Covid-19 News

China vaccinates "hundreds of thousands" with trial vaccine.....

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news…-BB18W5Ta?ocid=uxbndlbing

The article does not state whether the vaccines were all voluntary.. but somehow I doubt it. It is interesting that bit of information was left unaddressed.. thus my suspicion. If it was indeed voluntary, then there would have been no reason not to state it.... however, if coerced, that would play into the hands of the anti-vaxxers.

At least the head of the pharma company took it along with the others... however how likely is it he had no choice either! I think some here really under estimate the communist state's control and power there.

It is concerning.

Quote from Fm1

https://www-insider-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.insider.com/fauci-takes-recommends-vitamin-d-and-c-supplements-immunity-boost-2020-9?amp_js_v=a3&_gsa=1&&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.insider.com%2Ffauci-takes-recommends-vitamin-d-and-c-supplements-immunity-boost-2020-9

Fauci recommends vitamin D and C to fight flu and covid

Only a criminal in charge would wait until September 11th to recommend Vitamin C and Vitamin D. Which are more important than any theoretical vaccine, and have been for 8 months+ since the start of Covid. He started Vaccine development January 14th (surely much prior in fact).

Let's hope his criminality is prosecuted.

Only slaves listen to criminals in charge, who lie and lie and lie at the behest of a vast pharma industry (and by extension other system actors). This is a story as old as time, Fauci is a healthcare Nimrod.

Quote from ZenoOfElea

Your view seems to chime with the current Internet articles based on the new book by Michael Sandel - such as this one from the Guardian.

A revolt against the tyranny of merit.

This is fair. The meritocratic ideal which both left and right espouse these days is a broken ideal. Nowhere more evident in the fact that many in the US are one sickness away from being destitute, literally. Healthcare is too expensive, and the social contract that should allow everyone to have healthcare is impossible to institute - since the very suggestion makes right-wingers bristle at Hammer-and-Sickle socialism. Quite often these people are confused and argue against their own interests. What does that - propoganda! ("don't let the government get between you and your doctor")

Given the renegade (and at times lawless) profit seeking healthcare fiefdoms in the US -- they will lobby lobby and lobby against any type of centralization. Only centralization will give people healthcare like we have in Canada, Sweden etc.

I think as more evidence of nutrition through supplements emerges and it's association to the immune systems, we will big looking at even more hostility towards big pharma and the greed behind it.

Quote from Mark U

The simple fact remains : In 2019, in the age of computers, and in full knowledge of what 20th century flu pandemics have wrought, the experts at the WHO said that the following were "Not recommended in any circumstances" for flu pandemics :

"Contact tracing"

"Quarantine of exposed individuals"

"Entry and exit screening"

"Border closing"

Display More

For good reasons. You can't do those things for influenza, except quarantine, and even that is problematic when 40 million people get sick in a few months during the flu season.

Contact tracing would be utterly impossible, even with computers and cell phones. Border closing would be futile. There is a flu peak season but the disease is everywhere, at all times, crossing every border on earth. One infected person can infect the whole U.S. in a month. So there is no way to stop it by closing borders. Taking passenger's temperature before they board a plane might be a good idea, similar to the way we now check for weapons. The same equipment might be used to do it.

Quote from Bob#2

The article does not state whether the vaccines were all voluntary.. but somehow I doubt it.

Why do you doubt it? On what basis? Did you read that somewhere?

China has millions of patriotic people who would volunteer for such a thing. They need a carefully selected group of both sexes and range of ages, all in good health. They are not going to dragoon random people into such a study. On the contrary, they will probably reject many volunteers.

Quote from JedRothwell

Why do you doubt it? On what basis? Did you read that somewhere?

Really? It is indeed amazing how some think China really is with it's own people, even with over whelming evidence of continual human rights violations.

So for what good it will do, you think that China's communist government does not commit oppressive actions or involuntary requirements against it's own people, especially the racist oppression of certain ethnic groups?

It is fact that they do and that is why I doubt the vaccine of "hundreds of thousands" was likely voluntary. It likely was not even explained to them in many cases what the vaccine was.... simply... take this or "else implied". Not questioning the government out of fear is not the same as being "patriotic"!

Such as :

Yes they have forced medicine as noted :

https://time.com/5885020/china-xinjiang-forced-medication/

Forced organ harvesting... if they force you to give up your guts, you do not think they would force you to take a vaccine?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/w…%20the%20statement%20said.

Forced labor : If they make slaves of you, you do not think they would test vaccines on you?

https://www.businessinsider.co…ced-labor-xinjiang-2020-9

https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/chinas-forced-labor-problem/

and the list goes on.

The fact that you have to ask why I doubt that the vaccines could be / were involuntary in principal shows that you are either uneducated about China's continual major human rights violations (which I doubt you are not aware) or simply you do not want to acknowledge the issue as it might go against a current agenda.

Quote from Bob#2

Really? It is indeed amazing how some think China really is with it's own people, even with over whelming evidence of continual human rights violations.

Human rights violations do not include involuntary participation in vaccine tests, as far as I know. (It is possible I know more about China than you do, since I spent several semesters studying Chinese history and anthropology.)

Quote from Bob#2

So for what good it will do, you think that China's communist government does not commit oppressive actions or involuntary requirements against it's own people, especially the racist oppression of certain ethnic groups?

Yes, this is common knowledge. However, there are no reports of involuntary vaccine tests as far as I know. Do you know of any?

Quote from Bob#2

It is fact that they do and that is why I doubt the vaccine of "hundreds of thousands" was likely voluntary.

Again, do you have any evidence for this? Why would the medical establishment do that? I am 100% sure millions of Chinese would volunteer for tests, just as millions of Americans or Japanese would. Given that fact, there is no need for involuntary test subjects.

Also, news of this would get out, and it would be bad PR. The Chinese government cares about its image, and about public opinion. That does not prevent it from oppressing minorities and jailing the opposition, but it does mean the government avoids pointless acts that look bad, and this would be utterly pointless.

Quote from Bob#2

The article does not state whether the vaccines were all voluntary.. but somehow I doubt it. It is interesting that bit of information was left unaddressed.. thus my suspicion. If it was indeed voluntary, then there would have been no reason not to state it.... however, if coerced, that would play into the hands of the anti-vaxxers.

At least at Sinovac it was (supposedly) voluntary:

Liu Peicheng, a spokesman for Sinovac, which said it has injected 3,000 employees and their family members, said the company’s recent vaccinations were purely voluntary and that it had disclosed to recipients the potential risks of taking the vaccine before the completion of clinical trials. He said the company had made the offer to its employees because it believed they were exposed to a higher risk of infection.

That said, the Chinese people know that CCP officials could swoop in and do just about anything they want, anyway. God knows what they've done to thousands of Falun Gong practitioners.

America's greatness is supposed to stem from the constitutionally declared sovereignty of the individual. The individual truly matters. A ground up upwelling of a free, informed and enabled citizenry creates a nation.

China is about the supremacy of the state (and race) first, a top down approach, emphasizing the collective good and stability over the individual, who is dispensable.

With Covid-19 and issues like mandatory vaccinations, we see that the US is creeping towards a Chinese mentality. People are reduced to being potential vectors of disease, supposedly endangering the collective. Personal bodily sovereignty is legislated away on the pretence of ensuring public safety and stability, even when in reality there is no clear and present danger, only hypotheticals from a technocratic elite who financially and otherwise benefit from their fear based 'service' to the state.

Quote from Mark U

America's greatness is supposed to stem from the constitutionally declared sovereignty of the individual. The individual truly matters. A ground up upwelling of a free, informed and enabled citizenry creates a nation.

China is about the supremacy of the state (and race) first, a top down approach, emphasizing the collective good and stability over the individual, who is dispensable.

This is a tired and old political divide for a modern interconnected world.

The individual matters. So does the state, and how it enforces the many many regulations we want and need to live together relatively peacefully and with prosperity under a relatively fair system of law.

As does leadership that has the consent of the populace. The US is failing there now, and with such deep divisions may continue to fail. China does better (in terms of overall popularity).

I don't like the Chinese regime. Xi has taken the country in the wrong direction and shows no sign of changing. Even so US refuseniks need to face and mend the failures of their own system rather than compare it with one completely different.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Even so US refuseniks need to face and mend the failures of their own system rather than compare it with one completely different.

The people of the US have the opportunity to change every election cycle. Do you think the Chinese have that luxury? Or even if they can choose anything themselves? I do not believe it is the regime that is the core problem, it is the inherent system.

That is the wonders of a plurality.... but then it is a growing trend among elitist thinking that the populace is too dumb or uneducated to make "scientific" decisions themselves, so the elitist should simply be in charge and make those decisions for them! Then you wind up with a Russia or China...... or worse....

"China does better overall"...... I do not see much immigration to China but MUCH to the US from China... wonder why?

You might ask the people in Hong Kong what they think!

Quote from Bob#2

it is a growing trend among elitist thinking that the populace is too dumb or uneducated to make "scientific" decisions themselves

Bob - in the context of US political system you have to be pretty strange to think that a choice between Biden and Trump for the head of state is throwing up anything like two leaders of the calibre you would want. It (my comment) is about whether the political system gives the populace good or bad choices, not whether they are too educated to choose.

You here consistently take my remarks about the US to be political anti-Trump. I do think Trump is a bad leader, but I see him as a symptom of a political system that has not served democracy well. That must be mended, and saying the US is better than China, whether true or false, does nothing to mend it.

We had the same thing in the UK with a disastrous choice between Johnson and Corbyn. Again, our system is not giving us anything like good leaders to choose from. When democracy does this you need to look at the structures and ask why.

FDA permits ivermectin trial , California

Better late than never.. BigPharma has a quicker path.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/…vermectin-clinical-trial/

'

Now the FDA has just issued two “Study May Proceed” letters to the clinical investigator and trial site research organization. The Southern California-based research team will commence two Phase 2 clinical trials, including two controversial therapies involving combinations with Zinc, Vitamin D3 and Vitamin C, the antimalarial drug first embraced by much of the research establishment and ivermectin.

The Phase 2 ivermectin study NCT04482686 involves the treatment of 300 COVID-19 patients with a combination of therapies or a placebo and standard of care. The study treatment duration is 10 days with follow up for 6 months. The study drug combination includes ivermectin, Doxycycline, and dietary supplements including Zinc, Vitamin D3 and Vitamin C.

I will make one more comment about politics and history. I have studied Stalinist Russian, today's communist China, and Japan under a military dictatorship before 1945. I am particularly interested in this history because I have personal connections to it. My parents were posted to Russian during WWII by the U.S. government, and I grew up knowing many Russian people. During the height of the cold war, we had visitors from the KGB in my house. Very nice people. George Kennan's secretary was a dear friend of mine. I went to college in Japan in the 1970s when the professors were mostly WWII veterans, and half the population lived through the war. So I heard a lot about it. As I mentioned, I took several courses in Chinese history, anthropology, asian political science, and so on.

Here is an important point about these societies.

The governments cannot survive without the support of many citizens. Probably, without the majority of citizens. Even Stalin had to consider public opinion. Of course he could kill millions of people with impunity, and even his supporters were terrified of him. Despite that, he had to have overall support, especially from the ruling class (the nomenklatura the communist party). Decades later, when the nation as a whole and the ruling class lost faith in the party, it collapsed. This was triggered to a large extent by the Chernoblyl disaster.

This is something a person living in a democracy will probably not know, or understand. It seems almost unbelievable that Stalin and the Japanese militarists had to concern themselves with public opinion, but it is true. Obviously, I do not mean that Stalin had to go around begging for votes the way American or British politicians do. However, it is a fact that when Stalin died, a tremendous number of people in Russia were heartbroken. Crowds of people tried to approach the funeral. So many that some were trampled to death. Stalin is still revered by many. That was also genuine enthusiasm for the terror. Many people were happy to see Stalin slaughter millions of countrymen, because they despised the people being slaughtered, the same way Germans were happy to see Jewish people killed.

There is also no doubt whatever that most Japanese people in 1945 revered the Emperor and respected the military, and were heartbroken when Japan surrendered. Some, of course, were delighted, but most people were in tears. It was not an act. Many people of that generation told me this. They were honest. After the war, many people turned on the government and the military, but I think that was partly because they lost. If they had won somehow, people would have supported them. Along the same lines, after the U.S. lost the war in Vietnam, my mother remarked that if we had won, she would probably consider it wise policy and a helpful victory.

Getting back this discussion, the Chinese government imprisons and oppresses minorities in the country, but these are people the rest of the nation despises. The public approves of this, the same way the U.S. southern white population approved of Jim Crow oppression. The government would not do this as much, or as openly, if most people were opposed to it. It does not imprison many ordinary citizens, and it would never force them to take a vaccine, because that would be bad public relations. The government worries a great deal about its image and what the average Chinese person thinks of it. It does not have to solicit votes, but it does have to stay in power, and that calls for keeping the population on its side.

Quote from Bob#2

The people of the US have the opportunity to change every election cycle. Do you think the Chinese have that luxury?

They have the luxury of averaging 10% per year growth, for the last 40 years. America averaged 2-3%. You or I might not want to work in some factory on the outskirts of a smog-filled megacity, but its all relative. Would you rather live in poverty? Their government has huge levels of popular support, because they keep to their side of the social contract.

Quote from Bob#2

..... I do not see much immigration to China but MUCH to the US from China... wonder why?

Because you live in the US?

Quote from Alan Smith

QUITE ENOUGH POLITICS. Any more will be deleted.

Oops didn’t see that

Jed,

I have not been following this forum lately. Can you provide a quick link to Mizuno's recent results?

Question to the members:

Assume that a vaccine is 100% effective. Also assume COVID-19 kills 1% of those that are infected (it may be 3% in the US). However, the vaccine kills 1 in 1000 individuals. Would you take it? If it kills 1 in 10K, would you take it? What level of safety is necessary for you to accept the vaccine? The MERS vaccine had issues in animal testing and I am told by reliable sources that it had problems in some human early trials that caused substantial health problems. In that case, MERS disappeared but was about 10% fatal so a vaccine was important.

Statistically, anything less than a 1% death rate would be taking the vaccine is the best bet. The difference in many minds is that getting a disease is never 100% (for COVID19 is will likely be in the high 80s) and unknown but the risk of a vaccination is known and voluntary (or should be). You can play with the numbers of risk of disease vs. vaccination vs. efficacity and decide when you get the vaccine or take the risk of the disease. Always remember you have about a 1% chance of dying in a traffic accident by commuting to work by car over a 40 year period.

BTW: Some military vaccines are labeled "experimental" as they are not FDA cleared "approved" and I think they are mandatory (there were court cases on this aspect).

Quote from JedRothwell

This is something a person living in a democracy will probably not know, or understand. It seems almost unbelievable that Stalin and the Japanese militarists had to concern themselves with public opinion, but it is true.

There is also no doubt whatever that most Japanese people in 1945 revered the Emperor and respected the military, and were heartbroken when Japan surrendered. Some, of course, were delighted, but most people were in tears. It was not an act.

It does not have to solicit votes, but it does have to stay in power, and that calls for keeping the population on its side.

I think we can all understand this. Gates is a front man for a large system, just like Stalin had a large system of control and many who benefitted from him being the frontman. When Gates dies, you probably will be tearful -- and thinking he worked so hard to save humanity; meanwhile he is one of the most repugnant people in history (I'm not saying he is as criminal as Stalin, likely he has a long way to go there;).

Gates does not need to solicit votes, but he spends a massive amount on public relations - in the same way Rockefeller did.

All control systems have to keep the population on their side. Because population control is (a key) to their business model.

Quote from DAK2

Question to the members:

Assume that a vaccine is 100% effective. Also assume COVID-19 kills 1% of those that are infected (it may be 3% in the US). However, the vaccine kills 1 in 1000 individuals. Would you take it? If it kills 1 in 10K, would you take it? What level of safety is necessary for you to accept the vaccine? The MERS vaccine had issues in animal testing and I am told by reliable sources that it had problems in some human early trials that caused substantial health problems. In that case, MERS disappeared but was about 10% fatal so a vaccine was important.

Coronavirus has a worst case IFR of 0-50 of 0.05%, and that is without proper standard treatments like HCQ and more. A respected German epidemiologist has said the risk reward is so high that nobody should take it in that group. However, if proven safe and effective to people who have immunocomprimise or who are older --- they should consider it.