Covid-19 (WuFlu) News

  • THH, I have shown you privately (some months ago) a multitude of papers, including vaccinated vs unvaccinated studies, that show significant vaccine injury.

    This is not the forum to drag this out on. It is clear to me you don't really want to know. Just know this: the same databases that were accessed by the study from Jed's link contain the information needed to perform a nation wide comparison of vaccinated vs unvaccinated populations. The NIH has been asked to do this vaxxed vs unvaxxed study (by, iirc the AMA), but they refuse. Think on that. BTW, the obvious flaw in the study referenced by Jed is something called "health bias". In short, people battling an illness are not supposed to get vaccinated ; they have to wait until they are well. These are the very people who are more prone to die in the next month or two, so it should be no surprise that the general population has a higher mortality rate. This 'health bias' is also a main reason the Danish studies on the safety of their MMR vaccine are flawed.

  • THH, I have shown you privately (some months ago) a multitude of papers, including vaccinated vs unvaccinated studies, that show significant vaccine injury.

    This is not the forum to drag this out on. It is clear to me you don't really want to know. Just know this: the same databases that were accessed by the study from Jed's link contain the information needed to perform a nation wide comparison of vaccinated vs unvaccinated populations. The NIH has been asked to do this vaxxed vs unvaxxed study (by, iirc the AMA), but they refuse. Think on that. BTW, the obvious flaw in the study referenced by Jed is something called "health bias". In short, people battling an illness are not supposed to get vaccinated ; they have to wait until they are well. These are the very people who are more prone to die in the next month or two, so it should be no surprise that the general population has a higher mortality rate. This 'health bias' is also a main reason the Danish studies on the safety of their MMR vaccine are flawed.


    Ok, so let us then for public record leave it as this. I read what you posted (at least the bits you said were most persuasive) with interest. They did not, on analysis, show what you thought they did, and i posted there at length why I believed that. Perhaps a good summary would be "lies, damned lies, and anti-vax statistics!"


    Navid, above, has rightly pointed out the difficulties in trusting the pro-Vax argument based on looking at differential death rates between those who are and are not vaccinated. The problem is that those who choose to be vaccinated are a selected group that may be less at risk of mortality for other factors: social, environmental.


    The same problem cuts the other way. Those who choose to be vaccinated may be more at risk, for example there are illnesses that make children more susceptibe to childhood diseases - and other things. Those children will be much more likely to be vaccinated than others.


    Similarly: looking within a population across time for correlations between vaccination and mortality is a mugs game.


    • Vaccinations typically increase over decades due to campaigns. Many other factors change over the same period that will effect disease of different types one way of another. An anti-vaxer need only look at all countries, all other immune-related diseases, and cherry-pick a correlation to be sure of his or her beliefs.
    • Pro-vaxers have the same issues - but they know - for example from the data Jed published - that vaccination cannot overall be too bad.


    The anti-vaxers bring this on themselves by pushing a hypothesis for which there is no evidence, and almost no way to obtain evidence: vaccines are causative of various long-term somatic changes that cause later harm. I think the reason they do this is that with such tenuous linkage there is also almost no way to disprove the hypothesis!


    So how about a compromise. I like compromises; they are usually made by people who can sympathetically understand both sides of an issue.


    Consider the difference between vaccination, and catching the disease for which the vaccine primes the immune system. It is pretty clear to me that there are similarities, and differences. The similarities are enough to make the vaccine efficacious (as is proven by phase III trials). the immune system is incredibly complex and unintended consequences of vaccines might be good or bad. Just as unintended consequences of actually catching a full-blown disease might be good or bad. There is a great variety of vaccine technologies, and also great difference - unpredictably - in how any specific vaccine actually affects people. That is why you need that long process of careful testing. Some vaccines are much closer to the diseases they protect against than others. Exactly the same variability exists for diseases; great variety of different viral or bacterial attack mechanisms. Great variety in what long-term effects diseases leave. Saying "vaccines bad, disease good" is every bit as unthinking as Orwell's communist satire: "Four legs good, two legs bad".


    I agree that evidence here is not as good as we would like, there is always uncertainty. That applies to both unrecognised long-term effects of diseases and long-term effects of vaccines. the difference is that vaccines have a smaller effect than diseases, by design, would would hope that to make a difference. Also, vaccines are very carefully tested looking for side-effects in a way we do not bother with diseases.


    That is why, in spite of the inevitable difficulty of proof, I side strongly with the pro-vax side here. yes vaccines are dangerous - but as long as we do not allow politicians to push the medical processes they get very carefully tested. those that pass are much less dangerous than the disease they protect against (and yes - that protection many be temporary, as with Flu, but still life-saving and worth it).


    Big pharma has no interest in pushing unsafe vaccines. the reason vaccine companies stood up to Trump is not just altruism. It is that if they release an unsafe vaccine it will prevent vaccine update of all future vaccines for a long time. Their long-term financial interests align with giving us safe vaccines - even when you might argue the world would be better off with an effective but less safe vaccine.


    THH


    PS - where I do not compromise, and have little sympathy, is with the emotional basis for anti-vax fears. The idea that Western governments wish to control people by making them ill, and vaccination is all part of a sinister plot, is just silly. The idea that big Pharma peddles bad medicine for profit is true, but that actually cuts the opposite way. Vaccines are not great things for pharma since they prevent diseases and are difficult to develop. More profitable is drugs to treat diseases multiple times. Yet that view, and a paranoid view of the world, is I think what lies behind such strong animosity towards this one aspect of medical interventions. I'd have more sympathy with people who reject medicine entirely, reckoning that God designed diseases, and our response to them, interfering with that using medical science leads to peril. At least that view is consistent (though wrong).

  • Influenza vaccine are a big pharma cash cow who are you kidding by saying there is little profit in it if a covid 19 vaccination becomes available Governments worldwide will pay billions for the rights to give it to it's population. The true way out of this pandemic is a worldwide drive to get vitamin D levels up in the human population each winter 3\4 of the U.S.population is vitamin D deficant. Over 1.1 billion worldwide suffer from a vitamin D deficenccy. Yesterday NASA released a report that the sun is entering a new solar phase #25. For the past few years NASA has reported less sun spots meaning less UV B reaching the earth and that will also lead to more vitamin D deficenccy. The medical community is beginning to realize the importance of vitamin D in immune system balance. A simple body pH test that can be bought over the counter will tell you if the body is vitamin deficant low ph and you have problems with vitamin A, D. E. K. A regiment of vitamin D will bring your ph backn balance7.35-7.45 if under you are vitamin d deficant. All pandemics and bad flu seasons, have one thing in common, all were related to a vitamin D deficenccy. Could it really be this easy? I ask the real truth seekers!!!?

  • The anti-vaxers bring this on themselves by pushing a hypothesis for which there is no evidence, and almost no way to obtain evidence: vaccines are causative of various long-term somatic changes that cause later harm.

    Only a dilettante (or professional spin doctor) can talk about anti vaxers as nobody here is as simple minded as our spin doctor is.


    There are many good vaccines! But also a few that cause significant harm like : https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesaf…story/narcolepsy-flu.html for the swine flu.


    Also a Swiss vaccine had problem that has been applied by a nasal spray. Not to mention polio that is now redeveloped. Or simply the flue vaccine of 2018 with 30% coverage = fake protection!


    Today the Swiss medical board (>70% rotary people) decided that it is to risky to allow us a self immunization and that we should wait for vaccine..


    Such people are dangerous idiots that only want to optimize profits for their buddies. Just to remind you that the Oxford vaccine already in phase II had serious side effect like dizzy -ness and now seriously injured a persons spine nerves, what had to be expected! Even if such things only happen with 0.01% or once in the trial, this will result in 10'000 of victims world wide.


    No need to tell you that 80..98% of all people anyway face no risk with CoV-19. 81% here are more or less immune the others show no serious symptoms at all.


    But you can be sure that the current vaccine trials are only run among people with no risk at all instead of only (or majority) recruiting people at risk!

  • Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route.


    Li-Meng Yan (MD, PhD)1, Shu Kang (PhD)1, Jie Guan (PhD)1, Shanchang Hu (PhD)1


    1Rule of Law Society & Rule of Law Foundation, New York, NY, USA .


    A Chinese defector's study claiming that Covid-19 was manufactured in a lab was published by groups founded by former Trump strategist Steve Bannon and a billionaire Beijing exile.

    The scientific paper, which has not been peer-reviewed, claims the disease was built by merging the genetic material of two bat coronaviruses and that a spike protein was edited to enhance its ability to latch onto human cells.

    Scientists have slammed the report published on Monday as 'unsubstantiated' and said it 'cannot be given any credibility.'


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne…founded-Steve-Bannon.html

  • I would not at all be surprised.

    Try to imagine this for a minute.


    China is just seeing how far they step across the line before they get punched in the mouth.


    They get to see how the world and particular how the WEST reacts, his will help them build the next virus.


    They get economic and political chaos in the west.


    This specific virus also incapacitated a US Aircraft carrier, so the next time they will target army and Air Force bases.


    When the ability to project military force is so limited, then China will do what they have always wanted to do but couldn’t,


    Taiwan, South Korea and Japan.


    Who is gonna say no?

  • Scientists have slammed the report published on Monday as 'unsubstantiated' and said it 'cannot be given any credibility.'


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne…founded-Steve-Bannon.html


    Deep state under attack. Let's do the work of the dedicated-to-this-board members and call out the conspiracy theory.


    1. Dr Andrew Preston, an expert in microbial pathogenesis at the University of Bath, blasted her report as being 'reminiscent of a conspiracy theory'.


    Dr. Preston warned previously that "other threatening viruses will strike again in future and we need to be prepared - or face 'going into lockdown every three years'."


    How pleasant! More vaccine work or lockdown every 3 years!


    2. Dr Michael Head, a global health expert at the University of Southampton, said the conspiracy theory peddled by the report has been 'doing the rounds throughout the pandemic. If people are exposed to and then believe conspiracy theories, this will likely have a negative impact on efforts to keep Covid-19 cases low and thus there will be more deaths and illness than there needs to be.'


    Do a little digging on Michael: I lead on the Research Investments in Global Health (ResIn) study. This project has received funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation... anti-vaccine activism.


    This guy studies money flows in healthcare. He is a tool.


    Note, they don't address a single line of the data. Just references on references that become stories.

  • This paper states this: "increased from the 0-1-day to the 0-60-day interval following vaccination."

    This doesn't look protective to me.


    How quickly would you expect someone to die from the effects of a vaccine? If there is no measurable effect after 60 days, why would there be an effect months or years later?


    Severe or dangerous reactions to vaccines listed in the disclaimers occur quickly. 28% of people given the shingles vaccine develop a fever within a few hours. This is an expected side-effect, and not dangerous, but the dangerous side effects also occur within minutes or hours.

  • Zues, although I lean your way, how can experts trash a report based on who funded it. By that way of thinking you confirm wyttenbachs theory that big pharma is behind the hydroxychloroquine suppression funding those inconclusive trials. I would expect an expert to do some investigating before trashing a report first!!! Same as anyone here would when reviewing a positive cold fusion paper. Right boys?????

  • Zues, although I lean your way, how can experts trash a report based on who funded it.


    FM1 - the same way that experts know reports funded by industry tend to say what the industry wants them to say. The devil is all in the detail when it comes to arm's length agreements but analysis of the debacle over smoking shows how far individual expert evidence in the past has been contaminated by money. Things are better now generally, but not when a report is commissioned and paid for by a special interest group, and contains a lot of opinion and interpretation.


    I have not looked at the specifics here, just replying to your broader question.

  • There is no way to stop the truth.


    For those silent majority here, the questions we need to be asking is not "why did they do it" but "what inside us let them go this far?" (why are we afraid of them?)" They told you to lockdown because you are gonna die if you don't, and it was b.s.. They told you can't taken "unproven" drugs and continue to this day, and it was b.s. They will invent new distractions, a race war, a religious war, anything to distract us.


    If you want to talk about furin cleavage sites, rat backbones, and pengolin overlays -- happy to -- but other than that you all look foolish and everybody on the internet can see this. For those paid for FUD, you need to request better scripted lines to spew onto message boards.


    For those who care about science, give us one solid reason you feel this paper by Yan is fundamentally flawed. I'm not seeing it. Don't source your opinions from other people. Just look at the data and speak.

  • Dr. Preston warned previously that "other threatening viruses will strike again in future and we need to be prepared - or face 'going into lockdown every three years'."


    Do you seriously not believe this? We have had, in quick succession, SARS, MERS, COVID-2. That warning is what anyone normalt who looks at the facts has been saying for a long time, it will remain true unless we vastly reduce human interconnectedness via travel and human mingling with assorted domesticated and wild livestock. Both those things have gone up a lot in last 30 years hence the zoonosis problem.


    THH

  • Dr. Fucci vitamin D dosage vs what US government recommends by age group


    Anything to do with nutrition (Vitamins count) and the evidence is so weak that experts can be genuinely divergent on what is right, and innocently wrong. Look at all the controversy over whether fat reduction in diet is good or bad.


    That such can start conspiracy theories is a pity.


    THH