Covid-19 News

    I thought I'd repost this from Lou Pagnucco previous post since its the best biochemical evidence for HCQ whilst excluding many other possiblities. Also for my GP brother who may be joining our forum.

    Paper just published in Nature examines anti-Covid targets that appear promising

    for drug repurposing. It includes several cell culture tests including effectiveness at

    preventing viral replication and toxicity. My first impression is that HCQ looks quite

    good, and that there may be a couple of repurposed drugs that may be even better.

    Figures 6 (page 13) and 8 (page 25) appear to indicate HCQ has a good anti-viral/toxicity

    profile - and that the drug designated PB28 may be the best.


    The paper and URL(pdf) --

    (Accelerated Article Preview)

    A SARS-CoV-2 protein interaction map reveals targets for drug repurposing

    https://www.nature.com/article…-020-2286-9_reference.pdf


    An interesting excerpt (page 4) --

    "PB28, zotatifin, and hydroxychloroquine all decreased the detection of the

    viral NP protein even in this single cycle assay, indicating the antiviral

    effect occurs before viral egress from the cell (Fig. 6e). Furthermore, all

    three molecules inhibited NP expression when added up to 4 hours post-infection,

    after viral entry has occurred. Thus, these molecules seem to exert their

    antiviral effect during viral replication."

    Quote from Navid

    Second, as I have already said there is a mythology that vaccines have eradicated these diseases. These diseases were on the steep decline due to public health measures like sanitation and nutrition (with the first most important).


    There are things that are much worse than death. If you ever did see a "living" child with poliomyelitis and understand the suffering of the parents that just can love & care it until it will finally die some 10-20 years later, then you will immediately run for a vaccination.


    Regarding the flu vaccination: I wouldn't recommend it to anybody that is not at high risk. In fact in the broad flu vaccination is more damaging than helping due to cross correlating with Camphylobacter that may induce the GBS Syndrome with a likelihood of up to 3%. Such a GBS does not occur after a week. It takes GBS months to years to fully form out and most patients cannot draw a correlation with what they did.

    See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillain–Barré_syndrome . It's even mentioned in the pharma friendly Wiki...


    This effect (GBM induction) is mostly due to the fact that most of the world wide Chicken and egg production is heavily (Germany/USA 100%) infected by Camphylobacter and touching an egg may transmit it without causing a serious illness. So it's not the vaccination that is the main problem.

    Wyttenbach:


    Many times here you post that 95% of COVID infections are asymptomatic (that is, never have any symptoms).


    That is contrary to the evidence so far, as I understand it, which has asymptomatic number between 10% and 50%.


    Perhaps you have a different definition of asymptomatic from what is normal? Evidence please, together with a precise definition. Clarifying this might reduce the number of posts saying opposite things.

    probable W s definition is regarding beeing a statistic or not 1 out of 75 becomes a statistic in sweden

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    Regarding the flu vaccination: I wouldn't recommend it to anybody that is not at high risk. In fact in the broad flu vaccination is more damaging than helping due to cross correlating with Camphylobacter that may induce the GBS Syndrome with a likelihood of up to 3%. Such a GBS does not occur after a week. It takes GBS months to years to fully form out and most patients cannot draw a correlation with what they did.

    See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillain–Barré_syndrome . It's even mentioned in the pharma friendly Wiki...


    From: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/…in-barre-syndrome/causes/


    In the past, vaccinations (particularly the flu vaccine used in the US during a swine flu outbreak in 1976) were linked to an increased risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome.

    But research has since found the chances of developing the condition after having a vaccination are extremely small.

    For example, a study into the vaccine used during the 2009 swine flu outbreak found that for every million people who had the vaccination, there were fewer than 2 extra cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome.


    And evidence suggests that you are far more likely to get Guillain-Barré syndrome from an infection, such as the flu, than the vaccine designed to prevent the infection, such as the flu jab.

    Quote from stefan

    probable W s definition is regarding beeing a statistic or not 1 out of 75 becomes a statistic in sweden


    Right so cases (as often quoted) are usually a small proportion of "infections with symptoms". In UK I think it is around 10%. So that (if true - it is not acurately known) turns 3.5/1000 cases into 3.5% infections with symptoms. Or the 0.5 per 1000 death rate into a 0.5 per 100 upper value for IFR. IFR would then go down a bit according to the number of additional completely asymptomatic infections. But remember not all deaths are yet counted, and we know just as cases undercount infections by a lot, deaths recorded from COVID undercount deaths from COVID by a bit (10% - 100%).


    To get 1 case per 75 infections as in Sweden (?) you need very good shielding for those most at risk so that a high infection rate of those less at risk can happen, without swamping health systems.


    Which, as a understand it, is what Sweden has been able to do... But I have not looked in detail about how well this works.


    I don't see such high quality shielding elsewhere, like in US or UK.


    THH

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    That is contrary to the evidence so far, as I understand it, which has asymptomatic number between 10% and 50%.



    And evidence suggests that you are far more likely to get Guillain-Barré syndrome from an infection, such as the flu, than the vaccine designed to prevent the infection, such as the flu jab...


    You don't understand the real data: The confirmed cases just cover 1/10 of all infections. 90% (see Spain, Switzerland antibody tests!! ) happen undetected = with no Symptoms.


    May be you once should read and then understand the post. At the end I wrote: So it's not the vaccination that is the main problem.

    But if vaccination does the same harm as the illness then why having it?? Especially if far more people are vaccinated than ever get the flue? And as said GBS, in average, only shows up full scale after a long delay any many - not fully affected - patients never shine up at doctors. The e.g book physiotherapy treatment because of back pains etc..

    shielding is ok in sweden for all old but the one that needs care in nurseries. I think this is s common situation. The difference is that young people probably get it in a higher degree here than e.g. spain. There are efforts to measure antibodies now in a random sample. in a week or so we will know if all this worked or not and get s good handle on things like death rate.

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    You don't understand the real data: The confirmed cases just cover 1/10 of all infections. 90% (see Spain, Switzerland antibody tests!! ) happen undetected = with no Symptoms.


    May be you once should read and then understand the post. At the end I wrote: So it's not the vaccination that is the main problem.

    But if vaccination does the same harm as the illness then why having it?? Especially if far more people are vaccinated than ever get the flue? And as said GBS, in average, only shows up full scale after a long delay any many - not fully affected - patients never shine up at doctors. The e.g book physiotherapy treatment because of back pains etc..




    On the contrary, I do understand the data, whereas in one (important) respect, bolded below, what you post above shows you do not. Maybe this is a misunderstanding, where what you mean and what you say are different. My intention is to stop this unnecessary cross-posting. No-one here is saying there are not a lot of infections which don't count as cases. That is because cases are only counted when people are tested positive, usually in hospital. Many people have milder illness and never go to hospital, never get tested.


    Everyone has agreed this, and said it, for a long time.


    However undetected (in official statistics) does not mean no symptoms. in fact some people catch COVID, stay at home, are never tested, even die, and are never put on official COVID statistics. That was true of everyone in social care in the UK until recently when we started testing and including them. We still do not test all.


    That is different from the number of asymptomatic infections (people with no symptoms at all). These are important because they can maybe infect others over a long period because not recognised. However, we now know the percentage of those is relatively small.


    The percentage of infections that are not counted varies wildly from one country to another, and over time within one country. More testing => more cases. less testing => less cases => larger fraction of uncounted., untested, infections. That is why the oft quoted Case Fatality Ratio is by itself completely meaningless. We need to work out Infection Fatality Ratio.

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    e.g. those like Bob who see the harm of lockdown as much higher than the harm of more infections,


    Either I have done a poor job of explaining my position or you have not paid attention to what I have said in detail to understand my position. In any case, I have not advocated the very simplistic idea that the "harm of the lockdown as much higher than the harm of more infections".


    Almost nothing in real life is black and white.... it MUST be "A" or "B" will happen.


    I am advocating that


    A) There are other viable options other than a full lockdown.


    B) People who exalt the lockdown so strongly and confidently have NOT been affected by it much, specifically financially. And if they were affected by it as much as some, such as myself, they ALSO would be looking hard at alternatives other than full lockdown.


    C) That the pandemic a a very bad deal... but one cannot simply use "infections" as the absolute measure. That is a numbers game to attempt to cherry pick data to support the lockdown position. Some strong lockdown supporters here, do not seem to want to acknowledge that likely 98% of infections would not cause serious harm IF they were diagnosed and treated property and early, WITH the caveat that the high risk population was quarantined and protected to eliminate high dose initial virus contact. (Such as forcing nursing homes to accept positive Covid cases)


    Most of the arguments here are "if the lockdown is abandoned, MILLIONS will die!" Well, please find a post where I said we should completely abandon precaution or any form of quarantine.... With high risk group protection / quarantine, better diagnosis and early treatment, it appears that indeed, low risk population could continue economic activity with precautions as masks, more attentive sanitary hygiene and yes, some events disallowed such as "standing room only, close contact events.


    D) I am strongly pointing out that the current "lockdowns" are a sham in many cases anyway. Forcing mom and pop stores, with occupancy of 3-4 people on average, to be closed while allowing Wal-mart and other big box stores to have 500 people at a time is NOT "science and data"... it is pure BS! That closing outdoor trails and waterways to outdoor, low density events such as hiking/ fishing etc (which many private businesses are tied to) and yet allowing unfettered access to recreational Pot Stores is pure political BS. That prohibiting elective / non-critical medical procedures in counties that have extremely low cases with no deaths and thus resulting in hospital reductions and clinic closures is absurd!


    The response to this here is that it is not the "lockdown's" fault, it is stupid and moronic leadership. This is crap! The "lockdown" is NOT an entity, it is what is REALLY happening in the day to day REAL world. Do not tell me that "the lockdown" is necessary but then excuse the implementation of it. Some here are quick to call Trump and idiot, but never a critical word of Cuomo, Pritzker and other liberals. It confirms the political bias and mind set the lock down is connected to.


    Theory is NOT what counts here... it is what will ACTUALLY happen. Like the old saying..,. what good does compassion do if a hungry person comes by and you say "I feel for you! Good fortune and I am sure you will find food down the road.... and not lift a finger to actually feed the person. Saying what a lockdown COULD do versus what it actually DOES is hype. Take your own view of LENR... you and Jed both agree on the theory of the lockdown, yet on LENR your are almost opposite, even though BOTH cases are very similar. Jed stats the evidence is conclusive, yet you do not. Jed states that LENR works and you state that if it did, we would have at least wide spread replication if not working reactors. I.e. Theory would result in real life results. So data, theory and personal interpretation do not always mean one is correct about the truth of things.


    So no, to state that I am championing "the harm of lock down is worse than the harm of infection" is totally wrong. That is binary thinking. We MUST do what we can to minimize death and suffering within the restraints of reality. Shutting down the country via blind, total lockdown for long periods is not reality. Jed states a lockdown was not needed and even now, a lockdown should not cause economic damage. Well, that is BS.


    IT IS CAUSING MASSIVE ECONOMIC DAMAGE, and there are other smart, educated and informed people that also think there are other ways to combat this pandemic. Some here are not willing to contemplate those ideas! Just like LENR, some adamantly say it WORKS and some say, well, not so sure. Look at the insulting retorts Jed has made towards you on your LENR posts!


    My stance is that Jed and your total "lock down" is the ONLY means to fight it and I disagree with that. I also state that Jed's assertion that if "we only did what Korea did" we would not be in this situation. Well, that is just like Jed's response to MIzuno's reactor...... if you follow exactly what he did, you will see great success....but when no one replicates, the excuses start coming that nobody other than years of experience, must have mass spec., must have this and that and that is will take YEARS for someone to replicate is just like Korea.... people should follow them but "it reality it is impossible" to follow them! The US and Korea are so different in so many ways that it is in reality, impossible. Theory does not count for shit in these types of situations.


    Hope that clears it up. Some points cannot be made with a one line response.

    Thank you.

    • Official Post

    https://www.thelocal.se/202005…-face-masks-to-the-public


    Interesting. Question is; why is Sweden not recommending citizens wear face masks? Never thought of their reasoning, but it makes sense:


    "the Public Health Agency states on its website that wearing a mask could increase the chances of you touching your face, because of itchiness or as you adjust the cloth. Every time your hands touch your eyes, nose or mouth, the risk of being infected with the coronavirus increases.

    "The virus can gather in the mask and when you take it off, the virus can be transferred to your hands and thereby spread further," state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell told SVT."


    In public I do see people almost constantly adjusting their masks. Many times after touching things in heavily trafficked areas such as the check-out counter. Many pull it down to talk, or catch their breath. Anyway, the article goes on to say:


    "So why are other countries recommending face masks? Well, one reason is to increase people's feeling of safety. Another is as a precaution, to protect your surroundings in case you are, unknowingly, contagious."




    Quote from Bob#2

    B) People who exalt the lockdown so strongly and confidently have NOT been affected by it much, specifically financially. And if they were affected by it as much as some, such as myself, they ALSO would be looking hard at alternatives other than full lockdown.


    I understand Bob.


    I think the paradox is that for example Jed - and I mostly agree, reckons that test, track and trace is the only sane way out. BUT, for that to do the job without lockdown we need a starting point which has low enough infection rates for every one (or at least most) to be tracked. We can only get there with lockdown to reduce infection rates.


    So the argument for very strong lockdown now is just that it is the quickest way to get out of lockdown - but it all depends on having very good test, track, and trace.


    The worst case for everyone is a half-hearted lockdown that is v destructive but does not reduce infection rates. Or coming out without good enough test and trace to cope with the levels of infection remaining. When Trump says that testing is not so important he is really very very wrong.


    Yes, a third good reason for face masks is psychological. It makes people feel differently about things and therefore much more likely to have good hygiene, social distance, etc,


    But overall it is not an easy decision to make.


    The real world is always more complex than beakers and syringes.


    Polio has been apparently well managed in India - until you see that the Vaccine induced Polio is not even counted and has some questioning the benefit with 400+ cases in recent years from the vaccine. All the while, you must realize that India has a long way to go in terms of clean water and sanitation.


    My concerns are valid, and you may not share them. Autoimmune disorders being just one area. There is a generation who are becoming autistic. At 1 in 30, we have 120,000 just this year. We know for sure that DR. Thomson the CDC Whisteblower said they definitively have evidence on the link between autism and MMR in early age black children. I would need to deep dive into this more - but when a CDC member is whisteblowing against the tremendous pressure not to do so, I take notice.


    Its a timely topic because a new vaccine to the schedule will cause injury, and even Gates has said "we will need the governments to indemnify risk from the vaccine companies." Gates is a Vaccine Nazi, why would he even talk about risks if they weren't serious. This is serious business. If you toxify your body and get cancer 10 years later you won't get a penny from vaccine court. The same people who write papers against the CDC Whistleblower's Bill Thomson (e.g. Reiss) are lawyers, not scientists, and wouldn't you know it now they are advising on the mandatingof a Covid vaccine.


    I always appreciate more actual data. Bring it on. But puffing your chest and using epidemiological data as proof of safety is a farce.


    The vaccine schedule was opened up in 1989. This should be concerning. Have we worked this all out - of course not - because low level toxins are not something that is well understood in science at all. You can lick a small bit of a toxin and statistically show it is safe to do so... We are dealing with small numbers of immediate adverse events that cannot be ignored (and there is a genetic correlation to those susceptible but when we give someone a shot we don't know that). The long term adverse impact of toxins are basically unstudied (and would be hard to since we're almost all getting this stuff)


    As a parent there is no chance I want an intervention with my kids, that is almost surely more likely to cause harm then ameliorate harm --- but the societal discussion is beginning on if we should mandate a Covid things to kids. We can argue till we are blue in the face, but one side is mandating an intervention so it is their duty to show a clear, convincing, benefit. I virtually guarantee they won't do that.


    lenr-forum.com/attachment/12406/

    e

    • Official Post

    https://www.city-journal.org/c…el-driven-decision-making


    Neil Ferguson who headed up Imperial Colleges "COVID-19 Response Team", issued the report that shook the UK with it's predictions of up to 500,000 dead. Hundreds of thousands dead, and hospitals overflowing even with mitigation. Now with things starting to get under control, his models are being put under the microscope, and the author of this article does not like what he sees:


    "I’m a virologist, and modelling complex processes is part of my day-to-day work. It’s not uncommon to see long and complex code for predicting the movement of an infection in a population, but tools exist to structure and document code properly. The Imperial College effort suggests an incumbency effect: with their outstanding reputations, the college and Ferguson possessed an authority based solely on their own authority. The code on which they based their predictions would not pass a cursory review by a Ph.D. committee in computational epidemiology.

    Ferguson and Imperial College’s refusal of all requests to examine taxpayer-funded code that supported one of the most significant peacetime decisions in British history is entirely contrary to the principles of open science—especially in the Internet age. The Web has created an unprecedented scientific commons, a marketplace of ideas in which Ferguson’s arguments sound only a little better than “the dog ate my homework.” Worst of all, however, Ferguson and Imperial College, through both their work and their haughtiness about it, have put the public at risk. Epidemiological modelling is a valuable tool for public health, and Covid-19 underscores the value of such models in decision-making. But the Imperial College model implementation lends credence to the worst fears of modelling skeptics—namely, that many models are no better than high-stakes gambles played on computers. This isn’t true: well-executed models can contribute to the objective, data-driven decision-making that we should expect from our leaders in a crisis. But leaders need to learn how to vet models and data."

    The FHM unit ho handles the outbreak in sweden had a bug in the codeb of one of their models. a couple of hours after publication of at at least two persons contacted them about it an it all got fixed whithin some days with minimal negative effects on the decitions.

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    On the contrary, I do understand the data, whereas in one (important) respect, bolded below, what you post above shows you do not.

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    however undetected (in official statistics) does not mean no symptoms. in fact some people catch COVID, stay at home, are never tested, even die, and are never put on official COVID statistics.


    Really ?? Do you see 10x more deaths than accounted for?? New York, UK and many others did adjust their data for untested deaths. The hidden death count is now in the range of 20-30%.


    May be you also do believe that they did antibody tests with dead people ...


    No Symptoms means nothing worth to mention. I always have some symptoms if I stay out in the rain for a little bit to long or after to many beers...

    Quote from Bob#2

    Either I have done a poor job of explaining my position or you have not paid attention to what I have said in detail to understand my position.


    America has done a bad job for the last 40 years. If people think that clear thinking minds like Sanders are socialists then they deserve a few more terms with a mafia ruler in the white house....


    Quote from Navid

    DR. Thomson the CDC Whisteblower said they definitively have evidence on the link between autism and MMR in early age black children.


    I'm not a friend of combined vaccination (MMR) and would recommend individual more costly ones without "shark dirt" or ALU adjuvant. It' is also not ideal to do this very early in the live. Only measles can be really dangerous for a young child. But young parents can be influenced very easily and selling fear is much simpler than selling health...


    Further: The American Society of Psychologists has vastly refined the catalog for diagnosing a metal disorder: Today - according their diagnosis book - , in average, every American has at least 3 mental disorders...

    I just wish Neil Ferguson also had stressed the need for Anti viral therapy in addition to quarantine. We might have had a good supply of Avigan and Hyrooxychloroquine by now freely available from every pharmacy, along with all the other components of Anti Bat. That is what Angela Merkel has done in Germany, and distributed it using the military. A true leader rather than the prevaricators we have here. Same in Indonesia and Mass Fever Treatment with chloroquine now in India. If poor third world countries can do it why is it not being done here? Also now in Spain, France, Italy, Portugal, and most of the rest of Europe too. Following the Chinese model who mass prescribed chloroquine donated free from Bayer in India from Feb 20 onwards (note the coincident recovery) Since the initial discovery by Wang et. al showing the potent equivalent effects of HCQ and remdesivir at the beginning of Feb. Shall I e mail Ferguson again? Or The BBC, or Trump again? Better not after what happened when Both Zelenko and I gave him the idea of a game changing magic bullet. Shot himself in the foot and then confused chloroquine with chlorodioxide. WTF can we do?

    Vaccination is a tried and tested strategy and to not vaccinate is to simply court death or permanent mutilation and disability. Autistic cases would have occurred anyway for other reasons. Probably just traffic pollution. Another spurious correlation that the media blew all out of proportion. My own son nearly died of measles complications when a baby because the vaccine was briefly unavailable at our GP surgery, possibly due to reduced supplies at the time caused by these ridiculous anti vaxer opinions in the media. You want pseudoscience well this is an example of how much damage pseudoscience can do.

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.