Covid-19 News

  • Scholarly reference with peer reviewed controlled study or shut the f*ck up.


    Complete, total stupid crap. Maybe if you were a physician or other health professional and had ever seen a case of tetanus, diphtheria, or pertussis (whooping cough), you wouldn't voice such inane idiocy.


    Jed perhaps has an excuse, but you should know better about non specific adverse effects.

    How about this, published by the Lancet:

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/…cle/pii/S2352396417300464

    Quote

    Among 3–5-month-old children, having received DTP (± OPV) was associated with a mortality hazard ratio (HR) of 5.00 (95% CI 1.53–16.3) compared with not-yet-DTP-vaccinated children. Differences in background factors did not explain the effect. The negative effect was particularly strong for children who had received DTP-only and no OPV (HR = 10.0 (2.61–38.6)). All-cause infant mortality after 3 months of age increased after the introduction of these vaccines (HR = 2.12 (1.07–4.19)).


    Or this from Vaccine, about respiratory virus interference by vaccines :

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/…64410X19313647?via%3Dihub

    Quote

    Examining non-influenza viruses specifically, the odds of both coronavirus and human metapneumovirus in vaccinated individuals were significantly higher when compared to unvaccinated individuals (OR = 1.36 and 1.51, respectively)

  • I was going to reply in a similar but more polite way. Better like this.


    Mark: suppose you explain exactly how the data linked in the paper your link links supports your ideas? Carefully? Remembering that causality and correlation are quite different, and correlation does not imply causality?


    The main take home from that paper is that flu vaccination reduces flu. What a surprise!

    Yes it's a no brainer that vaccines are effective at reducing specific disease that is the target of the vaccination. Flu vaccination can even offer some protection against influenza strains not covered in the vaccine.


    But apparently it is too much of a brainer to understand that (inactivated) vaccines can have negative effects on the immune system in general, resulting in poorer health outcomes overall for those who are vaccinated. You're not going to hear that from the CDC or the WHO, both mouthpieces of big pharma.

  • If we consider that increasingly frequent heat waves are already caused by human activities, I think that the current virus should be put into perspective because only in France during the 2003 heat wave, there were already 15,000 deaths.


    And, since we are scientists, or at least take into account scientific analysis, we must factor in the fact that a viral disease with Ro of 2.5 - 4 and no population immunity will as inevitably as night follows day end up infecting a large portion of teh population, short of extreme measures to reduce Ro. And that the mortality rate is known to be at least 0.5% (some uncertainty due errors in estimating number of asymptomatic infections). Which leads, in absence of action, to overall mortality of at least 500,000.


    In addition to the difference in overall mortality, we have the overload to the health system. Again, from known (uncontentious) epidemiological analysis the rate at which cases happen, unchecked, will be much higher than any Western health system can cope with. Leading to a higher than necessary mortality and moral choices about who to turn away to perhaps die (and pushing mortaility rates up from a possible low 0.5%) that many would find appalling.


    So I agree with perspective, I disagree that this is a good analogy.

  • But apparently it is too much of a brainer to understand that (inactivated) vaccines can have negative effects on the immune system in general, resulting in poorer health outcomes overall for those who are vaccinated.


    That is plausible but incorrect. It cannot be true. You mentioned third world children being harmed by vaccination. Over the last 50 years, infant and child mortality worldwide has plummeted. Third world child mortality is now as low as U.S. child mortality was in 1963. During these decades, nearly every third world child has been vaccinated. So, if this were bad for them, and if it caused ill health, they would not more healthy now than ever in history. These simple and undeniable facts prove that you are wrong.

  • If 1 person, just 1, got past the quarantine

    in Japan, then how many could have got thru any quarantine measures set up in the US?


    In an airport? Zero. U.S. airport customs and immigration are locked tight as a drum. No one should have got out of the Japanese airport, but for some reason the door was unlocked. Normally you couldn't just waltz through Japanese customs and immigration. They are very strict.


    As it happens, I once arrived at the airport in Rome, walked out of the airplane, down a hallway, down another hallway, and out into the parking lot. I guess they had the doors set wrong. I went back inside to get my checked-in bag, but it was missing. They brought it to the hotel 3 days later.


    People driving in the U.S. from Mexico or Canada might get through quarantine measures. It would make harder to stop every patient.

  • The studies cited by Mark U are real but highly controversial. I don't have time to do them justice. A few thoughts though. First, what JedRothwell said. Smallpox was eradicated and polio almost eradicated due to vaccines. And diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis are rare in countries which vaccinate consistently and thoroughly. I found multiple papers debating the findings in the specific study of Guinea-Bissau. This from the World Health Organization (WHO):



    "A study in Guinea-Bissau (GB) published in the British Medical Journal in December 2000 by Kristensen et al.1 suggested a non-specific effect of routine vaccination that might influence survival in infants, either negatively or positively, depending upon the vaccine. Increased mortality was reported in children vaccinated with DTP in the six months following vaccination. It was suggested that females were more likely to suffer increased mortality. The Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS) reviewed this issue and urged WHO to arrange for testing of the hypothesis on different data sets from different countries where vaccination data, death and other factors possibly influencing mortality had been recorded. Following an open call for proposals, WHO funded or co-funded studies in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea.


    Analysis of the WHO-sponsored studies is now complete. All the studies show reduced mortality rates in the children vaccinated with all of the vaccines. In particular, the studies showed no negative effect of DTP vaccination and no difference was found between males and females.


    The Committee concluded that the evidence is sufficient to reject the hypothesis for an increased non-specific mortality following vaccination.


    1 Kristensen I. et al. Routine vaccinations and child survival: follow up study in Guinea-Bissau, West Africa. BMJ 2000;321:1435-8"


    https://www.who.int/vaccine_sa…s/dtp/statement112002/en/


    In one paper, I noticed that the control group which did not get vaccinated consisted of or included children whose parents refused, in some cases because the children were weak or malnourished. If true, this is not an adequate control group. The quality and preservation of vaccines in Africa may also be an issue. The complexity of this problem is illustrated here:

    https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/2/3/e000707


    The issue of viral vaccine interference is also complex. Again, it takes a lot of time to work through it and I'd prefer to let the likes of Dr. Anthony Fauci and his staff of thousands do it.


    At the moment, DPT, MV, and OPV are generally considered invaluable for children. And influenza vaccine saves a lot of lives and decreases the intensity of infection in millions. I have no idea what the problem is in Africa or if there is a problem. I am glad it's being pursued.

  • Quote

    Well maybe I could suggest a more appropriate title for the paper:

    Malarial drug chloroquine just as effective as standard treatment with anti-virus protease inhibitors

    Maybe so. But I have seen case reports regarding relatively young medical workers who have died despite every measure available including multiple anti-virals and antibiotics, ventilator support, and finally extracorporeal membrane oxygenators (ECMO). I don't recall if they got chloroquine. The reports and autopsy results were from China.

  • Daily cases in Italy reducing now is great news and a test of prophylactic use of chloroquine in Australia. The fish cleaner poisonings probably involved pouring several grams into their sodas. Instant heart attack? Well that would be expected with an overdose.

  • Japan reports 114 new cases today. This is much higher than it has been for several weeks. The country is freaking out. (As it should!) The governor of Tokyo asks everyone to stay home.


    https://www.japantimes.co.jp/n…virus-cases/#.XnuwM4hKgUE


    They recently had some sort of boxing event in a huge stadium full of people. It was on the news. The officials were upset but they said they had no authority to stop it. The organizers said "we will take full responsibility if this spreads the disease." They didn't say how they will take responsibility. By committing ritual suicide? They said they asked all of the fans to write their names and addresses on the back of the ticket stub, and to put the stubs in collection boxes. Gee, that should help!


    http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13237345

    • Official Post

    Daily cases in Italy reducing now is great news and a test of prophylactic use of chloroquine in Australia. The fish cleaner poisonings probably involved pouring several grams into their sodas. Instant heart attack? Well that would be expected with an overdose.


    Re the fish tank cleaner. I suspect they took at least 10X the normal 500mg anti-malarial dose. The survivor (in ITU) said they took 'a teaspoonfull' which could be somewhere between 5 and 10 grams

  • Wondering if the successful treatment Vladimir Zelenko has been using could be extended to other Jewish communities particularly in London where my son is suffering from COVID-19 infection. He or his rabbi who is also COVID-19 positive (and possibly the rest of his congregation) should contact Dr Zelenko because they are probably all going to become seriously ill with only the NHS advice thus far (self isolate and hope for the best). If I can't persuade them to take HCQ/Zn/A z then may be he can. Assuming they are able to obtain the drugs since even India is now preventing HCQ export. It would make the first UK clinical trial too and would no longer be the most medically backward country in the World.

  • Code
    chloroquine has a low margin of safety; the                   therapeutic, toxic and lethal doses are very  close.                                                              In adults fatalities have been reported after                      ingestion of 2.25 to 3 g chloroquine (Britton &                      Kevau, 1978). Without treatment, a dose of 4 g                      is usually lethal.                                          So 20 mg/Kg is a toxic dose, 30 mg/Kg may be                      lethal and 40 mg/Kg is usually lethal ..

    somewhere between 5 and 10 grams

    Quinine lethal dose is probably similar w or w/o gin


    Paracetamol/ acetaminophen is a more difficult suicide... 10-20 gms slow death through liver failure


    the therapeutic dose for malaria prophylaxis by HCQ (hydroxyCQ) is only 5 mg/kg)

    much lower than 20 mg/kg.toxic levle for CQ


    however it is important to have proper dosing calculated and checked by two ..

    since greater than 6mg/kg can lead to retinopathy..in long term therapy..greater than 1 yr..

    eye checks may be necessary.. which is one reason the Australian HCQ trial is rather expensive..

  • Quote

    Wondering if the successful treatment Vladimir Zelenko has been using could be extended to other Jewish communities

    Right now, it is simply an unreliable anecdote. You don't treat communities based on anecdote. Come back when the guy has a blinded, patient matched, controlled study of sufficient size with proper records.


    Quote

    eye checks may be necessary.. which is one reason the Australian HCQ trial is rather expensive.

    Reports I read relegate eye damage (retinal damage) to long term use, mostly >5 years. So, if that is for sure, then it would be an issue only for prophylaxis extending years and not for acute treatment lasting two weeks at most. I forget which type of study the Australian one was.

  • Quote

    Re the fish tank cleaner. I suspect they took at least 10X the normal 500mg anti-malarial dose.

    Yeah.


    I don't know why this one tragic error, the only one reported so far in the US, created such a stir. Obviously it says nothing about the drug except that yes, it has a narrow therapeutic margin of safety. One can overdose on any of a number of common everyday drugs and die. As robert bryant noted, the safety margin for acetominophen (paracetamol) isn't all that great either and particularly in people with liver disease, significant overdose can result in a lingering, inevitable and horrible death.

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.