Covid-19 News

Quote from Wyttenbach

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...

Display More

I'm sticking with this until you DO understand the data, and also pay attention to what others say - since it is annoying have so many OT posts.

No, not 10X, The official statistics for deaths are usually pretty accurate. Why is that? Because before people die of COVID they usually go to hospital, are diagnosed, tested, form one of the "cases" and then - if they die - one of the official deaths. Even so, we have a significant number of people who die at home not going to hospital, because the disease can get worse very quickly and some people live alone and do not realise. Those are not counted as either cases or deaths if not tested. In the UK we are estimating that excess as around 30% but it has varied.

Is that clear? Now, that is what you said above, when not incorrectly criticising me. And also, that is what I said above, if you bother to read it. So we are in broad agreement.

Whereas the case figures are wildly inaccurate. They vary according to what percentage of those with symptoms go to hospital, and whether home testing is available. Which is the key point.

In the UK I know of MANY people who have had bad symptoms (like a bad case of Flu) but not gone to hospital and not been tested. In some countries with more tests maybe they would be tested. So it is just not true that if you are not counted as a case you have mild symptoms.

Antibody tests are a separate issue. The problem is that 100% antibody tests are expensive to do. With sampled antibody tests the accuracy depends on the statistical accuracy of the sampling (as well as having reasonably accurate tests which not everyone has). Antibody tests tell you how many people have at some time been infected, so they are of course the key thing to determine the Infection Fatality Rate.

Quote from Wyttenbach

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...

Psychology is definitely broken and yes DSM probably can be collapsed. Many of the so called "disorders" are really symptomology. That's why the best evidenced based treatment is alcoholics anonymous for alcoholism. From a DSM point of view, that makes no sense.

However, autism as a condition is so overwhelming, obvious and debilitating there is absolutely no chance that this is being overdiagnosed. It was virtually unknown 40 years ago. There is a generation of kids who have this, and will have this for the rest of their adult lives. In the US alone it's probably a million kids. The burden of that is so immense, as in a $200B+ problem if not more over a life time. Just like big tobacco or big oil, you can bet big pharm spends to avoid this discussion. I am not saying this is proof, I am saying we need to do more science and look at the data.

Too much emphasis on testing as a solution has put anti viral treatment on the back burner to a certain extent. I believe some of our limited resources could have been spent on treatment strategies in addition to vaccine development. There is at last a clinical trial in Oxford but they seem to be oblivious of the potential of CO administration of Zn, ivermectin or even aziithromycin/doxycycline or Avigan. And will they start treatment early enough so as not to replicate the disastrous VA and other dubious studies in the US? Depends if they have vested interests in remdesivir and other expensive money-making pharma schemes. We'll just carry on harping on about Anti Bat I guess.

Quote from Dr Richard

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.

I am sorry. It would be hard to be impartial given what happened. A lot of resonance.

Let's remember Purdue said Opiods are not addictive. Now we have a crisis.

We must look at the data. Without doing that, and by labeling people as anti-vax you stop discussion. Some of the changes that may need to be made, may not be stoping vaccination but changing when vaccination occurs, proving that the ingredients are safe, and a whole host of things that should happen if there are checks and balances. But when an industry has blanket immunity (no lawsuits in the US) and don't pay damages (the public has paid $4B in damages)...then what incentive is there for safety.

Recent ivermectin news -- Claims ivermectin + doxycycline is virtually a cure

Bangladeshi doctors claim to have found effective drugs to treat COVID-19

https://tbsnews.net/coronaviru…und-effective-drugs-treat

Coronavirus effective drug combination found, claim Bangladeshi doctors

https://www.livemint.com/news/…ctors-11589718389637.html

Cheers to Shane D. for posting this excellent link (below) exposing the smear campaign against HCQ --

http://fullmeasure.news/news/f…-story-hydroxychloroquine

- and for those who are pressed for time, the following link extracts the HCQ part of the above video ---

http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/hydroxychloroquine

Quote from THHuxleynew

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.

Again, you emphasize infection rates and do not seem to want to acknowledge that it is possible it is not the only deciding factor.

Let's see if I can explain in simple terms, that surely will eliminate misunderstanding.

If a virus had NO serious implications, such as no deaths, no physical body damage, etc. ... no one would care about infection rate and closing down the economy. Infection rate would not mean squat in that scenario.

If a virus had a very small fatality rate, say less than 1%, one would take measures, but not that extensive. Again, infection rate still would not be that significant considering the cost a a lockdown. As proof, we did not have lockdowns for SARS, Ebola, Asian Flu, Swine Flu etc.

If Covid19 has a fatality rate of 5% of ALL INFECTIONS, then infection rate certainly be a major consideration and action using infection rate would be logical.

(I am using rounded general numbers here, trying to get a point across for clarity, not saying the numbers are actual)

It is possible that the a huge portion of a 5% fatality rate of Covid19 is for those over 65 years or serious existing medical conditions and for healthy, younger individuals, the fatality rate could be well below 1%. I do not think the current stats would say otherwise.

So if Covid19 has less than a 1% fatality rate for 99% of infections for young and healthy, then it is a logical step to say protecting the old and infirm is a consideration. Total infection rate is not the tell all.

Now some will say that the fatality rates being reported of close to 5% IS for all infections.... but I argue that is likely not the case. There is a large number of infections NOT being reported and those that are, are probably heavily skewed to the old and infirm. Those not being reported are probably skewed heavily to the young and healthy.

Data is also now showing, that it is likely that Covid death rates have been slightly inflated as many deaths are being labeled Covid when it is questionable.

Some here will say that is not true, it is all political and crap. Well, that is possible, but they refuse to acknowledge it is possible that it IS over reported and we should seriously look at all the consequences.

So probably the biggest difference between me and you and Jed is that ..... I am willing to seriously look at alternatives, suggestions and other opinions... I acknoweldge the serious nature of the pandemic, but ALSO acknowledge the VERY severe nature economically. But just like Shumer and some other liberals who actively attack HCQ simply because Trump supported it and therefore it must be demonized , it seems that you and Jed cannot consider any alternative than your prejudged solution of Trace/Track/Lockdown and that alternatives are unthinkable.

I see no difference in this than when Jed thinks your views on LENR and your comments on various tests are complete bunk and insults you as such. You have a different opinion and he refuses to consider it. He will state his view is based upon hard facts and you are patho-skeptic.

Quote from Navid

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.

You might want to read up on the real causes of vaccine induced polio cases... Its basically the anti-vaxxers kids who are getting ill:

https://www.who.int/news-room/…-is-vaccine-derived-polio

Quote from Navid

However, autism as a condition is so overwhelming, obvious and debilitating there is absolutely no chance that this is being overdiagnosed.

Sure DSM has some big failings, but austism spectrum disorder decribes a wide range of symptoms, and there's various good reasons who people with lower scores are being more readily diagnosed these days:

https://www.appliedbehaviorana…-autism-so-prevalent-now/

Quote from Bob#2

If a virus had a very small fatality rate, say less than 1%, one would take measures, but not that extensive. Again, infection rate still would not be that significant considering the cost a a lockdown. As proof, we did not have lockdowns for SARS, Ebola, Asian Flu, Swine Flu etc.

Bob - just a small correction here.

I believe COVID mortality is likely around 0.7% - so < 1%.

However that is not good.

SARS, Ebola have higher mortality but do not spread that easily and have never reached community infection in the West or China. So no lockdown needed. They do not spread so easily.

Asian Flu, Swine Flu

https://www.nhs.uk/news/cancer/swine-flu-deaths-examined/

This was a well-conducted investigation into all deaths in England attributed to swine flu up to November 2009. It found that there were 138 deaths from an estimated 540,000 cases, or around 26 deaths per 100,000 people

0.026% IFR

That is at least 20 X less than for COVID. In addition COVID seems to be more highly transmissable than Swine Flu, so unchecked we get a high proportion of the population catching it in a shorter time, more stress on the health system.

20X is a big deal - and the difference between lockdown and no lockdown.

Quote from Zeus46

You might want to read up on the real causes of vaccine induced polio cases... Its basically the anti-vaxxers kids who are getting ill:

https://www.who.int/news-room/…-is-vaccine-derived-polio

Simple logic says that cannot be. Vaccination rates are extremely high in India. So herd immunity is effectively established. Now you are telling me that the people who get polio is from the people who didn't get vaccinated...hmm...you are in a logical blackhole. They state:

Hence, the problem is not with the vaccine itself, but low vaccination coverage. If a population is fully immunized, they will be protected against both vaccine-derived and wild polioviruses.

Find me evidence for that statement. The WHO is not Mother Theresa folks

Perhaps a bit obvious, but nevertheless quite interesting

https://www.medrxiv.org/conten…101/2020.05.12.20099093v1

As the COVID-19 pandemic has spread to the entire world, a race to understand the virus and to find an effective and safe vaccine or treatment has triggered interest in the factors contributing to mortality. For instance, some studies have suggested that the BCG vaccine could protect from COVID-19 and nicotine patches could be therapeutic against the virus. This study makes use of data for about 140 countries to evaluate the determinants of COVID-19 mortality. It finds that a country's share of spending on health care (as a measure of a country's effectiveness in tracking, recording, and reporting COVID-19 deaths) is positively associated with COVID-19 deaths. It also finds that the share of people above 65 years of age, obesity, and urbanization are all positively associated with COVID-19 mortality. There is no evidence that BCG vaccination, smoking prevalence, and PM25 pollution have any link to COVID-19 mortality. These estimation results are robust to alternative specifications and after controlling for confounding factors and excluding outliers. Policymakers should allocate resources towards the protection of the elderly and those suffering from underlying conditions such as obesity. They should also exercise caution about administering nicotine patches or the BCG vaccine to fight COVID-19 without the backing of concrete scientific evidence.

Been gone for a while. If this has already been discussed, please delete.

NIH doing hqz/az testing

https://www.google.com/amp/s/s…in-to-treat-covid-19/amp/

Quote from Shane D.

A must watch. Sharly Attkisson is a highly respected journalist known for going where the facts take her. She is not left wing, or right wing. I always had the hots for her as she is a beautiful lady...but that is another story.

Today she did a segment on HCQ, and what she calls "politics, money and medicine and how they intersect with the coronavirus". 3 prominent US doctors are interviewed and give their opinions on the drugs efficacy (so far), and their frustration with the media's role. Doctors publicly critical of HCQ refused Attkisson's interview offer. Interesting where the money comes into play. Starts at 1:25, enjoy....

http://fullmeasure.news/news/f…-story-hydroxychloroquine

Pretty stunning.

Someone extremely powerful is pushing a campaign through media they own to keep people locked up in their homes, and introduce all sort of control measures and a vaccine agenda. This is not about the money only (the doctors don't understand what is going on). I assure you Gilead cannot by itself create these outcomes.

Quote from THHuxleynew

I'm sticking with this until you DO understand the data, and also pay attention to what others say - since it is annoying have so many OT posts.

Well, that's one definition of futility!

Quote from Bob#2

So if Covid19 has less than a 1% fatality rate for 99% of infections for young and healthy, then it is a logical step to say protecting the old and infirm is a consideration. Total infection rate is not the tell all.

ETA: And similarly from THHuxleynew

Quote

Policymakers should allocate resources towards the protection of the elderly and those suffering from underlying conditions such as obesity.

Unfortunately, there is currently absolutely no way at all to "protect the old and infirm." Do you know of one? And "infirm" is a bizarre term. In addition to people with pre-existing conditions related to age, you have to protect all young diabetics, those who have had chemotherapy for cancer, those with immune system disorders, those with inborn errors of metabolism, and on and on and on. You are grossly and incompetently oversimplifying an immensely complex problem. The only long term solutions are vaccines, or effective treatments and/or prophylaxis. And obesity? In the US? *Seriously?"

The prevalence of obesity was 42.4% in 2017~2018 https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html

There isn't any way to protect people given how people live in the real world. The best you can do is minimize exposure in public places and in the US, about half the population doesn't understand or relate to the concept. Many of those people actively oppose social isolation, masks and anything else that mitigates COVID-19. They are standing up for their freedoms. I guess one of those freedoms is the right to negligently and ignorantly cause the deaths of multiple others. That's like allowing drunken driving again because under some weird concept we just have a basic right to drink and drive.

We may have a truly horrible next six months or a year. The US is up to about 90,000 deaths and the daily rate is constant or climbing. How many lives are we willing to sacrifice?

Quote from Lou Pagnucco

Recent ivermectin news -- Claims ivermectin + doxycycline is virtually a cure

As is often the case, small, apparently anecdotal study without control, matching, blinding, etc. It isn't clear from the lay articles what sort of patients they used but in all likelihood they would have gotten better anyway. From 80 to 95+ % of unselected patients will. You may want to look for a real study of Ivermectin with anything else or by itself. I have not found a credible one. The lab results are encouraging but the clinical evidence seems lacking.

Quote from Shane D.

Today she did a segment on HCQ, and what she calls "politics, money and medicine and how they intersect with the coronavirus". 3 prominent US doctors are interviewed and give their opinions on the drugs efficacy (so far), and their frustration with the media's role. Doctors publicly critical of HCQ refused Attkisson's interview offer.

All such interviews done currently are complete nonsense. The right answer is that nobody knows. But everyone will, somewhere between fall and winter. The answer won't come from talking heads on TV. It will come from studies like this:

https://scitechdaily.com/nih-b…omycin-to-treat-covid-19/

Similar studies, done right, may also come from recent experience in New York State which used a lot of HCQ with and without AZI in controlled experiments. That and others may be out even sooner. Until then, conversations about it are opinions. And you know what is said about opinions. They are like ayholes. Everybody has one and they often stink.

Quote from Navid

As a parent there is no chance I want an intervention with my kids,

Don't take your non DTP vaccinated kids near any under 6 months non vaccinated kids

and certainly not near a hospital where kids are..

several deaths have been recorded from whooping cough because of this..on the Central Coast in NSW.Australia

Please read the latest WHo report on the Guinea mortality DTP paper you cited..

Guinea is one of the poorest countries with the poorest healthcare in Africa

the safety of the DTP vaccine in Australia is not a problem..

as I said the DTP vaccine is basically irrelevant to hoped for Covid vaccine

if it works at all there are going to to be ongoing safety checks needed in all age groups.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Antibody tests are a separate issue. The problem is that 100% antibody tests are expensive to do.

Only a spin doctor never commits a mistake. Now your excuse is that antibody tests are expensive:

Fact is: You completely ignore what other write and reference as SOT'y does too. 95% at least show no symptoms. If you don't understand that 10x more people had the virus than your logic base (worldometer) contains then please go back to primary school before you adjust your comments.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

Well, that's one definition of futility!

This has been said by a doctor that just treats his patient without known anti COV-19 medication. (See below.)

Quote from Lou Pagnucco

Bangladeshi doctors claim to have found effective drugs to treat COVID-19

https://tbsnews.net/coronaviru…und-effective-drugs-treat

This (Ivermectin + AB) has been already said by Japanese doctors about 3 weeks ago. I did not post the Japanese (Kanji) link because some folks here even don't read the english links.

As mentioned before. To completely avoid complications Heparin (blood thinner) is needed at start up. (But this is the luxury treatment ..)