local media. “It’s very exciting to have the potential to help humanity with this catastrophic disease,” said Strauss, a member of Temple-Tifereth Israel at Beachwood. “COVID-19 hospitalization, ICU hospitalization, and reduced mortality reduce the burden on the medical system, especially in developing countries where access to vaccines is restricted and highly infectious variants of the new coronavirus have emerged. There is a possibility.”


    Study Funding

    National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute of Neurological Stroke


    Lead Research/Investigator

    Ronald Strauss, MD


    Joe G. Zein, MD, Ph.D.


    Call to Action: The authors declare that more research is needed to validate these findings, including randomized controlled trials


    DEFINE_ME

    Quote from Fm1

    For every worker that is given the ultimatum to become vaccinated or face termination, another unvaccinated individual is watching from the shadows and wondering when the time will come where, they too, will be forced to make the same near-impossible decision. We see the conversations swirling on social media that go a little something like this: Those who are against the mandates are appalled with what’s happening and say that no one should be forced to choose between their job or a jab. Pro-vaxxers then clap back with a response that usually runs along the lines of, “Well, no one is forcing you to take it.” But it’s hardly a “choice” when earning money to put food on the table is critical.

    This is exactly like expressing sympathy for fast food workers who demand the right to shit on people's food.


    We force restaurant and grocery store employees to follow health and safety laws. We force drivers to obey traffic laws, and not to zip through red lights. It would be insane not to.


    As the expression goes, your right to swing your fist ends at my nose. If you do not understand that, you have the mind of a 4-year-old. If you think you have a right to infect other people with the most dangerous disease of the last 100 years, of course you should be fired. It is no different than carrying around a pistol and randomly firing into offices, stores and crowds of people.

    External Content youtu.be
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Quote from Shane D.

    That is what my Tribe believes, and if it is good enough for them it is good enough for me. Go team!

    That is funny, but it is not scientific and it is not a valid basis for public health policy. Such beliefs will kill another 700,000 people. Mostly Republicans, at a ratio of 5:1, which I suppose is your team.


    Not vaccinating children will condemn hundreds of thousands of children to a short lifetime of ill health, which is not a bit funny.

    Aspirin lowers risk of COVID: New findings support preliminary trial
    The treatment reduced the risk of reaching mechanical ventilation by 44%. ICU admissions were lower by 43%, and an overall in-hospital mortality saw a 47%…
    www.jpost.com


    By JERUSALEM POST STAFF OCTOBER 6, 2021


    Over-the-counter aspirin could protect the lungs of COVID-19 patients and minimize the need for mechanical ventilation, according to new research at the George Washington University.


    The team investigated more than 400 COVID patients from hospitals across the United States who take aspirin unrelated to their COVID disease, and found that the treatment reduced the risk of several parameters by almost half: reaching mechanical ventilation by 44%, ICU admissions by 43%, and overall in-hospital mortality by 47%.


    “As we learned about the connection between blood clots and COVID-19, we knew that aspirin – used to prevent stroke and heart attack – could be important for COVID-19 patients,” said Dr. Jonathan Chow of the study team. “Our research found an association between low-dose aspirin and decreased severity of COVID-19 and death.”


    Low-dose aspirin is a common treatment for anyone suffering from blood clotting issues or in danger of stroke, including most people who had a heart attack or a myocardial infarction. Although affecting the respiratory system, the coronavirus has been associated with small blood vessel clotting, causing tiny blockages in the pulmonary blood system, leading to ARDS - acute respiratory distress syndrome.


    Israeli researchers reached similar results in a preliminary trial at the Barzilai Medical Center in March. In addition to its effect on blood clots, they found that aspirin carried immunological benefits and that the group taking it was 29% less likely to become infected with the virus in the first place.


    “Aspirin is low cost, easily accessible and millions are already using it to treat their health conditions,” said Chow. “Finding this association is a huge win for those looking to reduce risk from some of the most devastating effects of COVID-19.”


    Aspirin, while having a substantial effect on reducing blood clots, can also cause bleeding disorders and stomach ulcers and has harmful side effects on patients to whom the treatment is not indicated. Be advised that new treatments should never be started without consulting a healthcare provider.

    Candy is dandy but the liquor is quicker


    L- arginine would work faster as it converts to nitric oxide almost immediately and goes right into the blood stream also a weekly supplement of iron will help with clotting


    Nitric Oxide a Possible Treatment for COVID-19 – Only Substance to Have a Direct Effect on SARS-CoV-2

    Nitric Oxide a Possible Treatment for COVID-19 – Only Substance to Have a Direct Effect on SARS-CoV-2
    Researchers at Uppsala University have found that an effective way of treating the coronavirus behind the 2003 SARS epidemic also works on the closely related…
    scitechdaily.com


    Mitigation of the replication of SARS-CoV-2 by nitric oxide in vitro

    Mitigation of the replication of SARS-CoV-2 by nitric oxide in vitro
    The ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is a global public health emergency posing a high burden on nations’ health care systems and economies. Despite the gr…
    www.sciencedirect.com

    Quote from Fm1

    Recently, investigators at the Cleveland Clinic participated in a groundbreaking initial study revealing that COVID-19 patients who regularly use nasal steroid sprays, also known as intranasal corticosteroids (INCS), are less likely to develop severe COVID-19-related illness.

    ...1 year after an Austria doctor treated 5000 patients with Budenoside and no hospitalization was needed...


    The first aid package is Ivermectin,zinc 5000..20000 IU V-D + doxy if you shine up late + aspirin if you already cough and budenoside if you have chest pains. About 5$ in India.

    This gives you 99.9% survival applied before day 3 of first symptoms.

    All depends on age. If you are younger than 50 treating before day 6 is OK. If you are old then day 2 is latest...

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    A summary of all the mafia and the people that help Ivermectin!


    https://www.thedesertreview.co…ec-bfe8-2b94d8993caf.html

    The author said:


    "There are many reasons, but the greatest has to do with freedom – creating off-label access to Ivermectin. In the United States, we continue to enjoy a patient's right to choose their doctor and their medical treatment - at least when we are out of the hospital"


    But that is changing rapidly here in the US. They are clamping down everywhere on IVM use. I read so many stories every day about a doctor being fired for administering, or a pharmacist refusing a prescription, etc. that I don't even bother to post them here anymore. Soon we will probably be as far down that rabbit hole as Australia, and the UK.


    If someone had told me 5 years ago that in 2021 we would be well into the second year of a deadly pandemic, the world health bodies STILL had no recommendation for those with symptoms other than hydrate and go to the hospital after lips turn blue -where they will have a very good chance of dying, but there was a repurposed drug safer than aspirin that many undeveloped countries were using with apparent great success, but it's use was banned in the developed countries because they wanted everyone to have no option but to take a partially effective vaccine instead, and were not even allowed to talk about it, much less promote it, on the major social media platforms....I would not have believed it. .


    Insanity rules.

    Why won’t the CDC or FDA reveal the VAERS URF?


    Why won't the CDC or FDA reveal the VAERS URF?
    Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite. Free to read and Share without
    trialsitenews.com

    .


    By Steve Kirsch


    Summary: The VAERS underreporting factor (URF) is required information to be known for any risk-benefit of assessment of a vaccine. The fact that this number was never calculated by the FDA or CDC means that all the safety recommendations to date have been by guessing. This has resulted in the needless loss of life of well over 150,000 Americans.


    VAERS is the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. It is the official system relied upon by the FDA and CDC for adverse event tracking.


    For example, if you report an adverse event in V-Safe, the app they told you about when you got vaccinated, you are told to file a VAERS report. It is essentially the mother of all adverse event reporting systems for vaccine events in the US. There is nothing more comprehensive than VAERS.


    The most important thing to know about VAERS is that it is always underreported. This is widely known.


    To properly interpret any safety data, you must know the underreporting factor (URF).


    For example, the famous Lazarus report estimated the VAERS URF to be over 100:


    “Although 25% of ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. Low reporting rates preclude or slow the identification of “problem” drugs and vaccines that endanger public health.”


    The Baker paper, Advanced Clinical Decision Support for Vaccine Adverse Event Detection and Reporting, showed that “the odds of a VAERS report submission during the implementation period were 30.2 (95% confidence interval, 9.52–95.5).”


    In other words, the VAERS URF was at least 30 (since the system wasn’t perfect, 30 is a lower bound of the URF in that study), but they estimated that it was likely between 9.5 and 95.


    The URF is normally calculated for very serious events since these are required to be reported for all vaccines by healthcare workers. That URF can then be applied to less serious events to create a conservative estimate of the true incidence rate (since less serious events would have a higher URF).


    The method for calculating the URF is well known.


    Sadly, the CDC has erroneously assumed that Vaccine Safety Datalink represents a fully reported comparator.

    This is clearly false as can be seen from slide 13 in ACIP Chair Grace Lee’s presentation delivered on August 30, 2021:


    Image

    You can clearly see that VSD estimates are below the VAERS estimates.


    Therefore, calculating the URF from anaphylaxis data from a prospective targeted study, such as the Blumenthal Mass General Brigham study that was published in JAMA provides a more accurate estimate. There was a second Blumenthal paper published again in JAMA (this time an Editorial rather than a Research Letter) showing an anaphylaxis rate that was 48X lower, but that is just to mislead people into taking the vaccine.


    As a Professor of Biology I know wrote:


    “You are correct in your analysis. The 2.4/10000 rate is based on all cases of anaphylaxis reported but the 5/1,000,000 is based only on inpatient hospital or emergency department visits. You can undergo anaphylaxis without being admitted into the hospital going to the emergency room. I also believe that the 5/1,000,000 applied the Brighton Collaboration criteria much too narrowly. The second paper is just propaganda to get people vaccinated.”


    When we do the math, we find that the URF is 41, well in line with the mean and range described in the Baker paper. It means that over 150,000 people have been killed by the vaccine so far (and we show 8 different ways in that paper, only one of which uses VAERS).


    The troubling thing is this: nobody at the CDC, FDA, or on any of the outside committees will admit this. When they are asked, “what is the URF for serious events in VAERS for the COVID vaccine” they are unable to respond. Not even Steven A. Anderson of the FDA can answer that. He said he was the top guy for vaccine safety at the FDA. I heard him say that on a zoom call.


    He won’t talk. He doesn’t respond to emails, he doesn’t respond to voicemails. His staff doesn’t respond either.


    Janet Woodcock won’t tell me the URF.


    The friendly people at [email protected] won’t tell me the URF.


    Lorrie McNeill of the FDA won’t tell me the URF.


    Tom Shimabukuro won’t tell me the URF.


    John Su won’t tell me the URF. He pretends in his presentations to ACIP and VRBPAC committees that the URF=1 because he never points out that VAERS is underreported or what the reporting factor is. We have all that on the record.


    No member of any of the outside committees of the FDA or CDC would respond to my multiple requests.


    I have tried to find someone knowledgeable to interview to ask that question, but no prominent pro-vaccine person would consent to an interview. Eric Topol doesn’t respond. Monica Gandhi doesn’t respond. UCSF Dean of Medicine Bob Wachter won’t talk to me on camera. They are all afraid of being exposed.


    None of the fact checkers I asked would help me out.


    Heck, I couldn’t even get Health Nerd to consent to be interviewed by me.



    I thought it was just me.


    To test that, I asked a former NY Times reporter (now working for another newspaper) to ask the question of the FDA and he was stonewalled as well. They refused to answer him. Silence as soon as he asked the question. But his paper won’t let him write a story about it.


    Let’s be clear: you cannot do any sort of risk-benefit assessment without knowing the VAERS URF. It is impossible.


    The fact that as of October 25, 2021 that nobody knows the URF for VAERS is a sign of mass incompetence and corruption at the FDA, CDC, and their external committees.


    There is no other alternative.


    This of course is why nobody at the FDA, CDC, or on the external committees wants to talk to me. Because I ask questions that they don’t want to answer. This is why censorship is required to silence people like me.


    This is the biggest cover-up in history. CDC, FDA, mainstream media, nearly the entire medical community, and all the major social media companies are pitching in to silence people like me who ask questions we aren’t supposed to ask.


    It’s pretty sad that nobody in the mainstream media is asking those questions, isn’t it?

    I have actually a telling story about what I call craziness. My ex wife who is a doctor of medicine got covid last year and it was not a big deal, Then the first jab caused a tough reaction and she has suffered with bad sleep for 6 months until she got better - she described it as torture. Now although this is an anecdote, we should accept it as natural that she just do not want to take the second jab. Traveling is now a mess for her and she will probable not go to conferences as it will be too much hazzle as she can't get a vaccine passport. A crazy thing is that this issue was not ever reported as a side effect of the vaccine. So I agree that we do see too much in black and white regarding this as people can have perfectly good reasons not to be vaccinated and we should accept that without generalizing and implicating people as a murderer because not taking both jabs. I am still thinking that vaccines are good for us, at least the elderly. But again when you get into small probability land we should not stare only on numbers but take a very very critical view as things that we do not think of can easilly be much more important than the numbers in the papers we cite. In my view being a father has learn me some lessons. One is that if you are to tough at a category of children she will not comply, but in stead go against you, much more stronger and rebel and in the end the effect is reverse of what you want to achieve, there are sheep like children as well we got one of each and I love them both for who they are. Anyway to me this explains a lot of the problems we see today. I believe that the pro vaccers are mostly right, but the harsh political climate and tendency to generalize people and nasty tone just creates the rebellion we see today.

    Quote from Fm1

    Why won’t the CDC or FDA reveal the VAERS URF?

    As the absent minded professor said: Everyone absent from class should please raise your hand.


    An underreporting factor (URF) cannot be known or revealed because it is under-reported. You can only estimate it. Or speculate about it. The CDC does not estimate or speculate about anything in the VAERS database. Given the nebulous nature of VAERS it would be unprofessional for them to speculate about it. They say only that you cannot use it to draw conclusions, because it is raw data. You have to have access to much more data than VAERS has. You have to establish a control group using some other database, and a background rate. (Okay, that's the gist of what they say.) Statisticians who are not part of the CDC are more free to speculate. Some of them have made rough estimates of the URF, such as:


    Interpreting VAERs: What is the expected background death rate for the USA vaccinated population?
    VAERs is an open reporting system put together by the FDA and CDC for people to enter in adverse events after vaccination for post approval safety assessments.…
    www.covid-datascience.com


    As I said, this is mainly based on other data from other sources. It is clear from this that underreporting is very large, but probably unimportant. Doctors know better than to report that a patient died a week after being vaccinated by getting run over by a bus.


    Estimating the URF is harder than you might think. The margin of error is gigantic. VAERS by its nature is not well suited to this kind of analysis. It is valuable tool, but not for the purposes antivaxxers wish to use if for.

    Quote from stefan

    Then the first jab caused a tough reaction and she has suffered with bad sleep for 6 months until she got better - she described it as torture. Now although this is an anecdote, we should accept it as natural that she just do not want to take the second jab.

    I would not describe this an anecdote. I would say it probably did not happen the way you describe, or if it did, there was some other totally unrelated cause. I would also say she should have had enough sense to consult with an another doctor who specializes in such problems. It is extremely unlikely this was caused by the vaccine. There is no physical mechanism that could cause this. The common cold and other infections that generate millions of times more spike proteins than the vaccine do not cause this. All traces of the RNA and spike proteins were gone from her body within a week. Furthermore, if the vaccine caused this to happen to her, it would have happened to other patients, and this would be noted by the people at VAERS and elsewhere. It is not likely she is the one person on earth who suffered from this side effect.

    Quote from stefan

    My ex wife who is a doctor of medicine got covid last year and it was not a big deal, Then the first jab caused a tough reaction and she has suffered with bad sleep for 6 months until she got better - she described it as torture. Now although this is an anecdote, we should accept it as natural that she just do not want to take the second jab.

    It is natural that she should not want a second vaccination. It is natural, but not very scientific or rational. Her first action should be to consult with experts to solve the sleep problem, because it is extremely unlikely it was caused by the vaccine. As a doctor, she should know that.


    Of course this should be reported to VAERS. Even if she is the only person on earth who suffers from this, and even if other doctors and experts conclude it is unlikely it was caused by the vaccine, the whole purpose of VAERS is to find a needle-in-the-haystack problem like this. I suppose if the doctors find some other cause, and they fix the problem, it would not be a good idea to report it VAERS. Or perhaps the report could be updated.


    The problem with anecdotal incidents like this is that they cause amateurs with no scientific knowledge to avoid getting the vaccine. People learn that one person in New Zealand died from the mRNA vaccine, and they conclude that the vaccine is dangerous. They ignore the billions of people who were vaccinated and had no serious side effects. This is like learning the someone somewhere once choked to death eating grapes, and concluding that eating grapes is dangerous and should be avoided. (An expert estimated that the vaccines are roughly as dangerous as eating grapes, at about ~10 deaths per 6.9 billion doses for mRNA and adenovirus types.)


    If my wife were killed in an airplane crash, it would be perfectly understandable if I developed a phobia of flying on airplanes. I suppose anyone would! But that would be an irrational phobia, because airplanes are extremely safe and it is very unlikely that I would be killed in another accident. A rational, scientifically trained person will know that -- but even rational scientists have phobias! As Arthur Clarke said, anyone knows ghosts do not exist but a sensible person is still afraid of them.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.