The Totally Civil Covid Thread. (Closing 31/05)

    COVID’s second death toll damns our ‘experts’


    COVID’s second death toll damns our ‘experts’
    COVID has killed a million-plus Americans, but the disastrous US policy response — blunt-instrument shutdowns and endless fear-mongering — has inflicted its…
    nypost.com


    A million died, largely among the elderly and the immunocompromised. Our smashing of every social bond did nothing to save them. It did do massive harm to everyone else, especially young people.


    Numbers don’t lie — and on COVID’s second toll they damn our expert class.

    Quote from Mark U

    As an example, I think it was Politifact that confirmed that the FDA still redacted some part of the Pfizer BioNTech recipe,

    As I said, that has been a crime since 1906, but you are impervious to facts. Absolutely nothing can be "redacted" from any recipe in food or drugs. The graphite found in one batch of vaccines was contamination. It was not supposed to be there.

    Vaccines may work well for some diseases, for some other (fast mutating viruses) not so well. And SARS-CoV-2 is special, being leaked HIV self-replicating vaccine. HIV inserts suppress immunity, vaccines based on its proteins are doing the same. Sorry to disappoint you, but negative efficiency of Covid-19 vaccines is already official on my forum:


    Adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines and measures to prevent them: COVID-19 vaccination is a major risk factor for infections in critically ill patients.

    New Research Shows Vaccines Help Omicron Spread (Science journal): Even mainstream science doesn't discuss long term contribution of vaccines anymore.


    redacted ingredients?


    PolitiFact - A redacted ingredient of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine is just water
    An Instagram post claimed the COVID-19 vaccine from Pfizer contains an undisclosed mystery ingredient, even though the f
    www.politifact.com


    Maybe aliens? And 5G towers too?


    The table shows the different ingredients that make up the vaccine, according to the Instagram post. However, one of the listed ingredients, described as an excipient, is redacted.

    The caption on the post claimed the excipient, a type of inert substance that acts as a vehicle for a drug, makes up 20% of the vaccine and could potentially make up 20% of each dose.

    "The undisclosed ingredient is also not disclosed in the vaccine package insert," the post said. "If the American people don't know the identity of an ingredient in an FDA-approved vaccine, how is informed consent possible?"


    The table featured in the post comes from the FDA as part of a summary report explaining its decision to give final approval to the vaccine. The report includes the studies conducted on the vaccine and an ingredient list. Although an earlier version of the report had one ingredient redacted, as shown in the Instagram post, the FDA updated the report since the post, removing the redaction.

    The formerly redacted ingredient is listed as "water for injection." (A Sept. 30 update to the Instagram post acknowledged the change.)


    Wow - maybe Bill Gates is adding H2O to vaccines to control our minds?

    Quote

    The Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine contains an “undisclosed ingredient. … How is informed consent possible

    Judge orders government, Pfizer to disclose jab ingredients forthwith Wasn't Pfizer vaccine already FDA approved including composition? (Hint: well, it actually wasn't). If yes, why to hide water before judges?

    Pfizer quietly admits it will never manufacture original FDA approved COVID

    Moderna recalls vaccine batch after foreign substance found in CDMO-made vial—again


    Edit: do You know what the Appeal to ridicule fallacy is?

    Antivaxxer ALERT!!!


    The first link above is an opinion piece which references real (and decent) research published in the Lancet by Nordstrom and claims to summarise it.


    This opinion piece (which is only a few paragraphs) has no argument to support its assertions. Nor is its conclusion followed by Nordstrom.


    The writer is a cardiovascular surgeon and this seems an ill-advised attempt to push antivaxxer (Senneff et al) claims.


    I would have some sympathy if he gave any arguments in support of his claim that the study showed what he said it does.


    He does not do this.


    And this specific claim has antivaxxer legs...


    COVID-19 vaccines don’t weaken the immune system; Lancet study misrepresented in Virology Journal comment
    No scientific evidence supports the claim that COVID-19 vaccination weakens the immune system. On the contrary, vaccination helps our immune system to better…
    healthfeedback.org


    The 2nd claim is (wait for it) also an opinion piece in which Epoch Times wrongly summarises the content of another (decent) bit of research.


    The writer Margulis is an old-school (sic) antivaxxer


    Jennifer Margulis goes from antivax to anti-COVID-19 vaccine
    Old school antivaxxer Jennifer Margulis goes new school with COVID-19 antivaccine conspiracy theories as satire. Her satire fails.
    www.respectfulinsolence.com

    Having been writing about the antivaccine movement for a long time, I’ve long been familiar with what I like to call “old school” antivaxxers. It’s an artificial demarcation. Basically, for my purposes “old school” means before COVID-19, in contrast to the new wave of antivaxxers who have arisen since COVID-19. For example, Andrew Wakefield, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Dr. Bob Sears, and the like are old school, while Dr. Robert Malone, Geert Vanden Bossche, Dr. Peter McCullough, and Steve Kirsch (and many more) are the new wave, people who were not—detectably, at least—antivaccine before the pandemic but have used the pandemic to spread anti-COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and become famous antivaxxers themselves. Of course, many “old school” antivaxxers quickly leapt on the anti-COVID-19 vaccination bandwagon and also enthusiastically embraced all forms of COVID-19 conspiracy theories, whether vaccine-related, mask-related, or other. This brings me to Jennifer Margulis.


    And of course the Epoch Times is a cultist religion mouthpiece not known for reliable reporting...

    The Epoch Times is a far-right[1] international multi-language newspaper and media company affiliated with the Falun Gong new religious movement.[25] The newspaper, based in New York City, is part of the Epoch Media Group, which also operates New Tang Dynasty (NTD) Television.[26] The Epoch Times has websites in 35 countries but is blocked in mainland China.[27]

    The Epoch Times opposes the Chinese Communist Party,[28][29][24] promotes far-right politicians in Europe,[5][7][24] and has championed former President Donald Trump in the U.S.;[30][31] a 2019 report by NBC News showed it to be the second-largest funder of pro-Trump Facebook advertising after the Trump campaign.[26][32][24] The Epoch Media Group's news sites and YouTube channels have spread conspiracy theories such as QAnon and anti-vaccine misinformation,[35] and false claims of fraud in the 2020 United States presidential election.[38] In 2020, The New York Times called it a "global-scale misinformation machine".[30] The Epoch Times frequently promotes other Falun Gong-affiliated groups, such as the performing arts company Shen Yun.[19][39][30]


    I would just recommend anyone seriously interested in the topic (and this second topic is interesting) to read the original research. It actually sort of says the opposite to what is in the Epoch Times/Margulis summary (the vaccines are not omicron vaccines but target previous variants).


    A long-term study of healthcare workers in the United Kingdom has allowed their history of infection and vaccination to be traced precisely. Reynolds et al. found some unexpected immune-damping effects caused by infection with a heterologous variant to the latest wave of infection by the Omicron/Pango lineage B.1.1.529. The authors found that Omicron infection boosted immune responses to all other variants, but responses to Omicron itself were muted. Infection with the Alpha variant provided weaker boosting for Omicron-specific responses. Furthermore, Omicron infection after previous Wuhan Hu-1 infection failed to boost neutralizing antibody and T cell responses against Omicron, revealing a profound imprinting effect and explaining why frequent reinfections occur. —CA


    Basically, for omicron, "natural" immunity actually boosts reinfection...



    My sister - who moderates a diabetes forum, says you can't do anything about this stuff - just give the antivaxxers a thread of their own and leave them to talk to each other.


    I admit she has the right of it,


    But I find it difficult to stand by and see these poisonous and deadly distortions promoted here as serious science. This is meant to be a science web site - after all.


    THH

    Quote from Zephir_AWT

    Judge orders government, Pfizer to disclose jab ingredients forthwith Wasn't Pfizer vaccine already FDA approved including composition? (Hint: well, it actually wasn't). If yes, why to hide water before judges?

    Pfizer quietly admits it will never manufacture original FDA approved COVID

    Moderna recalls vaccine batch after foreign substance found in CDMO-made vial—again


    Edit: do You know what the Appeal to ridicule fallacy is?

    Zephir,


    I realise the mRNA vaccines and specifically Pfizer set conspiracy-theorists bells ringing. I mean, Pfizer has not - as a company - behaved nicely - it has gone for a strategy of maximising profits like a good cog in the capitalist system rather than being helpful. Some other pharmas have done better.


    BUT - that is very far from saying that its vaccines contain toxic ingredients, or destroy the immune system, etc. You have to believe that INDEPENDENT REGULATORS in some 20 or so open democracies with robust legal and health system all are either part of some (zionist???) conspiracy - or just stupid and not able to see the stuff that clear-sighted clever people like Zephir and those he follows - Margules - an old-school Wakefield-style antivaxxer - have detected.


    And, the papers linked with these claims just don't say what Zephir, Margules., et all claim. I strongly invite anyone interested to read the source research carefully and compare it with the claims made.


    It would be laughable were the consequences not so destructive.


    THH

    Here for example is the UK assessment of BNT162b2 (which we have all been given)


    https://www.gov.uk/government/…0)%2C%20and%20cholesterol.


    There is lots of interesting stuff there and were the antivaxxers really interested in checking they would go through it with a fine comb. The Uk government and safety agency are, BTW, neither zionist, nor part of worldwide conspiracy nor incompetent. (Well, the government is incompetent but thank god we still have some institutions capable of doing decent work).

    Quote
    COVID-19 vaccines don’t weaken the immune system; Lancet study misrepresented in Virology Journal comment

    I can understand your sentiment - but negative efficiency was apparent in vaccination campaign from its very beginning even from solely USA data.. We discussed it here already before year when vaccines were still advertised as a 95%+ efficient solution of Covid-19 "pandemic".


    https://i.imgur.com/zDfk021l.jpg


    Do you see, how fast the efficiency of vaccines goes bellow zero? Do you think, such a curve would stop at zero axis after four months?

    Quote from CoherentMembrane

    My experience is that people are so polarized due to politics these days they can't admit to the nuances of topics like vaccination.

    I agree to that. However there is another affect: where whenever science is involved we are given mainstream views (say that AGW is real, and that global warming directly relates to the amy of fossil carbon we put in the atmosphere) and the various fringe groups and very fringe scientists trying to argue that is not true. In the 1980s this was actually a recorder goal of teh fossil fuel companies. They could see the science was against them, and decided they needed a policy of educating to believe that no scientific statement is certain.


    You can always find 1% of scientists who will stand up and say something very wrong. Science tolerates these - and should - juts occasionally the way out views have truth (or part truth) in them. We need to go on listening to all arguments. But sceintists are able to appraise all tehse different views and come to a sane conclusion.

    In public debates you can't do this. It is not that the public are stupid, but that they do not have 3 months reading the literature and cross-referencing to work out what makes sense and waht is an outlier contradicted by many other things.


    In a 60 minute public debate you just find out who is best at rhetoric.


    There is a way to resolve this - citizen's assemblies - but it is not much done.


    I am happy to discuss nuances - with others who do not blatantly misquote (with no evidence) the source literature.


    None of the vaccine scientists or regulators are blase about the safety of any vaccines, and particularly experimental vaccines. I don't think mRNA ones are particularly troubling. Although they have a new delivery method the technology has been around a long time now. There is however a solid immunological reason to be careful about any of the modern "do it quickly" vaccines, That is mRNA or sub-unit. All of these cherry-pick juts a few of the virus proteins which they reckon will be conserved and enhance immunity against those.


    The problem with that is that you may lose on broader immunity.


    Well, nothing is perfect and so far the COVID vaccines have dome much better than anyone expected which is why the original COVID vaccine has lasted 2+ years for original COVID and governments are only now willing to fund new-variant specific vaccine. And finding a better long-term vaccine is slow.


    Immunology is one of sciences great success stories and with modern techniques, and fast-developing understanding of the immune system, we will gst better vaccines. Already we can see that in principle most cancers can be cured with vaccines - though getting that to work properly for all will take many years.


    We are likely to have another pandemic, and one worse than COVID, within 20 years due to the very risky behaviour of people (those wet markets specifically, but widespread international mixing too). I juts hope that we learn enough before then to have a faster better response at that time. COVID was a sort-of dress-rehearsal. Bad, but not disastrous in the way that a 50% fatality R=10 epidemic would be.


    THH

    Quote from Zephir_AWT

    I can understand your sentiment - but negative efficiency was apparent in vaccination campaign from its very beginning even from solely USA data.. We discussed it here already before year when vaccines were still advertised as a 95%+ efficient solution of Covid-19 "pandemic".

    Zephir. Have you ever had a proper discussion of how to interpret the real-world efficacy data?


    You could look at the many covid data science articles on it to see how very careful you need to be. I would welcome you engaging with the real science here, rather than posting a graph and saying "it is obvious".


    Your graphs BTW are not Hazard Ratios if they go either side of zero :) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC478551/


    Shall we look at eaxtly the raw data they come from, how it is defined, what are the confounders, and what do the numbers mean? I would welcome this. I would also suggest since neiotehr you nor I nor (God help us) Margules are experts in this, that we look at people who do have expertise - and critique them.


    I have found no more detailed scrutiny of the VE data anywhere than here.

    Quote

    My experience is that people are so polarized due to politics these days they can't admit to the nuances of topics like vaccination.

    I guess the problem with vaccines is, they have so attractive business model and implications for population control with mandates and passports, that they started to be abused above natural limits of this technology. And repeated vaccination with small but inefficient doses of the same antigen isn't vaccination - but a desensitization in fact, and as such it has exactly the opposite effect. We can see on recent polio outbreaks, how Covid-19 vaccines unlock various exotic dormant viruses and they even enable vaccine-induced viruses to proliferate.

    I think that in addition to offering (not forcing) classical non-mRNA vaccines, governments around the world should have copied certain localities in certain countries that distributed packs of safe/common vitamins, supplements, and drugs. Instead, certain governmental health departments did things like post websites slamming D3 (which we now know lowers mortality) and shutting down clinics where people were obtaining mostly harmless (and at least somewhat beneficial) vitamin C IVs.

    Quote from CoherentMembrane

    THH,


    If the pharma companies had used existing tech to make the first COVID vaccines instead of experimental mRNA tech, I think the controversy would have been less.

    Perhaps - but the use of EUA vaccines - bound to happen - would stir up the antivaxxers in any case.


    If was perhaps just luck that of the fast vaccines the mRNA one worked best. The Astrazeneca vaccine was very fast - but has blood clot issues and is a bit less effective.


    There is another reason why mRNA dominated - which relates to what we do in another pandemic. It is faster to grow - in very large quantities - an mRNA vaccine than any of the others. It is a very efficient technology for very widescale distribution.


    Hilda has good cartoons and an informed but idiosyncratic view on the vaccines. Worth reading her blog about the relative merits of the different candidates. We are juts now getting a whole load of new ones.


    Absolutely Maybe - Evidence and uncertainties about medicine, science culture, and life.
    Evidence and uncertainties about medicine, science culture, and life.
    absolutelymaybe.plos.org


    THH

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.