Shane - note my moderate and unpolitical last post - made in a sincere attempt to keep this thread on a calm and orderly course towards enlightenment and the elucidation of truth!
The Totally Civil Covid Thread. (Closing 31/05)
- Mark U
- Closed
-
-
Display More
Just saying again,
People here claim to know better than the unbiassed researchers, based on their own reading or blatently biased write-ups from people with a specific view.
What I can say with certainty (following experts) is that there is a lot of associational linkage between Vitamin D and better health - for pretty obvious reasons, and because low Vitamin D can be caused by lower health. So determining a causal link between higher Vitamin D and better health (in that direction) is always going to require very great care.
Thus to convince the evidence needs to be very clear. It is not.
I cannot make my own review of the evidence, juts as FM1 cannot (neither I nor he are an expert on meta-analysis). Those who are have not found conclusive evidence.
Gut feeling (e.g. you read lots of stuff that seems positive) is a rubbish way to decide this stuff.
THH
My gut feeling early on on using body pH test to determine if you are a candidate for severe Covid turned out pretty accurate but you laughed, no expertise in the field. Covid severity as well as long COVID are the result of vitamin deficency starting with vitamin d , leading to deficiencies in vitamin B1,B3,B12 and iron. You can continue to live in your and with your uncertainty.
Gut microbiome, Vitamin D, ACE2 interactions are critical factors in immune-senescence and inflammaging: key for vaccine response and severity of COVID-19 infection
Santosh Shenoy 1
Affiliations expand
PMID: 34738147 PMCID: PMC8568567 DOI: 10.1007/s00011-021-01510-w
Free PMC article
Abstract
Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic continues to spread sporadically in the Unites States and worldwide. The severity and mortality excessively affected the frail elderly with co-existing medical diseases. There is growing evidence that cross-talk between the gut microbiome, Vitamin D and RAS/ACE2 system is essential for a balanced functioning of the elderly immune system and in regulating inflammation. In this review, we hypothesize that the state of gut microbiome, prior to infection determines the outcome associated with COVID-19 sepsis and may also be a critical factor in success to vaccination.
Methods: Articles from PubMed/Medline searches were reviewed using a combination of terms "SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, Inflammaging, Immune-senescence, Gut microbiome, Vitamin D, RAS/ACE2, Vaccination".
Conclusion: Evidence indicates a complex association between gut microbiota, ACE-2 expression and Vitamin D in COVID-19 severity. Status of gut microbiome is highly predictive of the blood molecular signatures and inflammatory markers and host responses to infection. Vitamin D has immunomodulatory function in innate and adaptive immune responses to viral infection. Anti-inflammatory functions of Vit D include regulation of gut microbiome and maintaining microbial diversity. It promotes growth of gut-friendly commensal strains of Bifida and Fermicutus species. In addition, Vitamin D is a negative regulator for expression of renin and interacts with the RAS/ ACE/ACE-2 signaling axis. Collectively, this triad may be the critical, link in determination of outcomes in SARS-CoV-2 infection. The presented data are empirical and informative. Further research using advanced systems biology techniques and artificial intelligence-assisted integration could assist with correlation of the gut microbiome with sepsis and vaccine responses. Modulating these factors may impact in guiding the success of vaccines and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 infections.
-
My gut feeling early on on using body pH test to determine if you are a candidate for severe Covid turned out pretty accurate but you laughed, no expertise in the field. Covid severity as well as long COVID are the result of vitamin deficency starting with vitamin d , leading to deficiencies in vitamin B1,B3,B12 and iron. You can continue to live in your and with your uncertainty.
And you like with your (false) certainty.
That is OK, but don't be surprised not everyone shares it, or get indignant about that.
-
And you like with your (false) certainty.
That is OK, but don't be surprised not everyone shares it, or get indignant about that.
With the likes of you in the world, I don't.
-
Why not quantify it by comparing reported Covid vaccine deaths with reported flu vaccine deaths, as Wyttenbach said long ago.
You mean adverse effects. The number of COVID vaccine deaths is zero. Everyone who died shortly after getting a COVID vaccine died from something unrelated to the vaccine. Those were all coincidences. Deaths were examined carefully by experts, and none was attributed to the vaccine.
As I noted, comparing adverse effects to the flu vaccine is invalid because people do not hang around the clinic or drugstore after getting a flu vaccine, so there are many fewer adverse effects reported.
-
(1) relate to number of jabs over time (divide by this). During mass covid vaccination there are a lot of jabs
Yeah, I did that in my previous post. Covid shots accounted for less the times the number of other shots in the same period of time.
(2) relate to the background death rate of the jabbed population (which will determine the number of coincident deaths). This is complex but it can be done.
The background death rate is high : one in one hundred people die every year. Let's say one in ten thousand die from the jab. I can't see it is possible to confidently tease this out from a background number of deaths. No, instead, compare age and health stratified cohorts of vaccinated vs unvaccinated, much better chance of getting a signal.
(3) relate to the likelihood a coincidence will be reported to VAERS. Will an old person dying of a heart attack 7 days after a Flu jab be reported to VAERS? Not often. The same after a COVID jab? Much more likely.
You're just making that up. You think that all of a sudden doctors and patients alike are looking out for adverse reactions from the covid vaccine, reactions which they normally wouldn't report if was, say, the flu vaccine. Rather, it could be the opposite. More than for any other vaccine, the health organizations and media have been repeating over and over the mantra of "safe and effective". The general public and doctors alike have been blue pilled. This to the extent that a supposed objectivist like yourself is falling over himself to make lame excuses for the huge spike in VAERS reporting.
-
The background death rate is high : one in one hundred people die every year. Let's say one in ten thousand die from the jab. I can't see it is possible to confidently tease this out from a background number of deaths.
There is no need to tease anything out. When someone dies soon after getting vaccinated, the medical records are examined by experts. The attending doctor is asked what the symptoms and cause of death was. In every case, it has been clear that the person died from a known cause and not the vaccine.
It is not as if these deaths are being ignored. And it is not as if a doctor cannot tell when someone dies from a heart attack or cancer.
The problems that the vaccine can cause were discovered during extensive double blind testing with tens of thousands of people. It is not possible that additional problems emerged later. Biology doesn't work that way. Every adverse effect the vaccine can cause is known. Some of these effects could be serious -- even fatal -- but so far, not one of them has been in the U.S.
-
You think that all of a sudden doctors and patients alike are looking out for adverse reactions from the covid vaccine, reactions which they normally wouldn't report if was, say, the flu vaccine.
That is what doctors report. That is a fact, described in detail in the literature. Doctors normally do not report problems from the flu vaccine because they never hear about them. The patients never tell them. As I pointed out before, nearly all problems occur within a half hour of vaccination. Patients were asked to stay around for 30 minutes after the COVID vaccines, but they are not asked to stay after flu vaccines. Most people, when they suffer from an expected adverse effect listed on the handout, never bother to tell the doctor. If they do tell the doctor, he or she is legally obligated to report that to VAERS. In the case of the COVID vaccines, both patients and doctors were extra careful to report all effects, including mild, expected ones, that they would not bother to report from a flu shot.
-
The attending doctor is asked what the symptoms and cause of death was. In every case, it has been clear that the person died from a known cause and not the vaccine.
This is simple not true. Take the recent so-called Sudden Adult Death Syndrome. Almost any doctor attending the deceased would be content to simply report 'heart failure'. He knows nothing more. Autopsies are rare, and almost always because of the advocacy and insistence of a relative. I wonder what they did for Hank Aaron. I know what they did for my father in law, three days after his third dose. Very convenient to simply put "Dementia" on the death certificate and move on. Did he make it into the Canadian adverse reaction database? Of course not.
The problems that the vaccine can cause were discovered during extensive double blind testing with tens of thousands of people. It is not possible that additional problems emerged later.
If you are familiar with the testing and reports of whistleblowers, you will see that the 'blinding' is questionable, and the ability of subjects to adequately report their injuries was greatly curtailed.
Every adverse effect the vaccine can cause is known. Some of these effects could be serious -- even fatal -- but so far, not one of them has been in the U.S.
I've heard estimates that over 100,000 people have been killed from the vaccine in the US alone.
-
As I pointed out before, nearly all problems occur within a half hour of vaccination. Patients were asked to stay around for 30 minutes after the COVID vaccines, but they are not asked to stay after flu vaccines.
This is mostly because of potential allergic reactions to substances in this novel vaccine, substances such as PEG.
If they do tell the doctor, he or she is legally obligated to report that to VAERS. In the case of the COVID vaccines, both patients and doctors were extra careful to report all effects, including mild, expected ones, that they would not bother to report from a flu shot.
The above is just fantasy. The reality, heard over and over, is that doctors will deny that someone's injuries are from the vaccine. Take my 90 year old uncle. Within a week of his first dose he got shingles (despite being vaccinated against shingles). Within three days of his second shot he was hospitalized with pulmonary oedema. I thought he was in the clear after his third shot. But about ten days after, his right hand swelled up like a balloon, and he was diagnosed with a flare up of pseudo gout, something he hasn't had before. I've discussed this with my uncle's doctor, and he insists it is all just coincidence. Very convenient, because reporting such things to the Canada Vigilance Adverse Reaction Online Database would be such a hassle. It might also raise the eyebrows of the medical licensing board : What, someone apparently eager to report adverse events? Let's investigate that doctor.
-
Yeah, I did that in my previous post. Covid shots accounted for less the times the number of other shots in the same period of time.
The background death rate is high : one in one hundred people die every year. Let's say one in ten thousand die from the jab. I can't see it is possible to confidently tease this out from a background number of deaths. No, instead, compare age and health stratified cohorts of vaccinated vs unvaccinated, much better chance of getting a signal.
You're just making that up. You think that all of a sudden doctors and patients alike are looking out for adverse reactions from the covid vaccine, reactions which they normally wouldn't report if was, say, the flu vaccine. Rather, it could be the opposite. More than for any other vaccine, the health organizations and media have been repeating over and over the mantra of "safe and effective". The general public and doctors alike have been blue pilled. This to the extent that a supposed objectivist like yourself is falling over himself to make lame excuses for the huge spike in VAERS reporting.
Thanks for a reply.
I can see you are thinking about this. You could look for other people who have done (1) and (2) better than you are I could? That would be better than guessing.
You think that all of a sudden doctors and patients alike are looking out for adverse reactions from the covid vaccine, reactions which they normally wouldn't report if was, say, the flu vaccine.
We are not talking about obvious adverse reactions (which are well documented, by the way, and very well studied). Deaths due to them get recorded in the real vaccine databases since they survive the "could it possibly be a vaccine" test.
No, we are talking about coincidental deaths that some people will think could be due to a vaccine on the grounds that no-one knows what weird effects a new vaccien could have. Some people? Well, if you look at the stuff posted here just recently we have antivaxxers assuming that VAERS-recorded death reports (without any investigation) must be due to vaccines because they spike around the time of the vaccine jab.
Would you like me to find my source for the "VAERS peak because of a Court case" thing? Would that help you to understand that whether people report a coincidental death as vaccine-related depends on whether they expect that the death might be vaccine-related.
You are correct about 1 in 100 people per annum die. You need to do the math on how that related to VAERS reports. I have a competent independent (e.g. not one of the "I know the establishment is right" people) link below. I like it because the quantitative analysis is detailed, complete, and transparent.
Interpreting VAERs: What is the expected background death rate for the USA vaccinated population?VAERs is an open reporting system put together by the FDA and CDC for people to enter in adverse events after vaccination for post approval safety assessments.…www.covid-datascience.comJust to reiterate why Mark U's view of VAERS above is not shared by anyone else: we will get more evidence from the data.
Even when using VAERs as intended to decide whether to flag an event as a potential "safety signal", one must assess whether the reported number of events is greater than expected based on the background rate of that event in the population sans vaccination and try to adjust for the (unknown) underreporting rate. In this blog post, I will not get into estimating the underreporting rate, but will focus on how to get a reasonable estimate of the background rate. Given deaths are the most serious potential adverse events, I will focus on assessing what is a reasonable estimate of the background rate of deaths for the vaccinated subpopulation in the USA.
As a back of the envelope calculation, in the USA roughly 3 million people die every year, which is ~250k per month, and ~50k per week. We can think of this as the overall background rate of deaths in the entire USA population. This suggests that even if vaccines were perfectly safe, if we vaccinated the entire population at a random time during the year, we would expect 250k to die within 1 month of vaccination, and 50k to die within a week of vaccination.
In this blog post, I will use available public resources to compute an improved estimate of the background rate of deaths in the USA vaccinated population.
The sources of data I will use in this calculation include:
- Total USA population by age as of July 1, 2020 from Statistica
- USA death rates per 100k population for 2018 from CDC
- Proportion given at least one vaccine dose by age as of September 17, 2021 from CDC
Thus, we expect that in the vaccinated subpopulation, we should see ~7k deaths per day and ~50k deaths per week. These numbers are very close to the "back of the envelope" estimates first presented, because the fact that not all are vaccinated is countered by the fact that the vast majority of those at high risk for death, the older people, are. To interpret in relation to vaccination, if vaccines were given at a random time, we would expect ~7k people to die the day of vaccination by random chance alone, even if the vaccines were perfectly safe and causing no deaths, >49k to die the week of vaccination, and >210k to die within a month of vaccination. These are the background rates of death for the vaccinated subpopulation of the USA.
It is important to take this into account when interpreting VAERs counts, since many of these background deaths would be reported to VAERs as post-vaccination events. In fact, according to law, healthcare workers would be required to report all of these events to VAERs whether they thought they might be related to vaccines or not. Thus, in principle, ALL of these deaths should be reported to VAERs.
Of course, whatever the law says, clearly not all deaths after vaccination are reported, so we still have to deal with the underreporting rate. Thus, to figure out the appropriate and relevant background rate against which to compare a particular number of VAERs-reported deaths to assess whether there is a safety signal, we would need to:
- Pick a certain time frame after vaccination for which to compute background deaths
- Assume a particular underreporting rate, possibly varying based on number of days post vaccination (since deaths closer to vaccination should be more likely to be reported, and deaths longer after vaccination less likely), and scale up the number of deaths based on the estimated underreporting rate.
If we really wanted to be more precise, for double vaccinated people, we would need to account for the time periods after each vaccine dose, so considering only first doses makes these numbers conservative. Also, these calculations do not take into account potential excess deaths from COVID-19 infections during the pandemic, so may be another reason why they are conservative.
The question of how to select a relevant time frame and estimate for the underreporting rate will not be addressed in this blog post, but suffice it to say that the assumptions of these two quantities will have a dramatic effect on one's assessment of the number of vaccine-induced excess deaths, or even if there are any.
This is one reason why scientists don't think VAERs can be used to obtain accurate estimates of vaccine-caused deaths -- while the calculations can be done, at the end of the day the answer will be strongly determined by the assumptions one makes in the relevant time frame and underreporting rate, as well as the background death rate.
So clearly, if one embarks on such an exercise, they should rigorously justify their assumptions on these key quantities and perform sensitivity analyses based on an appropriate level of uncertainty. Even then, they should consider their results as hypotheses to be tested with other data, using the active monitoring systems, population level data, or some other approach.
Now, that does not fully answer the VAERS question. But it does contradict Mark U's assumption.
I think Mark U is arguing backwards:
(1) there are a lot of VAERS death reports
(2) no smoke without fire, some reasonable proportion, maybe 10% must be real.
This is statistically wrong. There is a good reason for lots of VAERS death reports that has nothing to do with vaccine-cased death. It is known, and enough to explain the number of reports.
Therefore the number of VAERS reports itself tells us nothing about the incidence of vaccine-cased deaths.
For a very deatiled analysis of some of the VAERS-related (false) arguments see
Dumpster diving in the VAERS database to find more COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis in children"Dumpster diving" is a term used to describe studies using data from the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System database by authors, almost always…sciencebasedmedicine.orgTHH
-
The above is just fantasy. The reality, heard over and over, is that doctors will deny that someone's injuries are from the vaccine. Take my 90 year old uncle. Within a week of his first dose he got shingles (despite being vaccinated against shingles). Within three days of his second shot he was hospitalized with pulmonary oedema. I thought he was in the clear after his third shot. But about ten days after, his right hand swelled up like a balloon, and he was diagnosed with a flare up of pseudo gout, something he hasn't had before. I've discussed this with my uncle's doctor, and he insists it is all just coincidence.
Mark U. I have every sympathy for your 90 year old Uncle, who is clearly less healthy than my 92 year old father - he has had 4 vaccine doses with not a single side effect. And all the people we know similarly have remained healthy through 3 or 4 vaccine shots. But obviously rare side effects exist.
So - yes - it is coincidence. Never argue from anecdote.
However - looking at what is known about potential side effects:
Yes, there is plenty of strong evidence that mRNA COVID vaccines have as an infrequent side effect reactivation of herpes zoster. This is more common amongst patients who have rheumatological disease (which my father does not, but perhaps your uncle does).
Herpes zoster reactivation after mRNA-1273 vaccination in patients with rheumatic diseasesThe SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is one of the major strategies against the COVID-19 pandemic. The novel platforms of vaccines were developed to replace the…ard.bmj.comSo the shingles is very bad luck, but not unexpected.
Gout flare-ups - known side-effect of many vaccines
vaccine-induced lung disease? There have been a few cases and it is under investigation:
COVID‐19 mRNA vaccine‐related interstitial lung disease: Two case reports and literature reviewThe Pfizer‐BioNTech mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2) is an effective and well‐tolerated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) vaccine. However, rare adverse events have…www.ncbi.nlm.nih.govWhat can I say about this? Your uncle is extraordinarily unlucky... Luckily, all of these potential side effects are under investigation: with doctors not denying the reality that these things might exist.
THH
-
Dr. Birx Declares ‘We overplayed Vaccines’ & Only Hope for Elderly Now: Paxlovid & Testing
Bureaucrats Bombshell as Dr. Birx Declares ‘We overplayed Vaccines’ & Only Hope for Elderly Now: Paxlovid & TestingToday on Fox News, Dr. Deborah Birx, the American physician and diplomat who served as the White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator under President Donald…www.trialsitenews.comToday on Fox News, Dr. Deborah Birx, the American physician and diplomat who served as the White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator under President Donald Trump from 2020 to 2021, now starts to backtrack on previous aggressive and confident declarations concerning the COVID-19 vaccines first developed under Trump via the Operation Warp speed program. In an interview with Neil Cavuto on the Your World program, Birx downplayed the vaccine program, declaring she knew they were not going to protect against infection. Birx admitted, “We overplayed the vaccine, and it made people worry that it’s not going to protect against severe disease and hospitalization.” She emphasized, “Let’s be very clear: 50% of the people who died from the Omicron surge were older, vaccinated.” Is Birx clearing her conscience or covering her ass with the American people?
While the COVID-19 vaccines did serve to temporarily protect at-risk populations by boosting immune antibodies, a combination of vaccine durability challenges (e.g... the novel products waned in effectiveness over the months) and a rapidly mutating RNA virus have led to what still becomes a dangerous situation for the elderly and immunocompromised, even if they are fully vaccinated and boosted. TrialSite has reported on this phenomenon in Australia, where twice the people (mostly elderly) died in the first twelve weeks of 2022 than all of 2020 and 2021 combined. Given the majority of the population was immunized by the end of 2021, the vast majority of deaths in 2022 Down Under were fully vaccinated persons. This trend was observed in New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, and elsewhere.
TrialSite as consistently noted that dynamic RNA viruses are difficult to control with vaccines. Yet from day one that’s what Dr. Anthony Fauci at the National Institutes of Health boasted was the solution. That narrative is now clearly falling apart.
Birx now goes on the record while she is on the media circuit to sell her book declaring, “So that’s what I’m saying even if you’re vaccinated and boosted, if you're unvaccinated right now, the key is testing and Paxlovid. It’s effective. It’s a great antiviral. And really, that is what’s going to save your lives right now if you’re over 70, which if you look at the hospitalizations, hospitalizations are rising steadily with new admissions, particularly in those over 70.”
The vaccines have helped during the pandemic to reduce the risk of severe disease and hospitalization, but they were always over marketed while government authorities lowered regulatory standards to accelerate acceptance followed up by forced mandates that have led to a cataclysmic situation in the select labor markets.
What an admission that the vaccines now don’t really work, and that the best, perhaps only hope to save lives is Paxlovid during the Omicron surge. What an admission! Did Birx feel this way before, or is she just coming to see the light today? Based on her statement that they “overplayed the vaccine,” it sounds like the authorities were aware of vaccine limitations.
TrialSite’s Daniel O’Connor shared with this writer, “Of course they were aware of the shortcomings. They were aware by the summer of 2021 with the Delta variant of concern that waning effectiveness and the mutating virus were a real problem.” O’Connor continued, “TrialSite covered many scenarios in places like Israel where the fully vaccinated were getting hospitalized even more than the unvaccinated in certain circumstances. This problem has been known for at least a year yet there is this immense pressure to CYA and continually declare the vaccine is highly effective and safe despite A) what we know and now verified by Birx’s own admission and B) growing vaccine injury cases—some groups estimate as many as 4 million across America.”
O’Connor suggested the sooner public health and other government authorities level with the American people with a transparent public health communication program the faster we can hopefully transcend this current conflict-prone situation and advance public health initiatives that can benefit all—not just a couple of pharmaceutical companies. Given the positioning of Pizer as the only solution now along with testing, Birx contributes to Pfizer’s historic $30 billion Paxlovid forecast.
The American pharmaceutical company will easily rake in over $100 billion for the mRNA-based vaccine that clearly doesn’t work very well anymore. Yet regulators continue to pass with little critical vetting, such as what happened recently with children from age 5 down to vulnerable babies at 6 months old. The government has shared little in the form of a transparent risk-benefit analysis showcasing why babies so young should be inoculated with the novel vaccines. What about repurposed drugs and combinations that have been systemically attacked by academic medical institutions, regulators, and the mainstream media? Could there be some forces at work here to drive certain medicinal outcomes during this pandemic? Let’s not forget what happened during the opioid epidemic
-
for an antivaxxer, VAERS gives:
First true statement! CDC is anti vaxxer ....
-
Patients were asked to stay around for 30 minutes after the COVID vaccines, but they are not asked to stay after flu vaccines.
This has been ordered after the first 20 unrelated deaths within 30 minutes....50...
-
I've heard estimates that over 100,000 people have been killed from the vaccine in the US alone.
This most likely is 5..10x higher for teh whole 2.5 years.
Yes, there is plenty of strong evidence that mRNA COVID vaccines have as an infrequent side effect reactivation of herpes zoster.
RNA generated antibodies suppress the interferon response. So any virus will potentially reactivate and also the ones that lead to turbo cancer. Carefully read the cancer survival statistics...
-
vitamin D in long COVID-19 and of the current literature on this topic.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p…ally%20in%20lung%20tissue.
Abstract
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has quickly become a global pandemic. Reports from different parts of the world indicate that a significant proportion of people who have recovered from COVID-19 are suffering from various health problems collectively referred to as “long COVID-19”. Common symptoms include fatigue, shortness of breath, cough, joint pain, chest pain, muscle aches, headaches, and so on. Vitamin D is an immunomodulatory hormone with proven efficacy against various upper respiratory tract infections. Vitamin D can inhibit hyperinflammatory reactions and accelerate the healing process in the affected areas, especially in lung tissue. Moreover, vitamin D deficiency has been associated with the severity and mortality of COVID-19 cases, with a high prevalence of hypovitaminosis D found in patients with COVID-19 and acute respiratory failure. Thus, there are promising reasons to promote research into the effects of vitamin D supplementation in COVID-19 patients. However, no studies to date have found that vitamin D affects post-COVID-19 symptoms or biomarkers. Based on this scenario, this review aims to provide an up-to-date overview of the potential role of vitamin D in long COVID-19 and of the current literature on this topic.
-
-
Child hepatitus mystery mostly solved...
(Nope - it aint vaccines what done it).
Likely cause of mystery child hepatitis outbreak foundUK experts believe they can now explain the recent spate of mysterious liver problems in young children.www.bbc.co.uk -
Child hepatitus mystery mostly solved...
(Nope - it aint vaccines what done it).
Not Covid or vaccines but could be tied to a vitamin d deficency. You're not keeping up with latest vitamin d studies
Vitamin D levels in patients with small and medium vessel vasculitis
Vitamin D levels in patients with small and medium vessel vasculitisTo determine the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in patients with small and medium vessel systemic vasculitis.In this cross-sectional study, 25-hyd…www.sciencedirect.com
