Quote from Wyttenbach

Case tracking for ever ?? What is the idea behind this? Do it for the flue too ? It has always been done for AIDS, or Hepatitis C but they are a fraction as contagious as CoV-9 is.

Why not using simple medication in case somebody shines up with symptoms? How do you track 20x asymptotic cases that infect other 20x asymptotic cases and just 1 of 20 will be visible. You will loose all traces!! Case tracking is dead stupid nonsense as a general measure as it simply does not work as soon as 1 single asymptotic case occurs.

Countries like Japan, China will just face a never ending lock-down if they do not start to understand what really happens.

One to two years effort then there will be a vaccine. of cause if we get a good treatment the game changes. Also in sweden we have a immunity help it looks like this makes tracking easier.

FYI a bad flue season 1000 dies. now we are at 4000 and lands before 6000. if we could protect the one in elderly care we would have had 1000-1500 deaths. Possibly you have the same situation in Switzerland but hopefulle less problem in elderly care

Quote from Shane D.

CDC comes out with their latest "Best Estimate" (Last column) IFR's, and they match the Stanford results of ~.4%. Broken down by age groups; 0-49/50-64/65+:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronaviru…p/planning-scenarios.html

On an average basis taking account the population the IFR is

0.000917714

Basically 0.1% --- LOWER THAN 0.2% from Stanford.

0.4% MORE FAKE NEWS FROM CDC! You can't average numbers you have to factor in the population in each bucket.

It is a bad flu. We knew that.

Quote from Navid

I thought you would have been so beaten down from the Polio thing you would have not resurfaced yet.

As mentioned, previously the OPV has cause 490,000 cases of paralysis in India

Have some self-respect and stop using Snopes as any proof of anything. Read some source papers and show us actual data.

Navid, you're tripping hard sonny, I didn't see anything worth replying to in the short article you posted:

https://www.newindianexpress.c…n-kids-study-2051670.html

Although I notice it mentions a 'top Indian pediatrician' who claims that according to his research, in the last five years, 400 Indian children would have developed polio thanks to receiving the vaccine.

Seems he's in the same ballpark as the WHO's estimates.

Now you're saying that 490,000 Indian children have been paralysed by the OPV shot?

Has OPV been available over there for 6125 years? Or did you just pull that number out of your rear end?

Hard to tell, as despite your love of demanding papers from others you seem pretty reticent to link to them yourself.

Or perhaps it was a meme you saw on Facebook?

And yes, I'll add Snopes to the list of 'People Who Navid Thinks Are Conspiring Against Him And The Rest Of The Planet'...

Damn those pesky fact checkers.

Although I guess there's more logic in extending a conspiracy theory to include everyone you disagree with, than posting a link that refutes the argument you are attempting to make.

Anyway, lets not get distracted: Where does your number of 490,000 paralysed kids cone from?

Quote from Zeus46

Anyway, lets not get distracted: Where does your number of 490,000 paralysed kids cone from?

As I recall, those are cases of flaccid paralysis in India over the last ten years (or maybe 15, not sure). These are not viral infections. The linked article referred to vaccine viral strain polio. This is not that. This is a mysterious paralysis disorder that increased greatly in India as oral polio vaccination increased. It has also decreased as oral polio vaccination was decreased, recently. So it is highly likely it is caused in large part by the polio vaccination program. Flaccid paralysis rates were something like ten times the global rate iirc. India recently expelled the Gates Foundation, I surmise in part because there was an outcry from Indians who were angry about these vaccine injuries and who concluded that they were being used as guinea pigs.

Quote from Zeus46

Anyway, lets not get distracted: Where does your number of 490,000 paralysed kids cone from?

Hard to tell, as despite your love of demanding papers from others you seem pretty reticent to link to them yourself.

Or perhaps it was a meme you saw on Facebook?

It was in the article you responded to that started this thread (go back and look --- I included a snapshot).

We all get in over head sometimes, but using conspiracy talk and snopes as your fact checker -- come on. We'd expect that from a high schooler.

As for the real science, the article references the paperby Rachana Dhiman et al. "The last case of polio from India was reported in 2011. That year, the non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) rate in India was 13.35/100,000, where the expected rate is 1⁻2/100,000. --- [they found that],,, NPAFP rate correlated with the OPV pulse polio rounds -- over 5 years (R = 0.76; p < 0.001)...Now that India has been polio-free for over 6 years, we propose that we may be able to reduce NPAFP by further reducing pulse polio rounds."

In short, the best way to stop NPAFP is stop vaccine. 11/100,000 is 1/10,000 or Vaccine Paralysis Rate (VPR). That is a pretty high rate of danger.

These companies need to make the vaccines safer and we know they can. That's the punchline. No free lunch by using statistics or big claims.

Quote from Navid

I thought you would have been so beaten down from the Polio thing you would have not resurfaced yet.

As mentioned, previously the OPV has cause 490,000 cases of paralysis in India. That is epic. Simple minds go "oh well, the benefit probably outweighs the harm because you know WHO is involved and you know I read it on Snopes!" Simple minds can be in power. For example, the US sanctions to Iraq caused them unable to purify water and treat sewage. Childhood mortality grew and disease grew. Remember, when Madeline Albright said the 500,000 deaths of children was worth it?

You drove yourself into a ditch and said the VAPP "it is correlation not causation." You can't take that back. You also don't have a clue what you are talking about wrt this complex disease. Read the next paper.

CDC admits that vaccine derived polio exists but they claim it is 200 cases per year. India - who is doing the surveillance - says it is 30,000+ a year. India scientists says that the best way to help the people is to stop giving them OPV. Zeus would call them conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers.

Have some self-respect and stop using Snopes as any proof of anything. Read some source papers and show us actual data.

Display More

Navid, if you want people to take seriously your arguments you need to quote your sources. With links. Otherwise, how do you or we know your summaries are not incorrect just as Sharyl's vaccinations and autism summary was above?

Let me ask: re Polio vaccination - if we had no vaccinations, what would the rate in India be?

It took somewhat longer for polio to be recognized as a major problem in developing countries. Lameness surveys during the 1970s revealed that the disease was also prevalent in developing countries. As a result, during the 1970s routine immunization was introduced worldwide as part of national immunization programmes, helping to control the disease in many developing countries.

Rotary International launched a global effort to immunize the world’s children against polio in 1985 followed by the establishment of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) in 1988. When the GPEI started, polio paralysed more than 1000 children worldwide every day. Since then, more than 2.5 billion children have been immunized against polio thanks to the cooperation of more than 200 countries and 20 million volunteers.

Today, wild poliovirus continues to circulate in only two countries, and global incidence of polio cases has decreased by 99%.

There has also been success in eradicating certain strains of the virus; of the three types of wild polioviruses (WPVs), the last case of type 2 was reported in 1999 and its eradication was declared in September 2015; the most recent case of type 3 dates to November 2012 and this strain was declared as globally eradicated in October 2019.

http://polioeradication.org/polio-today/history-of-polio/

Quote from Mark U

As I recall, those are cases of flaccid paralysis in India over the last ten years (or maybe 15, not sure). These are not viral infections. The linked article referred to vaccine viral strain polio. This is not that. This is a mysterious paralysis disorder that increased greatly in India as oral polio vaccination increased. It has also decreased as oral polio vaccination was decreased, recently. So it is highly likely it is caused in large part by the polio vaccination program. Flaccid paralysis rates were something like ten times the global rate iirc. India recently expelled the Gates Foundation, I surmise in part because there was an outcry from Indians who were angry about these vaccine injuries and who concluded that they were being used as guinea pigs.

Mark, when you make interesting statements about mysterious new diseases it would be really helpful if you could link medical research articles about them? I trry to find links myself, when I vaguely remember something. Google is your friend.

Quote from Navid

As for the real science, the article references the paperby Rachana Dhiman et al. "The last case of polio from India was reported in 2011. That year, the non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) rate in India was 13.35/100,000, where the expected rate is 1⁻2/100,000. --- [they found that],,, NPAFP rate correlated with the OPV pulse polio rounds -- over 5 years (R = 0.76; p < 0.001)...Now that India has been polio-free for over 6 years, we propose that we may be able to reduce NPAFP by further reducing pulse polio rounds."

In short, the best way to stop NPAFP is stop vaccine. 11/100,000 is 1/10,000 or Vaccine Paralysis Rate (VPR). That is a pretty high rate of danger.

When looking at research papers it is always necessary to consider context. My experience, only about 10% of research papers are at all accurate (the figure is lower for non-peer-reviewed COVID preprints). Does not mean you should not read them, just be prepared to use critical thinking and do a forwards backwards citation survey if the results seem remarkable to check that they stand.

In this case few people seem interested in that paper. However there is one citation in the form of a comment that summarises defects. I think this thread has given a real life lesson to us all that establishing any medical causation is tough ad easy to get wrong. But the mistakes summarised below are more than usual, which perhaps explains why so few people have found it relevant to cite the paper.

https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/1/13/htm

Comment on Dhiman, R. et al. Correlation of Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis Rate with Pulse Polio Frequency in India. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1755

The authors of the published article ‘Correlation between Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis Rates with Pulse Polio Frequency in India’ [1] have not considered several important variables in their conclusions of their findings, which might have affected the validity of the correlations.

I would like to highlight several important points:

• The Acute Flaccid Paralysis (AFP) surveillance data that the authors have used include reported cases of the 0–15 year age group and the rates are calculated forthwith. However, the use of Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV) in Intensified Pulse Polio Immunization (IPPI) or Pulse Polio campaigns is targeted toward children in the age range of 0–5 years. Hence, correlating the two does not actually answer the hypothesis unless some analytical evidence is provided to show that the AFP rate in the 5–15 year age group is not influencing the results.
• There is the possibility that the sensitivity of surveillance and, therefore, the number of AFP cases reported depended not only on the broadened case definition, to include even atypical or non-classical AFP cases, but also on the focus and efforts in terms of active case search (ACS) visits by the surveillance officers. It is a reality that due to the transitioning plans, a shifting of focus from polio, and the reduced presence of specialized surveillance system workforce from partner agencies such as WHO, especially in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, the number of ACS visits to the reporting and informer units of the AFP reporting network have decreased considerably. This might also be correlated with the non-polio AFP rates in recent years.
• When comparing the data from states such as Delhi, Karnataka and Kerala, as per the data sheet provided by the authors, one fails to see the correlation observed by the authors for these states. Even the southern and northern parts of states such as Karnataka, with the same frequency of pulse polio campaigns, have widely variable non-polio AFP rates.
• The frequency of administration of OPV has increased due to routine immunization strengthening efforts, especially in northern states such as Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, stemming from campaigns such as special immunization weeks, Mission Indradhanush, and Gram Swaraj Abhiyan, which have been active from 2013/2014 onwards. The routine immunization OPV doses (5) are reaching a greater percentage of each birth cohort (about 30-40% more in northern states since 2013/2014), which is not accounted for by the authors.
• There was a change in OPV type during the global switch from tOPV to bOPV in 2016. IPV was introduced prior to the switch to avoid the risk of VDPV emergence. In addition, the complex effects of IPV generated immunity against polio paralysis of any type (WPV, VDPV, or VAPP), when administered simultaneously with bOPV, due to variation in the speed and magnitude of serosal immunity generation by IPV vis-à-vis that by bOPV, and the subsequent reduction in the risk of generation of paralytic illness is also not discussed or accounted for. Moreover, the low coverage of IPV, due to global shortages in supply chains, is not accounted for.
• The possibility of post vaccination paralysis, though described in the literature to be about one in two to three million doses, might apply only to those children who take vaccines for the first time, those who are totally naïve with no pre-existing immunity. This might be much more uncommon in already vaccinated children. As the naïve cohort will remain similar (or with only a slight change caused by the birth rate) irrespective of the number of polio campaign rounds or the routine immunization schedule, the possibility of the OPV induced paralysis rate changing much each year is questionable. Hence, there appears to be no biological plausibility for the conclusions on correlation described by the authors, which should be regarded as spurious unless proved otherwise by further studies.
• Another important factor, i.e., non-polio enteroviruses (NPEV) causing polio like paralysis, and variations in the temporal and spatial distribution of NPEVs across Indian states are unaccounted for.
• The authors do not describe how the proportions of actual diagnoses of AFP cases have varied over time, nor what percentage fit into the classical AFP criteria as practiced in the western countries to which the authors have drawn the non-polio AFP rate comparisons of India.

With all of these questions at bay, the findings and inferences described in the article are questionable and should be considered spurious unless proved otherwise by further study and analysis using more rigorous methods.

Sorry but the Lancet report is a load of crap made to look impressive by including a vast amount of data then complete!y losing the thread. Typical moronic MD (Mentally Deficient) bullshit. It's only aim is to support the expensive alternatives like remdesivir which Wang et al showed was biochemical equally effective to hydroxychloroquine. I just despair at the idiocy of this and the dark evil moneygrabbing obsession pharma funding of this study. Each participating author should be dragged before a court of law and prosecuted for scientific fraud. Or just sling them in jail. I have lost my patience with this, was going to stop posting, but this really makes my blood boil.

Quote from Navid

On an average basis taking account the population the IFR is

0.000917714

Basically 0.1% --- LOWER THAN 0.2% from Stanford.

0.4% MORE FAKE NEWS FROM CDC! You can't average numbers you have to factor in the population in each bucket.

It is a bad flu. We knew that.

Display More

Navid, could you please show your calculations? it is quite a serious accusation you make and I'm trying to follow your figures, which I don't understand. What values do you take for the population in each bucket? I agree, by the way, that it is a weighted average although what the weights are depends on how contacts, and hence infection rates, varies between the buckets, that is quite complex. I think the best way to do it would be to look at how cases break down, typically, between these buckets - that would combine fraction of population and likelihood of infection together. But then there is the issue that the figures would need to be case fatality rate rather than infection fatality rate.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Navid, could you please show your calculations? it is quite a serious accusation you make and I'm trying to follow your figures, which I don't understand. What values do you take for the population in each bucket? I agree, by the way, that it is a weighted average although what the weights are depends on how contacts, and hence infection rates, varies between the buckets, that is quite complex. I think the best way to do it would be to look at how cases break down, typically, between these buckets - that would combine fraction of population and likelihood of infection together. But then there is the issue that the figures would need to be case fatality rate rather than infection fatality rate.

There is nothing complex here - multiple each bin by the population in that bin. There are 211.62 in bin 1, 63.16 in bin 2, and 52.42 in bin 3.

You can see that they averaged the 3 numbers together.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Case tracking for ever ?? What is the idea behind this?

No forever. Just until a vaccine is deployed. The idea is to stop the epidemic. The method works, as shown in China, Korea, Japan, New Zealand and other countries.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Do it for the flue too ?

I do not think it would work for influenza. Also, it is not needed as much, because anyone can opt out of getting the flu with a vaccine. And because influenza is much less severe, with a far lower mortality rate.

Quote from Wyttenbach

It has always been done for AIDS, or Hepatitis C but they are a fraction as contagious as CoV-9 is.

COVID-19 can be controlled with case checking. That has been proved in several countries. It is not debatable.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Why not using simple medication in case somebody shines up with symptoms?

No such medication exists, as far as I know. But even if it did exist, prevention is always better than a cure.

Quote from Wyttenbach

How do you track 20x asymptotic cases that infect other 20x asymptotic cases and just 1 of 20 will be visible.

There cannot be 20x asymptomatic cases. If there were, the Japanese and Koreans would find them with their widespread testing, and they have not found them. Also, if there were this many, case tracing would not work. It does work, so there are not many hidden, asymptomatic cases.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Countries like Japan, China will just face a never ending lock-down if they do not start to understand what really happens.

It is just the opposite! With case tracking, you don't need a lock-down. China ended theirs weeks ago. Japan had a voluntary "soft" lockdown for a few weeks that most people ignored. Outside of Tokyo and Osaka, it was completely ignored as far I know. With case-tracking they are back down to 20 cases per day. That is a thousand times fewer than the U.S., in a country one-third the size of the U.S.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Mark, when you make interesting statements about mysterious new diseases it would be really helpful if you could link medical research articles about them? I trry to find links myself, when I vaguely remember something. Google is your friend.

Mysterious yes, but hardly new.

Google, well, is becoming less my friend these days. Same goes for Gootube.

I should correct something I said about India 'expelling' the Gates Foundation some years ago. This is not correct. The Gates Foundation still works in India but it's on a tighter leash, particularly concerning vaccines. https://www.reuters.com/articl…mmunization-idUSKBN15N13K

Quote from JedRothwell

There cannot be 20x asymptomatic cases.

In central London is bigger than 20x , in Spain, Swiss south > 10x.

Quote from JedRothwell

It is just the opposite! With case tracking, you don't need a lock-down. China ended theirs weeks ago.

This is nonsense! China is still in lock down in most places. The north has just jailed 100'000'000 people again. You may be should start to understand the facts. I have friends married too Chinese so may be you can give us your sources??

Japan is also still in lock-down (but with fewer restrictions) and if they stay with their rules it will never end.

Quote from stefan

FYI a bad flue season 1000 dies. now we are at 4000 and lands before 6000. if we could protect the one in elderly care we would have had 1000-1500 deaths. Possibly you have the same situation in Switzerland but hopefulle less problem in elderly care

We too had 50% of all deaths in car homes but this is average. The souths was hit like Italy. So this figure is dominated by the south.

But during the bird flu we had about 50 deaths in one care home only within a few weeks. So people talking about the flue being harmless should should shut up. It was far more deadly than todays CoV-9. Tests did show that at least 50% of all inhabitants of care homes did not show Symptoms albeit they had antibodies.

CoV-9 more closely looks like a "social disease" - amplified by bad live style staying to close together having no medical support/knowledge.

Quote from THHuxleynew

With all of these questions at bay, the findings and inferences described in the article are questionable and should be considered spurious unless proved otherwise by further study and analysis using more rigorous methods.

I'd be willing to discuss this more with a person trained in the art. Given the high correlation with the vaccine schedule, and the rate which is at least 10x expected -- these comments don't begin to address the issue. If it really was enteroviruses, NPEV, then it would appear that it is more dangerous than polio and would not be affected by reduction in OPV.

Again, the punch line is that vaccines must be made safer. Second, vaccines are not synonmous with health. If you live in a dump, and you have poor nutrition, fecal-oral transmission of a virus like Polio is going to occur. Health is complex, putting everything on a vaccine is dubious and only a vaccine maker would pump up the numbers like that and sell it like a magic bullet. We even know that Vitamin D is highly correlated with Covid outcomes but the vaccine makers don't talk about that....wonder why!?

It is worth noting that most statistics published by Gates Foundation have done a multiplier of about 7 based on the actual reported cases.

https://ourworldindata.org/gra…lio-cases-by-world-region

Now, the number of cases of from vaccine induced paralysis is high and we are trying to talk down the numbers.

I see the switch to IPV may eventually help this and we can pretend this never happened...which is what usually happens...no accountability.

Quote from THHuxleynew

With all of these questions at bay, the findings and inferences described in the article are questionable and should be considered spurious unless proved otherwise by further study and analysis using more rigorous methods.

THH, you went to all that trouble to find, copy and paste those comments which aim to detract from the original paper, but you didn't even link to the original authors' reply/rebuttals to those comments. I'll do it then, in the interest of fairness.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6339160/

Didn't anyone else see through the gobbledygook of the registry analysis in the Lancet report? This study was so large that any positive effects would be lost in the statistical analysis, becoming completely divorced from the reality of individual cases. Even if HCQ was completely 100℅ effective in half the cases (the other half dying due to it being given too late) such an effect would be lost in the background noise of the analysis. Sorry, this study is totally misleading, a RCT double blind trial of say 100 or so cases followed closely in the same clinical setting would be far more convincing either way. It is as effective as remdesivir, get over it pharma!

thodological methodological