Posts by stefan

Quote from Shane D.

I say the Mengele award goes to the so called journalist that wrote this anti Ivermectin, and President Bolsonaro hit piece. She is literally trying to scare poor, uneducated Brazilians away from using the one safe, cheap drug (along with Vit D, and HCQ) they have available, that studies show can save their life. Without it, their preventative care is the same as ours....waiting until they are sick enough to go to the hospital, most likely to die.

Funny also...if you read between the lines, many of those she interviews are using the "drug cocktail", and think it works. If not, at least it is worth the try they say. Sounds like what most of us here concluded well over a year ago.

I do not get it. Brazil was using these drugs extensivly and still had super high number of cases and deaths back in April. It is not a wonder drug is my conclusion, perhaps improving the odds.

Jesus christ what a craze in brazil

He'll on earth

And the doctor mengele awards goes to...

Quote from Wyttenbach

IVERMECTIN:: Nature paper (positive!) :: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-021-00430-5.pdf

I prefer to do my own fact checking. Heart inflammation due to RNA vaccines is the most often seen side effect among younger. Certainly only caused by spike protein. Further the Japanese (Luciferase) study shows that the spike protein migrates to almost all tissue. Originally the Pfizer researchers did believe it will stay in your arm muscle.

What does this protein? It blocks a pathway of the human immune system and local infection can amplify.

Switzerland now has close to 100 reported deaths after vaccination for about 3mio vaccinated. No fact check needed. Its from the state Rotary run covid site: https://www.swissmedic.ch/swis…ines-safety-update-1.html.

With Ivermectin nobody would die, except people that are not going to a doctor or believe in a flue myth.

Such facts is, what leads hyper sensible people to irrational actions like the vaccination of children. The real danger is your mind.

CoV-19 is no flu.

Lets repeat:

- 97% of all dead from Cov-19 are older that 65 years. (Average age of all deaths 84 years!)

- Only very few people younger than 35 did die. Almost all on chemo therapy.

- 75% of all people do not even notice that they had CoV-19.

- from the 25% with symptoms 80% have only cold like problem.

5% have strong symptoms and are/were victims of our Dr.Mengle medicine system, that gives /gave them no treatment albeit we always did know HCQ+combo works & Ivermectin works brilliantly.

The real problem is that most younger completely lost all sense of live as their existence happens inside Facebook, Twitter, Instagram only. These today are the prime FM/R/J terror media, that censor all negative messages about vaccines or even worse positive ones about HCQ/Ivermectin.

Display More

The link to heart inflamation is suspect but I think it is way to early to jump into conclusions now. The badness is not as bad as getting covid according to this source inflamations and therfore they recommend the vaccine to young ones. The analysis has not yet concluded a relationship between the vaccine and these problems, but professionals seam to think the number of reported cases probably are above normal incidence. Also it is not clear that it is the spike protein that cause it, but they do list it as a possible cause to investigate. We will see what comes.

Being cautions about the future, well yes today kids do not get sick, but kids both do not get infected as much and at the same time ha less severe issues then elderly. Do you know if these two have the same reason or not? If the reason for this is correlated then it is not unlikely that you both get an uglier virus and more transmittable amongst kids and already today the bad side of covid for young ones are more severe than the potential side effects according to the source linked above. But I will monitor this issue as it develops while we wait, it will take some months before we start getting to those ages in our vaccination programme.

Quote from Shane D.

From the liberal LA Times:

https://www.latimes.com/scienc…arditis-coronavirus-today

"now some medical experts are beginning to challenge the idea that this full-steam-ahead vaccination strategy ought to apply to children"

"After contending with the coronavirus for more than a year, it’s clear that children are less likely than adults to become severely ill or to die of COVID-19. Nor do they seem to spread the virus as efficiently as adults. With those things in mind — plus the fact that the pandemic appears to be winding down in the U.S. — there’s time to slow down and weigh the risks and benefits for kids more carefully, argues Dr. Martin Makary, a public health expert at Johns Hopkins University."

“But no one is thinking like this,” he said. “We’ve converted now from being pro-vaccine to vaccine fanaticism.”

Display More

True, at the moment and authorities here does not recommend vaccinating children due to less testing against the young and the mild case they get when they get it. But, as a father I am concerned now that there is a pressure for the virus to mutate towards either overcome the immune response of the vaccine or to overcome the reasons why children seam to be better to fight off the virus or both. It may happen that suddenly it is starting to spread amongst the young and the deadliness of such mutations is unknown. The Spanish flue event is ringing badly in my ears where the dead ones was mostly amongst the young. I'm leaning towards waiting for new test results though as if the virus changes we do have the vaccine and can vaccinate the young ones if needed, but it will, in that case, be a nerve wracking race.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Please do not use this CoV-19 fake fact checking site that says::

But experts told PolitiFact that, despite a document Bridle cites, there is no evidence to back his claim that what is known as the vaccines’ spike protein produces a toxin that could cause heart problems and neurological damage.

This has never been said: This is FUD by the big pharma mafia.

What has been said:: The spike protein itself is toxic! And this has been proven many times so far.

Good news from Geneva where we had most Indian Virus variants - B.1.617.2 - Delta (UNO !!).

Now 0 people in hospital 3 infections/day... No more B.1.617.2 - Delta...

Display More

Hmm, different quotes are different e.. we have this quite form the fact check article,

"There is no data that the spike is a toxin," said Dr. Drew Weissman, a vaccine expert and professor of medicine at the University of Pennsylvania.

So, when experts says this we need to dig out a science paper that states the other, as there seam to be two teams of experts

here. ...

then I found this,

not toxic or?

Quote from Shane D.

Testimonials from Canadian health care professionals about how they are being intimidated from speaking out about what they see, believe, and know. Best is the Viral Immunologist starting at 9:17 :

External Content www.youtube.com

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

Canada and USA seam to be on another planet. No nurse, doctor or scientists here is complaining that they can't express concerns about problems with the vaccine and all terrifying cases is totally missing from the public eye although we have one of the most open societies in the world and excellent health care and top notch medical research. I have asked around and mild problems do happen but not life threatening. Around 50% of the swedes have gotten the shot so we should have horror stories here as well, but they are totally missing. Maybe the troll fabrics is mainly concentrating to stear a conflict in anglosaxian countries or that politics is too involved in the science in those cultures. The big take away though from the movie clip though was the plea to have an open and sound scientific debate, but with the information war going on and all trolls trying to tease out maniac responses on both sides, does not help a bit. I think the public and economical interests should just stay out of the discussion and let the professional discuss, probably then the virologist would never have had any troubles raising his concern.

Quote from Fm1

judge for yourself

External Content youtu.be

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

The spike protein problematics is not clear cut as deduced form this fact check not sure what to think though when it comes to young individuals. Certainly if there is a big issue with it we should have tons of nations flagging that the vaccine has problems. I know Sweden independently is monitoring the vaccine and if there is a dramatic effect it should be known by now.

Quote from Fm1

External Content youtu.be

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

Interesting, but I wanted to lookup what scientist had said about the report and found this link,

discussion

So in short the statistical method has weaknesses.'

1. Higher initial viral load in the placebo group which should have been compensated for by randomizing so that the viral load was equalized or at least it should have been compensated for in the statistical analysis.

2. Many outcomes could be classified as a success, which means that a proper Bonferroni compensation should be used

when discussing P-values, take 0.05/(number-of-comparisons) in stead of 0.05. Usually one presents all the comparisons

made and the reader has to do the Bonferoni compensation themself, but less experienced people reading results like this

just take the P-value in the paper an run with it.

3. It is unclear if groups was made by looking at the result. This is a cardinal error and if you do it you are ruining your study

don't do this, if you need to group, then at least do not look at the result but just examine the covariates and make sure you mension it in the paper. Best is to register the test beforehand and have the hypothesis clear from the beginning.

In all and interesting study but not as strong evidence as one would think.

Re vegan diet and corona, this was an interesting analysis

I would like a commentary about what Thuxleynew says about publication bias, else this is interesting. I'm after arguments and counter arguments and found this link that discusses why India is recovering and is against the hypothesis that it is due to medication. I do not see that they are dishonest, they seam to be open about it and think that there is not enough proof yet. Well see, the study you linked seam to indicate that there is an effect. Actually maybe an even better strategy than taking Ivermectin, is to go vegan, a study taken up by the news here say that vegans have 75% less risk of getting a tough covid. But sure as hell this is a correlation and no proof, maybe vegans care about health more then other people, doing proper social distancing, masks etc and get a small dose of covid when they catch it.

Quote from Fm1

More evidence for the liars and deniers and vaccine warriors

Ivermectin and outcomes from Covid-19 pneumonia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trial studies

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/rmv.2265

Summary

Ivermectin is an FDA-approved drug for a parasitic disease that has broad antiviral activity. This study aims to analyse the efficacy of ivermectin in improving the Covid-19 outcomes. We systematically searched the PubMed, Europe PMC and ClinicalTrials.gov database using specific keywords related to our aims until 10th May 2021. All published randomized clinical trial studies on Covid-19 and ivermectin were retrieved. The quality of the study was assessed using Jadad scale assessment tool for clinical trial studies. Statistical analysis was done using Review Manager 5.4 software. A total of 19 studies with 2768 Covid-19 patients were included in this meta-analysis. This meta-analysis showed that ivermectin was associated with reduction in severity of Covid-19 (RR 0.43 [95% CI 0.23–0.81], p = 0.008), reduction of mortality (RR 0.31 [95% CI 0.15–0.62], p = 0.001), higher negative RT-PCR test results rate (RR 1.23 [95% CI 1.01–1.51], p = 0.04), shorter time to negative RT-PCR test results (mean difference [MD] −3.29 [95% CI −5.69, −0.89], p = 0.007), higher symptoms alleviations rate (RR 1.23 [95% CI 1.03−1.46], p = 0.02), shorter time to symptoms alleviations (MD −0.68 [95% CI −1.07, −0.29], p = 0.0007) and shorter time to hospital discharge (MD −2.66 [95% CI −4.49, −0.82], p = 0.004). Our study suggests that ivermectin may offer beneficial effects towards Covid-19 outcomes. More randomized clinical trial studies are still needed to confirm the results of our study.

DISCUSSION

According to our pooled analysis, ivermectin was discovered to have an association with a higher negative RT-PCR test results rate, shorter time to negative RT-PCR test results, higher symptoms alleviations rate, shorter time to symptoms alleviations, shorter time to hospital discharge and reduction in the severity and mortality from Covid-19. Our subgroup analysis also showed that the benefits of ivermectin therapy in reducing the severity and mortality outcomes from Covid-19 were more prominent when administered into mild to moderate patients, compared with in severe patients. On the other side, the benefits of ivermectin therapy in increasing negative RT-PCR test results rate, shortening time to negative RT-PCR test results, increasing symptoms alleviations rate and shortening time to symptoms alleviations were more apparent in severe patients when compared with in mild to moderate patients.

A few arguments might explain these findings. The sequestration of the SARS-CoV-2 viral nucleocapsid protein (NCP) into the host nucleus through the nuclear-pore-complex is a vital step in viral pathogenesis and defence against host immune response.48 Ivermectin can selectively inhibit the host importin α/β transporter protein which decreases translocation (shuttling) of SARS-CoV-2 NCP from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, alteration of NCP distribution will lead to viral propagation disruption and survival.23 The in vitro study by Caly et al.23 has proved that giving ivermectin in one dose was able to reduce the viral RNA load by 99.98% at 48 h and replication of an Australian isolate of SARS-CoV-2 in Vero/hSLAM cells by 5000-folds. Therefore, it has potent effects in altering disease progression and spread. These in vitro findings were further supported with the results from a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial study, showing that patients who received ivermectin 400 μg/kg single dose have a lower median viral load at Day 4 (161,000 vs. 493,500 copies/ml) and Day 7 post-treatment (1018 vs. 23,550 copies/ml). The differences were found, rising from a threefold decrease on the fourth day to about 18-fold lower on the seventh day when compared with placebo.49 Second, the pathophysiologic process which underlies severe Covid-19 involves hyperinflammatory response and accumulation of cytokines, called a cytokine storm. A meta-analysis study has demonstrated that severe Covid-19 patients tend to produce higher cytokine levels such as interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-8, IL-10 and tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), in comparison to non-severe cases.50 On the other side, an anti-inflammatory effect was also demonstrated in ivermectin, both in vivo and in vitro studies. Ivermectin can reduce the IL-1, IL-6, TNF-α production and suppressing lipopolysaccharide-induced nuclear factor-kappa B translocation.51 The suppression of mucus due to hypersecretion in the respiratory tract, the reduction of immune cell recruitment, and a decrease in the production of cytokines and immunoglobulin E/immunoglobulin G1 in bronchoalveolar lavage of experimental mice, were found as a consequence of 2 mg/kg of ivermectin administration.52 These findings suggest that ivermectin has an anti-inflammatory effect on the lung tissue, besides at the systemic level, which might help to reduce the severity and prevent mortality from Covid-19.

This study has several limitations. First, significant heterogeneities were found on most of the outcomes of interests included in this study. This was probably caused by the difference in the given ivermectin doses and the medications used as a standard of care or placebo. Second, the total number of patients included in this study was relatively small because at this time, ivermectin is still considered as new repurposed drug for Covid-19 where early trials still show conflicting results and there is still no meta-analysis study to support its efficacy, therefore it may be difficult to collect the participants and receiving their consent to participate in the trials. Third, we include some pre-print studies to minimize the risk of publication bias; however, the authors have made exhaustive efforts to ensure that only sound studies were included, and we expect that most of those studies currently available in pre-print form will eventually be published and that we will identify them through ongoing electronic literature surveillances. We hope that this study can give further insight into the management of Covid-19 patients.

5 CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis of randomized clinical trial studies indicates that ivermectin administration had an association with favourable outcomes of Covid-19, compromising of higher rate of negative RT-PCR test results, shorter time to negative RT-PCR test results, higher rate of symptoms alleviations, shorter time to symptoms alleviations, shorter time to hospital discharge, reduction in the severity and mortality rate from Covid-19. This study suggests that ivermectin may be the potential therapeutic agents for the managements of Covid-19 to give better outcomes for the patients. However, more randomized clinical trial studies are still necessary and encouraged to be done for confirming the results of our study. Finally, ivermectin should be considered as an essential drug for future Covid-19 therapy models.

Display More

It is always good to wait for commentary from both sides.

First, the media hype that covid is a gain of function result seam to be based on arguments that is really not that strong as indicated in the recent news. I used this discussion to get the pro and cons of it, redit discussion

Secondly the new mail publishing was really not as damning for Fauci as the republican news commentary make it. But the effect is that a lot of right wingers now go around angry thinking bad bad Fauci. I am of the view that if you collect a lot of mails from essentially anybody you will with some imagination find damning facts that are really just weakly circumstantial. I've seen it happen for our Swedish lead figure regarding the outbreak, and it looks like it is now happens to Fauci.

As, to me, classic example of these kind of fact, was the cam recording from one of the US counting rooms and there normal operation could with the right commentary become damning facts. That's what you get with pattern matching imagination and fact fishing expeditions.

Quote from Wyttenbach

One thing I would like to mention. Taking out wind energy is physically also lowering the global temperature. Will be interesting if we see such effects. "Stopping" air circulation results in hotter region staying warmer an vice versa. So there will be also an effect on backward radiation.

Not only this, the heat pump, the golf stream, that gives so much life to Europe is claimed to be weaken and if that happen then things can really get nasty. Unbearable heat near the equator probably and something much cooler where I live.

Re magnetic bodies,

Saw a news discussion of it, One of the reporters could stick a key to their forehead who have not taken any vaccine so this

stickiness can happen without vaccine and on other places. It is not strange that this feature is dismissed. We need new physics

for it to be magnetic. Current physics tells us that you'll be dead before becoming magnetic. Probably just sticky forces, and some

kind of skin effect.

People seam to be very amused by this finding.

I always understood that the fringe theory regarding the lab leak has always been against a human constructed

virus and not that it could have escaped form the lab from a collected sample. When you read about what the experts

said you would get the impression that Covid 19 seam to have evolved naturally. Now there are some new evidences

but I am still skeptical. Again the reason I am so weary is that statistical methodologies has not been reported when

performing the analysis. So people go out hunting for rarities, finding patterns is touted as only positive, but fail at explaining

the most basic principle. That you should before looking at the data write down that we are looking for x,y,z and then look

at the data. The reason is that although you find a rare genetic combination if all you do is look for rare combinations

you do not how many you would accept as a rarity. To illustrate if you find a combination that happens 1 in 1000 and

you accept 1000 such rare combination as rare you will typically find a rare combination in each and other sample. It is

sad state of science and society that these principles outside the medical community is under used and that lead to

good evidences essentially becomes ruined. This happen in physic theoretical science where one does not keep a strict

methodology on comparing theory and new improved measurement. It seam to happen in this man made covid 19 story.

Perhaps they do use correct methodology, for that we need to wait for the publication.

It is telling that journalists say that good ability of pattern matching is a super power. Tell you a secrete, it's a curse.

I have a friend that has epoch with psychosis and it is obvious after visiting him, that his pattern matching ability

is super sensitive. The issue is that you need to evaluate your finding and judge them correctly, which is hard without

good procedures and the most probably reason we as humans filter out and hides most of the patterns the brain pick

up from our consciousness.

So until I get to understand the true nature of findings I remain skeptical of anything that is counter to what domain expert

says and extremely skeptical to non experts sleuthing.

Maybe I'm too skeptical, but as I help with statistical analysis in medical research, I tend to get more and more sensitive to these

issues and today view basically the main benefit of someone expert in statistics as to police the researcher to become more careful

of how they manage the data and the findings in order not to destroy evidences and make sure they can argue in a correct way why

they see a connection in the data.

That said, we do have problems with the investigation of the lab leak in many human levels. It is not a left-right thing though, as it

seams to be rooted in scientist trying to avoid their career being ruined and journalists and politicians should certainly look into this problem.

Some more movies from BrLP, looks ready to hook into the steam pipes.

BrLP Link

People are calling it a scam. Really have you ever seen a scam come this far?? Anyway I would like to

heat a bath for longer periods with that steam to evaluate what practical COP they have. Possibly so low that

it is not cheaper than heating it with fuel, who knows. Anyhow a COP > 1 + e is revolutionary (e is heat of burning

hydrogen) and we can rule out splashing.

Do not forget that there is an information war going on.

Quote from zorud

Question to our very experts here: is there any valid data available for a comparison of so called "death rates" with other common vaccinations against seriuous viral or bacterial infections / deseases?

Not sure if the other vaccinations have significant less side effects among the vaccinated people (less than few cases per 10 million?)....

a few cases per 10 million is really really small and typically you are more probable to get killed in a traffic accident so it is kind of splitting hairs to discuss this matter and it is obvious that this discussion of these cases have made people go bananas over basically nothing.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Did you ever look into the European database ?? https://dap.ema.europa.eu/analytics/saw.dll?PortalPages

Up to date 3 mio. adverse reactions are in the database in total, 500'000 from CoV-19 vaccines. 50% are serious about 2% (10'000 so far) are deadly. How many are from Sweden? (As of today 41'770/6 ?!)

Typically 1.5% of all CoV-19 vaccinated people have an adverse reaction 1/3 end up in the database.

Criminal states of USA:

The (FM/R/J) mafia head (N'Cuomo) of New York started a lottery among young people age 12-17 they enter if they get a vaccine. 50 will be selected for a free of cost study at an university....

Göthe's Faust would have liked this. But Faust did it for a good "F.." and some more things...

Display More

As I said I know these people analyzing the data, if there is an obvious risk, that would be known by know. Just looking in a database and then concluding there is a massive risk indicates that experts that work for a living analyzing these types of data should have pushed the allert button long time ago. So you are most probably wrong if it so simple to find. On the other hand if you introduce a new novel way to view the data that exposes the risk in a much better way wen we are talking, but then you need to explain your algorithm better.

I do not get it. Millions of Swedish people have gotten the vaccine and the effect on the population is carefully monitored by authorities

where professionals are analyzing the result. For the experts to at this point to miss an obvious danger of vaccines is really really unlikely.

subtle risks yes but not obvious ones that's really out of the question.

I as far as I understand the trapped photon is a time varying EM fields without any charges. What holds the in place is the Em forces in combination with the mass centripetal force.

Somehow, which is a mystery to me, the EM fields of the trapped electron increases the attractive forces or eqvivalently it is as if the charge is increased with some factor. Not sure

what's true but that has been my interpretation of hydrinos which is very weakly explained in the book in my mind. Charges (if for the sake of argument assume is 1D world) are really

a cusp in the potential field e.g. the derivative of the field has a jump, and the second derivative is a dirac measure. I believe photons has a cusp in the force fields and the second

derivative has a jump at the electron shell, hence no charge.

Anyhow, things are really unclear and hard to understand in my view.